The aftermath of April 16, 2007
2:30 p.m.: Top Tech officials told 32 are dead, soon get word of Seung-Hui Cho's death.
2:48: Fundraiser's e-mail: Tragedy "presents an opportunity to . . . draw the VT community together," suggests replacing April 27 gala for fundraising kickoff with large dinner.
7:10: Officials are told all but six of the dead had been identified.
April 20: Tech President Charles W. Steger tells Policy Group: "Important that we not let this event define us."
April 24: Tech officials working on new fundraising kickoff choose Oct. 20.
April 26: Memo notes donations flooding in to Tech after the tragedy, adds: "In a sense the [fundraising] campaign never stopped."
April 30: Policy Group approves kickoff, notes "healing concert offered for Sept. 6 we could charge for outsiders."
May 9: Steger asks that all testimony to state investigation be coordinated.
May 15: Tech officials' "Script Outline" for investigative panel notes the first shootings "appeared to be a boy/girl situation" and that "one does not effectively lockdown . . . a campus like Virginia Tech."
May 20: Fundraising memo notes "our first opportunity to . . . recognize it is time to press ahead," says the key issue is "we will celebrate and embrace the Hokie Spirit."
May 31: Policy Group note: "Care so much we're hiring a full-time team of people to work w/ families & injured students," with additional note to use funds donated to Tech for the families and victims.
June 11: "Talking Points" for a news briefing: Tech never solicited funds for itself after shootings.
June 30: Policy Group discusses closing victims' and families' fund: "We're tired. . . . by Aug 1 disburse all $ -- no more $ avail for counseling," Steger is quoted as saying.
July 9: Parents of deceased student Emily Hilscher left off Tech notifications mailing list; parents of deceased teacher Jamie Bishop write to say: "What we needed immediately after the shootings was the human touch, and what we got was no attention at all. . . . [and] a well-orchestrated press conference. . . . deflecting any real or potential criticism."
July 19: At state investigative panel hearing, one parent complains that her daughter, injured at Norris Hall, can't get counseling from Tech. A Tech official monitoring the hearing writes of another parent of an injured student: "This guy appeared a bit strange to me."
Early August: Steger's office calls parents, arranging appointments for them to call him; it is the first contact many had.
Aug 15: Tech tells victims and families they have until Sept. 15 to file paperwork to receive disbursements from donations public made for them.
Aug. 19: Despite improved security, state investigative panelist gains entry into West Ambler Johnston dorm; panel staff member tells Tech the incident won't be mentioned in the report and adds: "People do not learn swiftly."
Aug 31: State panel criticizes Tech for delaying campus warning but says it was understandable because of mistaken belief that police had lead on a suspect within minutes of first shootings at dorm.
Oct 20: Tech kicks off public phase of $1 billion capital campaign.
SOURCES: Tech documents, Richmond Times-Dispatch interviews
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
VT has two incidents of violence that could have been prevented.
First with Cho, and then with Zhu. If it happens once it, it’s chance. If it happens twice, it’s a pattern. If it happens again? It’s a conspiracy.
First let me say I didn’t attend VT.
With that in mind, yes VT made mistakes but at the same time its not like there is a handbook on how to handle a mass shooting on campus. It does seem as though that Cho slipped threw so many cracks but even outside of campuses if you report strange behavior you will be told, sorry if they haven’t harmed someone or themselves there is nothing we can do. I can see how at first it seemed like a domestic violence case. VT had no way of knowing that later that day a total of 32 people would be gone because of one person. How does someone prepare for something like that? I also think answers should have been given to parents sooner about their children because in some cases they found out from reporters. That part was very wrong but I can’t say why VT did that. I can say though remember how things were after 9/11? People didn’t know what to do then either because something like that hadn’t happened before. I hope that something like this never happens again to another campus but in today’s world, I wouldn’t be surprised. It was obvious that Cho was mentally ill now but once again, unless he was an immediate danger to himself or others nothing can be done. That is where we need to go back to try to prevent these things from happening. The parents will never get over their loss and I do believe that the victims & their families should have come first and hopefully others will learn from this if they ever have to face something like this again.
