Reinstate Steger

Attorneys for the two Virginia Tech victims’ families who sued the school for failing to warn that a killer was on the loose on April 16, 2007, have appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court to reinstate school President Steger as a defendant.

There are, however, serious questions whether the families have a chance. The Virginia court system is politicized, and judges seem to care more about ideology than about truth.

Unlike other states’ Supreme Courts, Virginia’s highest court usually rules based on the far right ideological premise that organizations, businesses, and government agencies have absolutely no obligation to warn despite overwhelming evidence of imminent violence. The need-to-warn concept is “foreseeablility.” Other states’ courts recognize it; Virginia’s supreme court usually doesn’t.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers correctly argue that Steger has not been truthful in recounting April 16, 2007.  Following the shooting, Steger hired a crisis-management firm. That team prepared Steger for a Meet the Press interview that aired on September 23, 2007 in which he said a suspect was taken into custody after the dormitory double homicide—two hours before the Norris Hall massacre. Steger’s words were a lie. If Steger will lie on national television, can we believe anything he says?

Evidence in court documents, in the Governor’s Review Panel Report, and Steger’s own words show that he has repeatedly been less than candid and frequently untruthful.

Virginia judges are appointed by the state legislature. Brutally powerful right-wing politicians tried to derail the families’ lawsuit. These same politicians will work behind-the-scenes to ensure Steger is not held accountable.

When I wrote the book on Virginia’s first school shooting at the Appalachian School of Law, our Kilmarnock lawyer asked me, “How many corrupt judges have you uncovered?” I hope none of those, or like-minded, judges are on the Virginia Supreme Court.

            

Cuccinelli—One White Lie After Another

There seems no end to the depths the Virginia Attorney General will sink in order to deny justice to the families of the victims of the Virginia Tech shootings.

 The Attorney General’s office has appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court to overturn the jury decision that Tech failed to live up to its obligation to warn the campus that a killer was on the loose.  In fact, the Attorney General’s office may have broken the law in writing the appeal. You cannot represent to a court something that you know is false—and that is what the Attorney General’s office appears to have done. Furthermore, if you present something to a court leading to an incorrect inference because you have not presented all the facts, it is tantamount to a lie. And Cuccinelli’s office appears to have done that as well.

In describing the morning of April 16, 2007, Cuccinelli’s denies a duty to warn because “multiple police forces on the scene did not believe the campus was in danger.” That is simply not true. The erroneous decision that the dormitory double homicide was a “domestic incident” was the decision of one man alone—Chief Wendell Flinchum. Furthermore, the dead male was gay; there was no reason for the dead female’s boyfriend to be jealous.

Without presenting evidence (because there is none), Cuccinelli’s office says school President Steger “understood … that the perpetrator likely left the campus” and did not warn. The Attorney General appears to believe that a killer is any less dangerous after committing murder than before?

Finally, the Supreme Court is not told of the thirteen bloody footprints leading away from the crime scene and a bloody thumbprint on a doorknob leading to a stairwell and a building exit. That alone is evidence to warn immediately.  

            

It's Past Time, Speaker Boehner

Now Is the Time. Actually, It's Past Time, Speaker Boehner

By Colin Goddard

Trayvon Martin, Gabrielle Giffords, The Virginia Tech 32, The Columbine 13. Reagan, JFK. All shot by people who shouldn't have had access to guns.

After each of these tragedies, leading politicians have said, basically, "Now is not the time to talk about gun policy."

Last year, House Speaker John Boehner said it a nanosecond after the attack on Congresswoman Giffords and the others in Arizona.

The fact is, the tragedies that make national headlines represent only a small fraction of the thousands of deaths that occur every year at hands of people who never should have had guns. It is easier to take home a gun in our country than an adopted dog from a shelter.

Convicted felons, domestic abusers, the dangerously mentally ill, even terrorists, can buy guns in most states through gun shows or private sales over the internet with no background check whatsoever.

If Speaker Boehner knew firsthand what it was like to lose a loved one because of one of these people who never should have had a gun, would he think differently? Would it then be time to talk about gun policy?

On Monday, I'm going to try to meet with Speaker Boehner, and as many Members of Congress as I can. I want to ask simple questions like, "Do you think a convicted felon should be able to buy, carry or use a gun anywhere in our nation?"

