Tuesday, November 9, 2010

RESPONSE FROM WARNER—MORE DOUBLE_TALK

The following is the letter I received from Senator Warner dealing with my inquiry concerning the delay in the publication of the Department of Education’s report on the Virginia Tech tragedy. I also include the letter from the Department of Education to Senator Warner. Please note the run-around and the lack of response to my specific questions. My initial request was dated August 14, 2010 and was sent certified return receipt mail to Senators Warner and Webb and Congressman Whittman. I asked for information on when the Department of Education’s report on Virginia Tech would be released. I received nothing from Senator Webb and nothing from Congressman Whitman. Today is November 9, 2010. Nearly two months of silence and referrals—all I want to know is when the report will be published.

October 28, 2010

United States Senate

Dear Mr. Cariens,

Enclosed you will find the response from the U..S. Department of Education to my inquiry on your behalf. I hope that the information provided will be helpful and responsive to your specific concerns.

My staff and I stand ready to be of assistance to you in any other matter that is of concern to you. Thank you.

Sincerely,

(Signed)

Mark R. Warner

United States Senator

Now for the Department of Education:

United States Department of Education

Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs

October 14, 2010

Honorable Mark Warner

United States Senator

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Warner,

Thank you for your letter on behalf of David S. Cariens, Jr. I appreciate your interest in this matter and have referred your letter to the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools for a direct reply. That office has the expertise to assist your constituent. I am confident they will make every effort to be helpful.

If this office can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact my staff or me.

Sincerely

(Signed)

Gabriella Gomez

Assistant Secretary

Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Northern Neck News

I was interviewed by the Northern Neck News on October 28th. Below is the article that appeared on November 2, 2010, based on that interview.

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY

Burgess man is a voice of accountability

By Dianne Saison

The tragic murder of a family member was crippling, but the subsequent lies and cover-up are what forced a Burgess man into action.

David Cariens, Jr., a retired CIA officer with 31 years of experience in criminal and political analysis, had once looked forward to spending his retirement surrounded by family at his Northumberland home. However, on one cold winter morning, everything changed.

“We had heard about a shooting at the Appalachian School of Law and we were worried, but we never thought it would be our Angie,” Cariens said.

What followed would bring Cariens out of retirement and into the spotlight of victim’s rights advocacy.

Angela Dales, a student at the school, was the mother of Cariens’ eldest grandchild and a much-loved family member. She had recently made plans for both she and her daughter to move in with the Cariens while she interned in Richmond.

“Angela was a wonderful human being. She was pretty and vivacious and had the type of personality that was magnetic,” Cariens said. “She epitomized all that life should be.”

On Jan. 16, 2002, Dales was studying at the school lounge when the unthinkable unfolded.

Peter Odighizuwa, a native of Nigeria, had a history of mental health issues. His tenure as a student at the School of Law was riddled with numerous altercations involving both students and faculty.

In the weeks preceding the shooting, numerous media outlets reported that faculty members had voiced concerns to school administrators about Odighizuwa. Citing fears for their safety, the faculty requested that security measures be taken, but their pleas fell on deaf ears.

On Jan. 15, after failing the semester, Odighizuwa was dismissed from the school.

The following morning, Odighizuwa arrived at the campus and engaged in an altercation with Professor Dale Rubin over his recent dismissal. Despite Odighizuwa’s erratic behavior during the exchange, Rubin failed to report the incident to either the police or school staff, instead leaving campus to go to lunch.

Within hours of the incident, Odighizuwa returned to the campus with a loaded .380 semiautomatic pistol. He proceeded to the administration building where he shot, execution style, Dean Anthony Sutin and Professor Thomas Blackwell. Odighizuwa then ventured downstairs to the student lounge, walked up to Dales and fired three rounds into her at point blank range. After shooting three more female students, Odighizuwa was taken down by fellow students and apprehended by the police.

In the ensuing chaos, Dales was left unattended. Despite the close proximity of the school to the local hospital, she went without medical attention for nearly an hour while medical professionals mistakenly assumed she had been mortally wounded.

According to Cariens, the lack of immediate medical attention contributed to Dales’ death.

“She was shot in the neck, shoulder and chest,” Cariens said. “When the doctor arrived he had wrongly assumed she had been hit in the carotid artery and that nothing could be done. While she bled to death, they helped the less injured.”

Cariens added that had the doctors or police followed the basic rules of triage, Dales would have had a good shot at surviving the shooting.

“We wanted to know why Angie wasn’t evacuated immediately,” Cariens said.

He added that the lack of accountability extended from medical personnel to the highest offices at the college.

