A week ago, on the two-year anniversary of the shootings, families of April 16 victims Erin Peterson and Julia Pryde filed lawsuits against Virginia Tech, Cook Counseling Center and several school officials in an attempt to "receive accountability for the tragic events of April 16, 2007.
By doing so, many people believe these families are simply pouring alcohol on the already open wounds from that day. But I think the lawsuit might cause new information to surface - information that could bring closure to those closely affected by the tragedy and maybe prevent future shootings from occurring.
The Petersons and Prydes were the only families who did not agree to a settlement offered to the survivors and victims' families in 2008. By agreeing to the settlement, they would have abandoned the option of filing a later suit. The two families said they respect the decisions made by other families to accept the settlement, but they aren't satisfied.
One legitimate issue mentioned in the lawsuit is that on the morning of April 16, 2007, Tech officials were more concerned with saving face than providing a safe environment for its students. According to the lawsuit filed by Erin Peterson's family, "the university's image as 'a safe place to send one's child' had been damaged by three incidents in the preceding eight months."
One of those incidents occurred in August 2006, when escaped prisoner William Morva killed two people off campus. In that case, Tech was on lockdown within an hour, though no student was ever harmed.
Then on April 2 and April 13, 2007, bomb threats shut down various academic buildings on campus. In both cases, students were informed of the bomb threats and warned of possible danger within an hour.
The families want answers as to why, on April 16, after two students were killed in a residence hall, the Tech community wasn't immediately informed about what happened.
When an e-mail was finally sent at 9:26 a.m., more than two hours after the dorm shooting, it did not give an explicit warning to students and didn't mention that two people were killed. It said, "A shooting incident occurred in West Ambler Johnston this morning," and that "the university community is urged to be cautious."
The families of Julia Pryde and Erin Peterson believe the e-mail was an insufficient warning, mainly because of the magnitude of the incident that had already occurred that morning and the attention given to similar situations in recent history.
Leave a comment 6 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.
VT adopted Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention Policy in June of 2005. It stresses that carrying guns on campus will get you expelled or fired. It also stresses that students found to be stalking others can and will be expelled. It seems to me that Cho was found to have stalked two women. He was never expelled or threatened with expulsion. Had he been expelled he probably would have just ended up back in Nova with his family. Would he have come back and committed a massacre? I don't know. But it is clear to all of us that VT can't and/or won't stand by their own resolutions they adopt in the name of safety.
Reply to this Top
Read all about it here http://www.hr.vt.edu/employeescorner/workplaceviolence/index.html
Reply to this Top
His pending graduation was probably a mitigating factor. We know he was extremely paranoid from mental illness. What do you think an expulsion would do? Guessing games.
Reply to this Top
@Liza, I agree no one can understand what the parents have gone through and we shouldn't "cynically assume" their motivation (I prefer logical assumption). But, I admit there are two outstanding questions that would help clarity everyones (or maybe just my) opinion and understanding of this lawsuit: 1) Why such a large amount? 2) Who will be paying the bill, assuming a settlement is awarded. Until these are answered, I don't think you should judge anyone for judging a public lawsuit.
Reply to this Top
I would be interested to know what these two families are planning on doing with the money if they win. They could eliminate any and all accusations of greed if they say they will donate all settlements to charity. Also, no one in the administration can be held responsible for what happened, so I don't think anyone should lose their job. Complete transparency in the administration's actions that day should exonerate them and bring closure to this question.
Reply to this Top
Pouring salt on open wounds is the phrase you were looking for. Pouring alcohol on wounds is helpful because it kills bacteria...
Reply to this Top