I'll be joined by 31 of my friends, friends who I probably wouldn't have ever met except that they, too, were victims of guns in the hands of dangerous people who never should have had them. I've written to the Speaker (and other Congressional leaders) asking to meet. As of this point I've heard he's too busy.

I was shot four times at Virginia Tech -- five years ago this coming Monday, April 16. It's a sickening and surreal feeling, to be lying on the floor, hearing a constant BANG! BANG! BANG!, feeling the warmth your own blood, smelling what smells like fireworks on the 4th of July. It's absolutely terrifying, and it's nothing like you see glorified in movies.

I talk about it at length in a documentary about the shooting called Living for 32 that is going to be watched at more than 32 colleges and universities Monday evening, and I'll be discussing my experience after the movie in a livestreamed Q and A with NBC News' Luke Russert.

After the fourth shot, the shooter must have thought he got me, so he moved on. Seconds later, he shot himself, but I didn't learn that until the SWAT team stormed the room.

What does it say about Mr. Boehner if he, as the Speaker of "The People's House" will not meet with me and 31 other victims of gun violence to discuss how our tragedies might have been prevented?

I know the Speaker has met with people from the gun industry and their lobbyists at the NRA -- the House recently passed a bill to force every state to allow in people carrying loaded, concealed guns from every other state -- your own state requirements be damned.

Is Mr. Boehner scared to face the consequences of his actions, or complete lack thereof, as he has done the bidding of the gun lobby? Does he just want to sweep us under the carpet? We know he is an emotional guy. Might facing the real human toll of his political expediency force him to rethink his actions? Or might it just be embarrassing?

We must demand change now. We can't wait for another mass-shooting -- another "Breaking News" banner with people crying, ambulances screaming, flowers piling, then candles lighting. And, given the reaction of Congress I wouldn't count on them to do anything no matter how horrific the next tragedy might be.

That's why we need to take matters into our own hands. We can't hope for something to change anymore. We have to make it change. We have to put the realities of what happens when dangerous people have easy access to guns right in their face.

Every day in America, 32 people are murdered by guns. That's a "Virginia Tech" happening in our nation every single day. That's why there will be 32 of us walking the halls of Congress next week. But we will not just be there speaking for ourselves and our lost loved ones. We will be speaking for all of the 30,000 Americans who are lost to guns every year -- all of their families loved ones and communities -- all Americans who are sick and tired of living with the preventable tragedy of gun violence in our nation and who demand accountability from our elected leaders to end it.

Mr. Speaker, we're coming over to your office this week, and the offices of many of your colleagues. If you think it's not "appropriate" to talk about gun violence during the week that marks both Virginia Tech and Columbine -- the worst shootings in our country's history -- then when would it be for you?

Mass Shootings—As American As Apple Pie

            The American tradition continues; another mass shooting, this time at a Sikh temple in suburban Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Seven people are dead including the shooter and three more are wounded.

            Once again there are condemnations, words of sympathy—and, there is no attempt to do anything about the growing gun violence in this country. The politicians just ring their hands, shed tears for the cameras, and then shrug their shoulders and walk away. The shooting epidemic has now reached the point where an average of 32 people are killed every day in the United States by gun violence. To quote the Brady Campaign “We are better than this”—particularly if we really are the greatest country on earth.

            Slightly more than two weeks after James Holmes butchered 12 innocent people and wounded 58 others in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater, Wade Michael Page walked into a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin on Sunday morning, August 5, 2012, and turned his automatic weapon on unarmed worshipers. The death toll could have been higher. Had Page waited another hour, the temple would have been full of Sunday worshipers.

            Among the wounded survivors is 51-year-old police officer Brian Murphy. Murphy was shot at least eight times and is in critical condition, but is expected to survive. The police are calling the shooting a possible domestic terrorist incident, and have released few details. It is known, however, that Page was a singer in a skinhead band called “End Apathy.” Acquaintances have described him as a white supremacist.

            The suspect enlisted in the army in 1992 and in 1994 and was assigned to the psychological operations unit at Fort Bliss, Texas. In 1998, he was discharged under “honorable conditions,” which is not an honorable discharge. A pattern of misconduct, including being drunk on duty, led the military to discharge him.

NOW SUBURBAN DENVER: WHEN IS THE RIGHT TIME?