""The school ignored the warning signs and the result was the death of innocent people,” Cariens said, adding that Odighizuwa’s behavior had been ignored or excused for many years.

In the months fol lowing the shooting, the Dales and Cariens families looked to the school for answers as to why a known, mentally unstable individual had been allowed on campus and why, after the first shooting, an emergency evacuation of the school had not been ordered.

According to Cariens, their grief was met by evasiveness and deception, which culminated in a meeting where police stonewalled the families after they asked about Odighizuwa’s prior criminal history and recent email threats that Dales had received.

“I left that meeting furious. Did they think we were stupid?” Cariens asked. “Having been lied to and yelled at was the turning point.”

Following the meeting, Cariens began writing his recent book, “A Question of Accountability: The Murder of Angela Dales.” The book details the shooting and the alleged cover up that followed.

According to Cariens, while Angela’s death nearly paralyzed him with grief, writing the book nearly killed him.

“I was [physically] sick almost every day that I was writing it and I subsequently came down with cancer,” he said. “My wife said that I had to stop, but I couldn’t. It took over two years to complete.”

Cariens said he was not the only one suffering from illness. After the shooting, Dales’ father was diagnosed with stressinduced spinal meningitis, an illness he continues to struggle with today.

“These are the stories no one hears about, what happens after [a tragedy],” Cariens said.

While helping the Dales family pursue a lawsuit against the school, Cariens began advocating for better regulations in Virginia’s mental health system and regulations regarding the purchase of guns.

“I think it is a given that we could absolutely reduce crime if we could put more money into mental health,” Cariens said, adding that the recent $1.5 billion found in VDOT accounts could be used for things more important than infrastructure repair.

“I would rather the toilets [at highway rest stops] remain closed and spend the money on mental health [programs]. To not do so would be poor judgment,” he said.

Cariens’ advocacy also has brought him into the spectrum of victims’ families from the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, many of whom he now works closely with.

Cariens, who has actively criticized the events following the initial shooting at Virginia Tech, claims the school violated the Cleary Act, which requires colleges and universities across the United States to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses.

“The critical issue at Virginia Tech is what happened after the first homicides,” Cariens said. “You have bloody footprints leading away from a crime and two or three hours later 30 people are dead. What was law enforcement doing in that critical timeframe?”

On Nov. 12, Cariens will act as chairman and give opening remarks at the first International Summit and Student Symposium on Violence Prevention and Conflict Resolution at the Virginia Tech campus.

Cariens also has traveled the world, teaching intelligence and criminal analysis to various governmental agencies from Canada to Singapore. He has incorporated his book and his experiences at both Appalachia and with Virginia Tech into his lectures. His next book, “Critical Thinking Through Writing: Intelligence and Crime Analysis,” includes a case study of what he believes to be a major cover-up in the former Gov. Tim Kaine’s Review Panel Report on the Virginia Tech massacre.

“If you want to see classic use of passive voice to cover up a crime, read that report,” Cariens said.

While he holds the administrators of Appalachia and Virginia Tech personally responsible for the tragedies, he said the issues of school safety remain societal. He hopes that students and government officials will understand that change needs to occur if Virginia wants to protect its students.

“No matter what people’s political leanings are, we should all work in tandem to bring greater security to our schools,” he said. “Both shootings were inevitable because of bureaucratic incompetence. Until we hold people accountable for school shootings, they will not stop.”

The proceeds of Cariens book are split between his granddaughter and charities on the Northern Neck. He has not made any money from either the book or his advocacy. For more information, visit www.aquestionofaccount ability.com .

Sunday, October 10, 2010

ONLY SENATOR WARNER HAS RESPONDED

In mid-August, 2010, I send a letter to Virginia Senators Warner and Webb as well as Congressman Whittman asking that they check into the delay in releasing the final report of the U.S. Department of Education’s findings that Virginia Tech violated federal law (the Clery Act) on the April 16, 2007. Only Senator Warner has replied. Below is his letter:

United States Senate

Washington, D.C. 20510-4606

September 16, 2010

Mr. David Cariens

1666 Balls Neck Road

Kilmarnock, Virginia 22482

Dear Mr. Cariens,

Thank you for contacting me regarding the delay in DOE’s final report on the mass murder at Virginia Tech. I’ve taken the liberty of contacting the U.S. Department of Education on your behalf asking hat they review your concerns and get back to me with a detailed and appropriate response.

As soon as I receive a reply, I will again be in touch with you. Please do not hesitate to contact me about other matters that are of concern to your.

