Related:
In e-mails between roughly half a dozen members of the English department, Cho's eerie mannerisms and the professors' repeated attempts to reach him come to light in a way that is both intimate and unsettling.
English instructor Cheryl Ruggiero's chronicle of an Oct. 19, 2005 meeting between Cho and then-department head Lucinda Roy begins, "I am struck immediately by Seung Cho's physical aspect -- he has a choice of seating, the chair opposite mine close to Lucinda's desk or the sofa, and he chooses the sofa, as far as possible from either of us -- understandable. When I'm introduced and shake his hand, his hand is very sweaty and does not clasp my hand."
The Collegiate Times obtained a number of the documents released to families yesterday, a selection of which appear online at this time. The Collegiate Times will be adding to this archive during the winter break.
The meeting, one of several according to the e-mails, was called to address a violent poem Cho wrote and presented in Nikki Giovanni's poetry course on Oct. 10 in the fall of 2006. That poem -- which Cho later called satire in a lengthy e-mail to Roy on Oct. 21 -- described a previous class discussion on food and eating habits in foreign countries. Cho wrote of one of the conversations' participants, "I don't know which uncouth, low-life planet you come from but you disgust me. In fact, you all disgust me!"
While nearly all of Cho's e-mail correspondence consists of one-line responses to professors entreaties -- "I don't know. I'm not all that good at talking. I don't know," he wrote on Feb. 9, 2006 to English professor Bob Hicok in response to Hicok's e-mail about Cho's classroom reticence -- his response to the meeting with Roy and Ruggiero runs nearly three 8.5" x 11" pages in length.
In conversational -- if somewhat awkward -- prose, Cho writes that issues with Giovanni's teaching style and the lackluster approach he believes Giovanni brought to the classroom led him to write the offending poem.
"I was simply making a point that we seem to spend more time talking about random things than on anybody's poems in a poetry class, and it was certainly not an attempt in any way to offend anyone," Cho wrote.
He contrasts his shyness with what he perceives as a lack of effort on behalf of his classmates. "I might not say much after I read, but neither do many people ... it feels like hell when I [read], but I do it," Cho wrote. Cho concludes with, "I know all this mess that I've made with the class is all my fault. I don't know what to say ... sorry, sorry. I'm not sure if I fully or appropriately responded to your concern with me ... sorry if I said something wrong."
Tech released 13,700 pages of information yesterday to those who lost family members or who survived the April 16 shootings. The information was released only to the families, "because there are records unique to each victim and available only to them or the families of victims, the university is making it available only to settlement participants until February 1, 2009. This will allow them time to use and inspect the materials and to ensure that they are satisfied that no otherwise protected information (unique to them or their loved one) is exposed," according to a release from university relations.
The Collegiate Times has not released any documents with family-specific information, instead focusing on documents relating to Seung-Hui Cho and the work of the university Policy Group, a cadre of the universities top administrators, during and after the shooting.
After Feb. 1, public users in Newman Library and the Library of Virginia in Richmond will be able to access the archive through terminals at both locations. The information will "eventually" be able for access to anyone on-line, according to the release.
The archive, which uses propriety search software created by Servient, a Web hosting service and software vendor, cost $440,000, according to the release.
Any record pertaining to Cho, except his medical records, will be released, according to the release.
Tech spokesman Larry Hincker said he was "disappointed" in the Collegiate Times' on-line publication of the documents because it was the university's intent to allow families to "digest" the information contained within the archive before it became publicly available.
Continue Reading: « Previous12
Leave a comment 13 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
Nicely done. No reason at all to keep these away from the public. You've done a service by putting them out there. Transparency all the way. Sad the school paid nearly half a million dollars for proprietary software when the big-G could have put it together for nothing...
Reply to this Top
You should have respected the University's desire to let the families digest the information. Way to heap more pain onto the families.
Reply to this Top
I agree with Robert. No wonder the university keeps getting accused of being careless and irresponsible when students like yourself and the rest of the staff blantly disregard the families feelings and privacy. These were going to be made public in due time and there was no need to publish them now, especially right before the holidays. It has done nothing but open all the wounds for the entire Hokie community.
Reply to this Top
If none of the information is specific to the families, or is private medical information, I don't see why to hold it back. Clearly, the university is hoping to delay the release until no one cares anymore.
Reply to this Top
The information has been publicly posted since last month. Any effort by the university to keep the information unavailable to the public is simply stonewalling. The information has been available to the entire public via a FOIA request or on www.prevailarchive.org since last month.
Reply to this Top
How dare you open the wounds by grouping the apparent nonsensical amount of data into reader-friendly categories. (I'm proud the CT is my school's paper... good work, staff).
Reply to this Top
Thank you for making this information public. Those ranting about "re-opening old wounds", etc. are ignoring the obvious here: email's sent over the web server at a public university are public property. As such, the public has a right to view them--not after any other specific members of the public, but as soon as they are available. Thank you for protecting taxpayers' rights by releasing the information we are obviously entitled to access in a timely fashion. Given the amount of time that elapsed between the original incident and the present, it was high time this information was released.
Reply to this Top
Posting this information online is pure sensationalism. Publishing these messages- some of which are confidential- is extremely insensitive. The standard of your publication must be of such a high standard to stoop to this level. Hope you are satisfied.
Reply to this Top
I don't understand the people who are complaing about the publication of these materials and conversations. I think it's a good source to study, prevent, see things so they won't repeat. If it's bothering some so much, why are they here reading it? This is not about sensationalism, it's about learning. "If you don't learn from the past, you're doomed to repeat". I feel sorry for everybody involved here, but I find it also pretty obvious what was going on with the shooter... without our too easy access to guns he would have "accomplished" just the fraction of what he did...
Reply to this Top
Janet, it's the fact that the CT deliberately posted this information before it was supposed to be made public. They kind of overstepped their boundaries. The fact that they are student media doesn't give them to right to do something like this. There's nothing wrong with releasing this information, it's about adhering to the rules and requests of the families and others in order to protect these documents. Why does everyone think it's ok to deliberately overstep these boundaries?
Reply to this Top
Thank you for publishing the information. It was the correct action. It is a shame that some people believe hiding important information like this is inappropriate. The families have had plenty of time to absorb this information and releasing it does no harm to them.
Reply to this Top
Thank you for putting forth this information, God Bless you all.
Reply to this Top
Brian: This information is ALREADY PUBLIC. It has been public for months, by going to Burruss Hall and making an appointment with University Relations. The information was already digitized, at www.prevailarchive.org. The information is freely and publicly available. The CT did an excellent job by making it further accessible.
Reply to this Top