            Following the Tuscon shooting that killed six and seriously wounded 12 others including Representative Gabriele Giffords, members of the Brady Campaign asked to meet with House Majority Leader John Boehner to discuss ways to curb gun violence. Boehner said that “now is not the right time.” On the fifth anniversary of the Virginia Tech shooting Brady Campaign officials asked for a meeting with La. Sen. Vitter to discuss a bill he had introduced making it easier for the mentally ill to buy guns. Vitter was too busy.

            Congressman Boehner isn’t too busy to visit tanning booths and Vitter found time to frequent New Orleans prostitutes.

            Now we have 12 dead and some 50 wounded in a movie theater in suburban Denver. So when is the right time to discuss ways to keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons, convicted domestic abusers, terrorists, and mentally ill people who are a threat to themselves and others?

            The guns rights advocates’ assault on the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and dialogue with elected officials has been blistering and deadly. With rare exception, politicians are so afraid of the National Rifle Association they won’t even talk to people looking for ways to curb this epidemic of violence.

            Following the massacre at Virginia Tech, UCLA Professor Douglas Kellner monitored coverage on the Sunday news shows on all the major networks. The results debunked claims of liberal media bias. What he found was a feeding frenzy of right wing, pro-gun advocates. Only one gun control advocate spoke, and that was just for a few moments on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

            So, when will our elected officials respect the First Amendment as much as they fear the Second? When will they engage in a dialogue?

Freedom of Information Request

June 30, 2012

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cucinnelli

Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia

900 East Main Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

REF: Freedom of Information Request

Attorney General Cucinnelli,

I am requesting all documents relating to the amount of money your office and the state of Virginia (including Virginia Tech University) spent on the Pryde and Peterson lawsuit.

Specifically, I would like all documents showing all money and expenses paid to individuals, lawyers and their staff for legal service from:

McGuire Woods

One James Center

901 East Cary Street

Richmond, Va. 232190

I would also like the names of all deputy attorney generals and their staff members used in the state’s defense? What are their salaries (daily salary rate if possible), and how many days did each devote to the trial?

Would you also send me a list of all expenses, travel, miscellaneous, etc. associated with the state’s defense?

Thanking you in advance,

                                                                                    Yours sincerely,

                                                                                    David Cariens

                                                                                      

cc: Governor McDonnell

The Medieval Mind of Kurt Hofmann

Kurt Hofmann is a former paratrooper who was paralyzed in a car accident in 2002. He has become a gun rights advocate and writes a blog entitled, Armed and Safe. The Mission Statement of his blog reads:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Mr. Hofmann, instead of examining the constitutional arguments of the second amendment, engages in immature name calling with those who disagree with him. Certainly that is right under the first amendment—freedom of speech. But such words are indicative of an individual who relies on emotion and not thought. Hofmann is telling so much more about himself than those he criticizes. Furthermore, it is somewhat disturbing when he picks on those who have been wounded in school shootings.

Everyone has the right to deal with and heal from catastrophic events in their own way; no one can tell someone else how to heal from being shot four times. But Hofmann feels he has that right, and he has labeled Colin Goddard an alchemist for working for the Brady Campaign. Hofmann’s cheap shot is that Goddard is making money off the Tech massacre. In fact, if Goddard wanted to make money off that tragedy he would work for the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA has money to burn and buys one politician after another. The NRA is not only rolling in cash, it has not hesitated to exploit school shootings. It is not Goddard who is getting rich off school shootings.

It is troubling that Hofmann would stir his cauldron of medieval hatred, paranoia, and self-pity in order to defame a young man who is walking around with bullets in him, bullets that could move at any time and cause potentially serious damage.

I can only assume Hofmann will not stop with Goddard. I know of a young woman, injured in a school shooting, who is walking around with a bullet lodged next to her spine. One tiny move and she will be paralyzed for life. I wonder how Hofmann will attempt to degrade her because she wants to keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons, terrorists, convicted domestic abusers, and those who are dangerously mentally ill?

 Or, Mr. Hofmann, why not attack the father who had to be put on suicide watch after his child was gunned down in a school shooting; the father who cannot hold down a job because he is so emotionally and psychologically upset, and may now lose his home. You should have a field day making fun of him.

What a shame. Just because you have suffered a terrible trauma, Mr. Hofmann, does not mean that you have the right to cheaply criticize others who handle trauma differently.