Let Them Marinate in Their Guilt

The jury decision (in the Pryde and Petersen lawsuit) that Virginia Tech was negligent for not warning the campus after the double homicide at Ambler West Johnston Hall is, once again, proof of the bungling incompetence of Charles Steger’s administration at that school. The Department of Education has already decided that Virginia Tech was guilty of violating the Clery Act for not issuing a warning.

Virginia Tech is one of this nation’s premier schools. It is an outstanding institution of higher learning. Our youngest son is a graduate of the engineering school at Virginia Tech—I am so proud of the education he got there; I am so ashamed that the school is run by such inept people.

To those who say Steger and school officials shouldn’t be held accountable for their inaction, I would remind you that school’s advertise they offer a safe and secure environment for learning, and that the courts have ruled that schools have a “special relationship with students” and do have a responsibility for their safety. Furthermore, how can anyone justify issuing the following warnings and not issuing a warning on April 16, 2007, when there were bloody footprints leading away from a double homicide in the middle of the campus? Tech had

--Issued a campus-wide warning when a convict, William Morva, escaped from a Blacksburg jail and killed two people and there was no evidence Morva was on campus.

--Issued a campus-wide warning about measles.

--Issued a campus-wide warning about mold in the library.

--Issued a campus-wide warning about mumps.

--Issued a campus-wide warning about a bomb threat even though the school knew it was probably false.

JURY FINDS VIRGINIA TECH GUILTY

Virginia Tech trial, Day 8: Families of two April 16 shooting victims awarded $4 million each

A Virginia Tech spokesman said the university is "disappointed with today's decision" and maintained that Tech responded appropriately, given the information available on that day.

The Roanoke Times

Updated 4:03 p.m. | Posted 9:21 a.m.

Virginia Tech spokesman Mark Owczarski responded to a jury's decision to award $4 million to the families of two April 16 shooting victims after finding that Virginia Tech's actions on that day contributed to their deaths.

Owczarski said, in a statement: "We are disappointed with today's decision and stand by our long-held position that the administration and law enforcement at Virginia Tech did their absolute best with the information available on April 16, 2007."

Updated 3:25 p.m.

Virginia Tech contributed to the deaths of two students, Erin Peterson and Julia Pryde, in the mass shooting that took place on the campus April 16, 2007, a jury ruled today.

The seven-person jury in Montgomery County Circuit Court also awarded each parent of Peterson and Pryde $2 million. In total, the jury awarded damages of $8 million. The state may only be responsible for paying $100,000 in damages. The judge will rule on the awards cap later.

The trial brings closure to five years of questions that victims' parents have had about decisions police and university administrators made the morning of April 16.

After two students were murdered in a residence hall, the university waited more than two hours to notify the campus of a shooting. The university was not put on lockdown as police searched for a person of interest -- wrongly, the boyfriend of the first female victim -- off campus.

The gunman opened fire minutes later in Norris Hall, killing 30, including Peterson and Pryde.

The families in court today were the only two estates of victims and wounded students who chose not to settle with the university or forgo a lawsuit.

When the jury announced its verdict after deliberating almost three and a half hours, Peterson’s mother, Celeste, began to weep.

Presiding Judge William Alexander then offered his condolences for the pain Celeste and Grafton Peterson, parents of Erin, and Harry and Karen Pryde, parents of Julia, have felt.

-- Katelyn Polantz | The Roanoke Times

Chardon Rampage

The shooting rampage in Chardon, Ohio, is a stark reminder to all Virginians of how little politicians have done to protect our schools. Following the Virginia Tech massacre, Richmond made promises to improve school safety on a wide range of fronts. Few of those promises have been kept.

The common threat connecting these killers is mental or emotional illness. The shooter at Chardon, an emotionally disturbed young man, proves that point again.

The official reports following both Columbine and Virginia Tech called for increased emphasis and spending on mental health in an effort to identify and get help for these future killers. In the crime analysis courses I teach, some of my students, who are mental health specialists, estimate that between 50 and 70 per cent of all crime in America could be prevented through improved mental health programs.