I’ll repeat comments I’ve made on your other artices. (1) How would you fill up your column space without these relentless stores about VT? (2) Your articles are, on the whole, very misleading. I’m very glad that Tech continues to provide emails to alumni to dispute your reports, point-for-point. Shame on you and your rag!
“Resident Assistants should be required to accept training in handling a hand gun and be willing to carry and be prepared to protect.“
Worst…
Idea…
Ever.
Hey, I’m all about lifting the ban on firearms on campus, but mandating RAs to carry is a recipe for disaster itself. They’re just kids themselves. If they are of the constitution to take the initiative, then fine, but saying everyone should is a pretty good way to ensure that someone who probably SHOULDN’T be carrying will be at any given time on campus. Agreements and psych testing don’t mean squat.
There is no such thing as a “safe zone.“ Resident Assistants should be required to accept training in handling a hand gun and be willing to carry and be prepared to protect.
Psychological testing should first be given to the student applying to be the Resident Assistant that must be willing to learn how to handle a hand gun and use it.
If this had been the policy at Virginia Tech then there could have been only two killed instead of 32, the poor girl that was initially murdered and the shooter, killed by an armed Resident Assistant.
This is not the first time mass murder has been carried out by someone that is intent on murder and they will find a way to do the crime when so obsessed. The ultimate security is the right to carry a weapon as a means of protection, if not for everyone, at least through a saturation of people throughout the whole campus since obviously there are never enough security guards or police.
Seeing a “protected by Smith and Wesson” sticker on a home owner’s door is a warming to an intruder and a person knowing that the resident assistants at a university are armed could curtail a possible next attack.
Guns do not murder. Criminals and crazy people murder and if there is no gun allowed for doing the crime, then they will make a bomb, use a car, perhaps a cross bow. The right to protect is a fundamental Constitutional right and it should be broadly restored to the people wherever they may be living.
Anony Mouse8, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is not based in any FACTs contained in any of the misleading tripe the RTD has published in the last few months.
It is amazing to me how twisted VTer’s get when their perfect little universe is sullied. The utter incompetence of VT administration cost the lives of 32 innocent people. VT was more concerned about putting on a good face than dealing with the tragedy. Two years is nothing in uncovering what went so tragically wrong and I certainly hope the RTD continues this investigation.
The families of the slain have every right to have answers and vent their frustration until the end of time. Everyone has the right to be personally offended that fund raising and PR takes front and center over the well being of those directly affected by this tragedy. It is unconscionable that the administration was looking for victims family to do their job - completely unconscionable. Steger should be held personally accountable for his complete lack of leadership.
VT alumni seem to want to have a group hug, sing Kumbaya and be done with it. Sorry folks, your school set the bar for one of the worst tragedies in this country and we all deserve answers. I can assure you, if it was your child lying dead in that classroom, you would be taking a whole different tone.
This tragedy needs to be dissected until every last ugly detail is brought to light. VT’s answer to everything is to put a good face on and move on. Well, now there the families of 32 dead people who have every right to know why incompetents are leading a major university. VT failed at every single level and needs to be held accountable whether that makes the sensitive little alumnae uncomfortable or not. Deal with it.
Give the VT story a rest! A senseless never-ending soap opera about a 2 year-old event serves no purpose. Poor journalism.
All of these “sources” referenced in the article are upset/angry people who are observing with emotion rather than fact. Not to discount their feelings or experiences, but Steger is one man. He can’t be in touch with an entire campus of students, faculty, and families all at one time at the drop of a hat.
As for a few of the documents… interesting that there is no “author” noted in many of the PDF files (emails excluded). Who wrote the notes in the attachment about the round table? For all we know, it was a parent sitting around the table who accidentally dropped their notes on the way out.
I would agree with a previous poster, it would appear as if the RTD is pulling quotations out of context and hand picking only the most negative and emotional in nature documents. In all of this, there has to be something positive said… where is that RTD?
Bobit, what are you talking about? The July 9 email correcting facts? Geesh. Heaven forbid you ever have to deal w/ a crisis of this magnitude. There is no “protocol” or blueprint for such a thing.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement