The second Comment of the Day on my post about a Salinas, California school district choosing to name an elementary school after an executed thief and murderer from that state’s colorful past is an unusual one. When I was first presented with J.S.’s comment protesting what he took as a false assertion that Mr. Dillinger was a killer in addition to being an epic bank-robber, I took him to be Dillinger fetishist, like the warped souls who are obsessed with villains like Billy the Kid and Charles Manson. I was wrong: as he explains here, he is a Dillinger family member, and has a valid reason for insisting that the original Public Enemy #1 is only condemned for the (many) crimes he actually committed. Here is S.S’s heartfelt Comment of the Day, on the post “What’s Next for the Alisal Union School District…John Dillinger High School?”:
“Mr. Marshall, I am not advocating that any school be named after John Dillinger. I have worked tirelessly to correct inaccurate history surrounding Dillinger. My grandmother was his sister and near her passing she asked that I try to make sure that people knew he was not a killer. It was very important to her and her father, John Sr. In speaking of her notorious brother she would always tell me and others not to romanticize or vilify him. She would continue that he was a bank robber and their is no honor in stealing but he was not vicious or mean-spirited. John became quite bitter in prison for what the trial judge later stated was an inappropriate sentence. The judge, Mr. Williams, asserted he was new to the bench and was trying to make certain the citizens knew he was going to be tough on crime. Please understand that I realize that what John did was wrong and that he did indeed travel with convicted killers but in speaking with those who actually knew him as well as one of the gang members I am satisfied that he never killed anyone. My concern is that you associated my great uncle needlessly with a very poor decision by a misguided school board and administration. I believe that you will be proud to know that on behalf of my grandmother and her beloved father John Sr., a Christian elder, I have created the John Dillinger Troubled Youth Fund. The fund is a 501-3c not-for-profit corporation that works to keep kids safe and away from gangs. Additionally it’s based on thee Christian Bible. No one, even after I’m dust, can ever make money from the fund. Every cent must go to assist young people. Hopefully that will explain why I was upset with how you used John’s name. Our family is trying to turn something bad into something good. I and others feel the biggest danger our young people face our gangs. In my heart I believe you too care about youngsters and what influences them. It’s my hope that you better understand my initial response and I wish you the best in assisting our young people. Thank you for allowing me the time to clarify my initial response.”
Ethics Alarms 
Well, that’s interesting! Certainly, we can’t choose our relatives. But how can you truly justify naming a fund- dedicated to keeping kids out of gangs- after one the the most notorious gangsters of the last century? If John Dillinger didn’t actually kill anyone- fine. But his actions led to deaths and he was responsible for robbing banks containing the savings of innocent people. Similarly, the Hitler family in America had fled from Uncle Adolph and some served in the Armed Forces during WWII. They probably have as much reason as any to despise tyranny. But would they name a fund dedicated to freedom after the man who brought them hardship and utterly disgraced the family name? I think not!
Hello Mr. Pilling and thank you for your interest. I certainly understand your concern. Please know that many movies have romanticized, falsified and villified my great uncle. All my grandmother, John’s sister,wanted was a Christian organization to teach youngsters about the Holy Bible and to work to keep them on the straight and narrow or help them save their lives from a world of vulgar beast-like survival of the fittest. The reason for naming the fund the John Dillinger Troubled Youth Fund is to get the attention of the youngsters. We then discuss some of John’s harmful exploits and always end with the truth of John being gunned downed in a pool of blood in an alley. As you yourself stated we can’t choose our relatives but we can make choices to hopefully create a better world or at least a corner thereof. I assure you that after the discussion with young people, hopefully with their parents with them, that most leave with a different outlook towards a life of crime and the dead end it leads to. My goal is to eventually have a chapter in every town where John committed a crime. The fund will teach youngsters accurate history, Christian principles and provide positive activities for them to be a part of along with their parents and/or Christian leadership. I cannot defend that John was a criminal and stole money nor did my grandmother . She said on more than one occassion, “There is no honor in being a thief but he was my brother and I did love him.” Hopefully this gives you more insight and the fund is mandated that no one can ever propsper from this fund as every penny must go to help our kids. Again thank you for your interest and for caring about young people as they are, outside God, our best hope for a better world. May God bless you, your loved ones and those that care about our young people. Thank you for your time and consideration.
1) I agree that pairing the name of someone like Dillinger with a non-profit-worthy purpose creates massive cognitive dissonance, and is certainly strange. I can see how the relatives of Bruno Hauptmann might want to establish a fund for parents who have lost infants to kidnapping, but I’d sure feel odd participating in it. The Bill Clinton Foundation for the Discouragement of Deceit. The Pamela Anderson Modesty Fund. The Charlie Sheen Marital Fidelity Foundation. The Dick Cheney Safe Hunting Alliance. I think the use of the dissonant name in such efforts undermines the central purpose of the organization.
2) That said, I understand the motivation, and can’t criticize the attempt.
Oh, this is a meme you must continue…The Chris Farley Healthy Living Institute, the Hunter S. Thompson Sobriety Support Alliance, the David Duke Center For Racial Harmony…
I know—a rich vein. The Dan Rather Institute for Integrity in Journalism. The Ed Wood School of Film Making Excellence. The Nadia Sulemon Family Planning Foundation.
Dear J.S.: As a Christian, I cannot find any fault at all with your motivations or your foundation. In a time when evil communications and influences are rampant among our youth- and where perversion and murderous atrocities among them have become the bitter harvest of that state- movements like your’s are indeed welcome. I understand your reasoning for naming this as you have, but I still can’t agree with it. I still think that a positive name is necessary. For example, the Thomas More Society would have never prospered had it been named for an antithesis of what it stood for… such as, perhaps, the Marquis de la Sade! To have named it merely the Dillinger Foundation after the family, but not specifically after the family’s worst embarrassment- but to invoke him in passing as a bad example- would seem more appropriate to me. But I support your right to make that determination. May God bless your endeavors in any case. And Merry Christmas.