Sincerely,

Mark R. Warner (signed)

United States Senator

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

THE BLACK SWAN REVISITED

Virginia Tech cited the “Black Swan” concept in defense of itself following the Department of Education’s findings that it violated federal law—the Cleary Act—on the morning of April 16, 2007, by not warning students, faculty, and staff of an imminent threat.

I have now read Nassim Taleb’s “The Black Swan” and nothing could be further from the truth. The school’s use of the “Black Swan” defense is tantamount to intellectual dishonesty. What a shame that a great academic institution stooping to such duplicitous measures. The school’s willingness to distort the “Black Swan” is yet another indication of how bankrupt its position is. In fact, Tech’s willingness to distort the “Black Swan” as it desperately grasps for excuses only underscores the indefensible actions of the Steger administration.

If you read Taleb’s book, he says that a “Black Swan” event has several characteristics. First and foremost is that nothing in the past can point to its possibility. Here he cites a turkey that is fed lots of food for months on end, and then a few weeks before Thanksgiving, the farmer cuts off his head. For the turkey, nothing pointed to its imminent demise—the head-lopping was a total surprise; it was a “Black Swan.”

Was that true in the case of Cho and Virginia Tech? I don’t think so. Do I really have to repeat all the warning signs? How many times does the Steger administration have to be reminded that an English professor threatened to resign unless Cho was removed from her class? She feared for the lives of her students and herself. Does the school really have to be told again that a judge ruled that Cho was an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness? Has the school forgotten that Cho’s behavior toward women got him into trouble with campus police? Circuit Court Judge Alexander has ruled that there is ample evidence of negligence on the part of school President Steger and others—enough evidence for a lawsuit to go forward against them. I could go on and on.

The school neglects to tell the reader that Taleb also says that “some events can be rare and consequential, but somewhat predictable, particularly to those who are prepared for them and have the tools to understand them… .” Taleb calls these events “near Black Swans.” The events of April 16, 2007, appear to fall into that category. I would remind Virginia Tech that just because something is unlikely, does not mean that it is not predictable. There was ample evidence that Cho might harm himself or others and the school found every excuse it could to avoid confronting those indications and doing something about them.

No matter how much the Steger administration twists and turns, the facts are the facts. The school’s inaction before the tragedy of April 16, 2007, makes the Steger administration liable for the murders that terrible day.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Letter to Congressman Wittman

Congressman Wittman,

I have listened to two of your telephone forums recently. You repeatedly raise the point that we have to bring government spending under control and spend our resources wisely. I assume you also mean that for the federal government and the state of Virginia. Therefore, I would like to call to your attention that Virginia Tech spent around $700,000.00 on a public relations firm to spin the story of the April 16, 2007 shooting tragedy.

You are a graduate of Virginia Tech, and I am sure you are appalled by this waste of taxpayer money. The university has a public relations office; the school has some of the best minds in the country. To spend a small fortune in an attempt to manipulate the facts surrounding the worst mass shooting in this country’s history is not just inexcusable, it is unconscionable.

Virginia Tech receives federal funds. Would you be willing to launch an investigation of why and how this public relations firm was hired, and who authorized this waste of taxpayers’ money?

In both the school shootings at the Appalachian School of Law on January 16, 2002 and Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007, the police refused to cooperate with either the victims’ families or in the case of Virginia Tech, the governor’s investigative panel.

Would you be willing to sponsor legislation making it a crime for police documents to be withheld from victims’ families and any investigative body looking into mass killings?

Would you also be willing to sponsor a group of volunteers made up of victims’ families representatives and individuals selected by the state of Virginia to review what information was withheld from the law school and Tech shootings, and why? The group would need subpoena power, should not include any individual who has had, or currently has, business dealings with the state, and should be headed by someone selected by the victims’ families. Congressman Wittman, given your professions—a lawyer and a politician—you are well acquainted with the principle of “limiting information in order to guide or obscure the conclusions.” That is what happened in the case of both shootings here in Virginia.

The preliminary findings of the Department of Education’s investigation into the shootings at Virginia Tech conclude the school violated the Clery Act, and Virginia Tech may be liable to penalties and fines. If there was gross negligence on the part of school President Charles Steger’s administration, would you support the removal of those individuals who were grossly negligent?

Congressman Wittman, it is my sincere hope that your are not one of those politicians who believes that the primary goal of politics is to keep from the electorate the information they most need to know—particularly when that information concerns the murder of our children and loved ones.