But Governor McDonnell and the Virginia legislature are cutting spending on mental health. Now, McDonnell proposes to privatize the state’s mental health program. Privatization has failed in other states. Furthermore, privatization will lead to a further decline in the quality of mental health care, thus helping to make the state more vulnerable to school shootings.

School safety is not cheap; mental health is not cheap. But what price would Governor McDonnell say is a fair price for the life of any student, staff, or faculty member?

I tried raising mental health and school safety issues with Delegate Ransone, Senator Stuart, and Congressman Wittman. They either don’t answer letters, or in Wittman’s case, he won’t take my questions on his phone survey. All three are afraid of the problem because it means addressing two issues: spending more money on mental health for school safety, and examining ways to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

GIDUCK—ONE MORE TIME

Apparently an honest disagreement and differences of opinion are out of the question when it comes to John Giduck or his supporters. For a man who nearly breaks his arm patting himself on the back for being the defender of truth, justice, and the American way, he has a funny way of showing it.

I have written a number of critiques of Giduck’s writings on the shootings at Virginia Tech. My critiques have been picked up and endorsed by several blogs. Indeed, the readership of my blog has nearly tripled since I posted the Giduck articles. Apparently my words have deeply upset Giduck or his followers.

Rather than challenge my assertions or show where I am wrong, he, or one of his fans, decided to deface my Facebook page by posting a picture of the cover of his book, “Shooter Down,” blocking and covering most of the page. The book cover has now been taken down.

Stop to think of what that action was—at minimum it was harassment, at worst it was a threat because of the title of the book. If Giduck, or his minions, cannot take an honest disagreement and engage in an intellectual dialog about that disagreement, do we really want him consulting about school shootings? When someone comes unglued because his or her ideas are challenged, it is very disturbing.

TECHNICALITIES: REFUGE OF THE GUILTY

Judge William Alexander’s decision to dismiss Virginia Tech President Charles Steger as a defendant in the wrongful death suits filed by the Pryde and Petersen families, is tantamount to contributing to gross miscarriage of justice.

For months, powerful, wealthy, and influential backers of Steger have tried a variety of pressures to stop the Pryde and Petersen families from finding justice in a court of law. Conservative politicians have even gone so far as to try to change the law in a way to drag the trial out, apparently in hopes of bleeding the two families dry. These efforts have been unconscionable.

It appears that this pressure has now gotten to the judge. He is after all appointed by the state legislature for a set term. And, had Steger been kept on as a defendant, the judge might not have gotten reappointed the next time around. Had Steger had been convicted, Judge Alexander might have “decided” on early retirement to spend more time with his family. The Pryde and Petersen families don’t have that option with their daughters.

The judge dismissed Steger on the grounds the prosecution failed to prove that Steger delayed in issuing a warning to the campus following the double homicide at Ambler-West Johnston Hall. The judge misses the point. Steger was the one individual who had the authority to issue the warning and he did not—no matter what the reason.

The judge fails to appreciate the fact that Virginia Tech, and Steger, violated the school’s own rules and procedures on the morning of the shooting. The school, and by implication President Steger, have been found in violation of federal law--the Clery Act—for not warning immediately. The school’s security plans call for an immediate campus-wide warning in the event of a serious threat; they had done so several months earlier when they thought escaped convict and murderer William Morva, was on or near the campus.

Judge Alexander should not have dismissed Steger as a defendant; he should have kept him and added Police Chief Flinchum. It was the police chief’s responsibility, faced with two dead students and bloody footprints leading away from the crime scene, to recommend, or at least raise the possibility of a lock down. Flinchum “indicates” he did not raise the subject of a lock down—if so, that is negligence on his part. Not too long after Flinchum said he did not raise the subject of a lock down with President Steger, Virginia Tech put Flinchum in for 51% pay raise.

