Share This Page

Ala. kidnapper's motive unclear

| Friday, Feb. 8, 2013, 8:12 p.m.

MIDLAND CITY, Ala. — Authorities never may know why an Alabama man killed a school bus driver and held a boy hostage for six days in an underground bunker, a prosecutor said Friday.

Jimmy Lee Dykes, 65, wanted to go on live television to make a statement, said District Attorney Kirke Adams, but he never told negotiators exactly what he wanted to say.

“He never let on what his message was going to be,” Adams said.

Dykes never clearly stated a motive for his actions, Adams said, but the man was due in court on the day after the standoff began.

He was set for a hearing on a menacing case filed in December for allegedly firing a gun at neighbors.

The district attorney said officials are not sure that the menacing case was the reason for the standoff.

“We had no contact with him since his arrest before this happened,” Adams said.

Neighbors said Dykes often went on rants against the government. A longtime acquaintance, Roger Arnold, said Dykes believed the government used electronic shocks to control the racing dogs at a track that he frequented.

Dykes fatally shot bus driver Charles Albert Poland Jr., 66, and grabbed a boy identified only as Ethan off the bus. He then retreated to a handmade underground bunker where he held Ethan for six days.

Dykes died of what the coroner said were multiple gunshots during an exchange of gunfire with FBI hostage rescuers on Monday.

The now-6-year-old boy is safe and back with his family.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.