Yours sincerely,

David S. Cariens, Jr.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Webb, Warner, Wittman

Senator Jim Webb

United States Senate

248 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Senator Mark Warner

United States Senate

459A Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Congressman Rob Wittman

United States House of Representatives

1318 Longworth HOB

Washington, D.C. 20515

Gentlemen:

As the three of you know, the Department of Education’s (DOE) preliminary findings in connection with the mass murder at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007, found the university in violation of the Clergy Act. The school is therefore liable to finds and/or loss of federal funding. The final report was due out in June, 2010. It is now mid-August.

The delay in issuing the final report is both troubling and disturbing.

Another school year is starting. It is of paramount importance that the DOE report be issued soon and that Tech be held accountable. If there is no accountability, there is no incentive to make our universities and colleges safe. Universities and colleges across the country need this report in order to learn.

This a great opportunity for the three of you to put party differences aside and work together to make our campuses safe and secure learning environments.

Would you gentlemen please check and find out the reason for the delay in issuing the DOE report?

Thanking you in advance,

Yours sincerely,


David S. Cariens, Jr.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

WE DON'T SEEM TO LEARN

Good people make terrible decisions with horrific results. The more I delve into the school shootings in this country, the more apparent that fact becomes. It also becomes crystal clear that our society needs to hold people accountable for their actions and inactions--particularly when they result in death. I am not talking about revenge; I am talking about removing people who clearly do not understand the law, override experts in mental health, or do not do their job.

Many of the poor decisions I am talking about are made for fear of lawsuits or to protect careers. I have documented the incredibly poor decisions made by people in positions of authority in connection with the shootings at the Appalachian School of Law and Virginia Tech. I was recently reminded of similar poor decisions made in connection with the murder of a freshman student at the University of California, Berkeley.

On October 26, 1969, Prosenjit Poddar, murdered Tanya Tarasoff. Poddar had met Tarasoff at a social event, fell in love with her and proposed marriage. When Tarasoff rejected the proposal, Poddar began stalking her.

Poddar voluntarily sought psychiatric help, saying he had thoughts of violence and getting even with Tarasoff. He had around eight sessions of out-patient therapy with Dr. Warren Moore over a period of two and a half months. When Dr. Moore challenged him about his violent tendencies, Poddar became angry and broke off therapy.

On August 20, 1969, Dr. Moore called the campus police and reported that Poddar was dangerous to himself and others. He provided the police with a letter from the acting head of the psychiatric department concurring with his diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenic reaction, acute and severe. Dr. Moore proposed a 72-hour emergency detention order if the police would pick Poddar up and take him to the hospital.

Three police officers interviewed Poddar, and based on their interview, decided Poddar was not dangerous and did not detain him. To my knowledge, none of those officers had any experience or training in mental health, but they over-rode the recommendations of two highly trained mental health experts.

No one warned Tanya Tarasoff or her family of the threat Poddar posed.

On October 27, 1969, Poddar found Tarasoff alone at home shot her with a pallet gun and then chased her into the back yard where he stabbed her to death with a kitchen knife.

You have to ask, when will we learn? If people use a bad word or tell an off-color joke they are reprimanded, sanctioned, or may even lose their jobs. Often these are things that would not have even turned a head in the 1960s, but we do not seem to have learned anything from the 1969 shooting at UC Berkeley. People in authority make wrong decisions, ignore experts, or do not comply with existing laws, resulting in student murders—and still nothing happens, no one is held responsible.

In 2002, people in positions of authority ignored the warning signs at the Appalachian School of Law—requests for campus security from the faculty, the soon-to-be murderer taking over classrooms and ranting and raving, a doctor calling the killer a time-bomb waiting to go off, police ignoring the very basic rules of triage and allowing a critically wounded student to bleed to death when the hospital was 10 minutes away—I could go on and on.

Then on April 16, 2007, there was Virginia Tech. Volumes could be written about the warning signs centering on Cho. He was deemed a threat to himself and others, but no one put his name on the list making him ineligible to buy guns in the state of Virginia, faculty members threatened to resign because he was a danger to students and faculty alike. On top of this, the school administration broke its own security rules on the morning of April 16, 2007, and as a result 30 people were slaughtered at Norris Hall. And again, no one is held accountable.

To make matters worse, the state of Virginia paid a small fortune to a contracting firm to write a report that covers-up, glosses over, or does not address many of the actions that would make people culpable and accountable.

Some argue that there is no way to prevent these tragedies like these; that the future is not predictable. It is true that we cannot predict the future, but we should be able to learn from the past. We can learn from 1969, 2002, and 2007. If we will finally face the hard facts and realities of what led to these shootings, if we can make people in positions of authority accountable for their actions or inactions, we can prevent some of these kinds of shootings from happening again. We can learn from the past, and we can adopt laws that keep guns out of the hands of those who have been deemed a threat to themselves and others.