Like a true little liar, he's putting responsibility anywhere but himself.
He's quoted as saying (in other articles) that he wasn't aware that IS had put a callout for Lone Wolf attacks at the time the siege took place.
So, I guess he's blaming:
- The people who escaped, to save themselves;
- The lack of knowledge of the overall situation; and
- Anyone but himself.
Now, most normal people would feel guilty for how this whole thing played out and would have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
Not this guy. No, he's absolved himself of any responsibility because the events weren't allowed to play out how he thought they should and that he wasn't aware of the bigger picture.
In my line of work, if I'm making calls without considering ALL the information, including LOOKING UP information that may be applicable, I'm still liable if things go wrong. Legally if someone dies, professionally if it costs my organisation money (no pay rise for the guy who blew our profit margins when he forgot to allow for a $1 million piece of equipment in the tender!).
I guess psychiatry is a bit like being weather forecasting: there's no accountability if you're wrong because you missed an important variable in the equation.
Except this time the psychiatrist made calls that got people killed, which is why I applaud him being stood down.
I also note that nowhere do they mention the radicalisation of Islam as a cause. I guess this "non-terror attack" has found its scapegoat and the gods of public opinion have been appeased.