When I researched and wrote the book on the shooting at the Appalachian School of Law, January 16, 2002, I consulted with more than one lawyer on the merits of my arguments. Invariably, those lawyers asked me, “How many dirty judges did you find in southwest Virginia in your research.” What a terrible reputation some members of the legal profession from southwest Virginia have with their colleagues. Judge Alexander’s decision does not help that image.

Letter to State Delegate Ransone and State Senator Stuart

Governor McDonnell’s (and the Republican) agenda for 2012 is to loosen gun controls and restrictions in Virginia. There is no mention of keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

Following the Virginia Tech shooting, Virginia’s Republicans and Democrats promised they would adopt policies to make our campuses safer—emphasis was put on mental health and keeping guns from those who are dangerous to themselves and others. Governor McDonnell was Attorney General when those promises were made. He did not object; his silence was tacit approval. The promises have not been kept.

The mentally ill can still go to any gun show in Virginia and buy a weapon without a background check. Colorado closed that loophole after Columbine; Virginia should do the same.

Governor McDonnell apparently considers that sponsoring a radio jingle to raise awareness is the right response to the Peter Odighizuwa’s, Cho Seung-Hui’s, and Ross Turett Ashley’s of this world. It is not.

Virginia spends less on mental health than it did before April 16, 2007. Furthermore, McDonnell is intent on privatizing the state’s mental health program. Privatization will weaken, not strengthen mental health care. A similar privatization program in New Jersey has led to a decline in the quality of care.

Privatization may be popular with some—but it is fool’s gold. Privatization is not more efficient than the current state-run program. Virginia will lose economy of scale through privatization. There will be cuts in care to ensure profits.

With voters clamoring for ethics in government, McDonnell should keep promises—particularly involving the safety of our schools.

I are asking you to strengthen, not loosen laws to keep guns out of the hands of the unstable; I am asking you not to weaken mental health care—keep it in the hands of the state

Yours sincerely,

David Cariens

Kilmarnock, Virginia

CNN REPORTS GUN SALES UP—FEAR MONGERING

The one-month record for background checks was set in November -- over 1.5 million December has already surpassed that record -- with a few days left in the month. The NRA says the figures indicate more people feel they need guns for self defense.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- December holiday shoppers were not just interested in buying the hottest electronics and toys -- they also were purchasing record numbers of guns, according to the latest FBI figures on background checks required to buy firearms.

With a few days left in December, the FBI reports the number of background checks has already topped the previous one-month record -- set only in November -- of 1,534,414 inquiries by gun dealers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System also known as NICS. Almost half a million checks were done in just the last six days before Christmas.

Two days before Christmas, NICS ran 102,222 background checks, which was the second-busiest day in history. The one-day record was set this year on Black Friday, the big shopping day following Thanksgiving, with 129,166 searches. By comparison, the previous one-day high was set November 28, 2008, when gun dealers made slightly less than 98,000 requests for background searches.

It's not possible to tell exactly how many guns have been purchased because buyers often take home more than one gun. But most people pass the background checks. Only 1.3% of the searches result in people being denied permission to buy a weapon, said FBI spokesman Steve Fischer.

FBI officials did not offer a theory on the spike in gun sales. It's also not clear how many of the background checks were for people who never had owned guns before and how many were for gun owners adding to their collections.

The National Rifle Association says the figures indicate more people feel they need guns for self defense.

"I think there's an increased realization that when something bad occurs, it's going to be between them and the criminal," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN. Arulandandum said Americans realize police cannot be everywhere there's trouble and also that some officers are being laid off due to budget cutting.

The NRA spokesman also said an increased number of Americans are participating in skeet shooting and other gun sports.

A leading gun-control organization says repeat buyers most likely are responsible for the holiday surge in guns sales.

"The research we've seen indicates fewer and fewer people are owning more and more guns," said Caroline Brewer of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "All the trends indicate the number of Americans who own guns has declined."

"It would appear because of fear-mongering by the NRA since (President Barack) Obama's election that people are adding more guns to their arsenals out of fear Obama and the Democrats will take away their guns, which is absurd," said Brewer.