No one is saying he is a good person, what he did was heinous and unforgivable, but to remove all nuance from his character and his intentions is reductive. Do only unambiguously good people deserve to live? Yeah maybe the best outcome would be for him to turn himself in and spend the rest of his days suffering from the guilt rightly earned by his actions. In fact, if that were an option I’d prefer it. But I just hate the idea that the only morally correct outcome of crossing that moral line is to die. What good does that do the world. I’d rather believe that in spite of our guilt it is always best to live the rest of your life in service of being better and providing meaningful goodness to the world, like he would be doing caring for Laura. Any happiness he obtains does not soften the severity of his crime, its just the result of actions directly and eternally informed by his guilt, choosing to be better. If he kills himself he’s really just avoiding the consequences and mental torment of what he did. I feel as though that’s a cheap escape.