Virginia Tech seeks to block $55,000 fine

WASHINGTON (AP) - December 7, 2011

"They had an obligation to let the community know so they could take preventive steps," said David Bergeron, a deputy assistant secretary.

An administrative judge is considering Virginia Tech's appeal of a $55,000 fine levied after the April 16, 2007 shootings, which left 33 dead, including the shooter.

Representing the university, Peter Messitt, a senior assistant attorney general for Virginia, said police responding to the initial report of shootings in a dormitory believed the victims were "targeted for a reason" in a domestic incident and thought the shooter had left campus.

Parents of the victims were expected to testify later Wednesday.

The Education Department says Virginia Tech was too slow in notifying students, faculty and staff of the safety threat. It says the school violated the law by waiting more than two hours after two students were fatally shot in a dorm before sending out a warning by email. By that time, student gunman Seung-Hui Cho was chaining the doors to a classroom building where he killed 30 more people and then himself. The department also says the email was too vague because it mentioned only a "shooting incident" but did not say anyone had died.

Specifically, the university faces charges of failure to issue a timely warning and failure to follow its own procedures for providing notification.

James Moore, an Education Department official, testified that there were shell casings, bloody footprints, no weapon on the scene and no suspect apprehended - all reasons the university should have acted more quickly to notify the campus. Even if it had been a domestic incident, Moore said that shouldn't have mattered.

The university says it acted appropriately in how it notified the campus that day and has exercised its right to an appeals hearing. It says that it followed standard protocols in place on campuses then and that the department is holding it to a higher standard than was in place at the time.

The hearing before an Education Department administrative judge, Ernest C. Canellos, is expected to last two or three days. Canellos is not expected to issue a ruling until after the hearing.

The fines by the Education Department were levied under a 1990 law known as the Clery Act, which requires colleges and universities to provide warnings in a timely manner and to report the number of crimes on campus. The law was named after Lehigh University student Jeanne Clery, who was raped and murdered in her dorm room by another student in 1986. The maximum fine per violation under the law is $27,500. Institutions can also lose their ability to offer federal student loans, but that has never happened.

During cross examination, Messitt pointed out that the Education Department's own handbook on campus crime that spells out the Clery Act uses examples of colleges that waited days - not hours - to alert the campus about sexual assaults and cites the responses as a positive way to handles such cases. Moore said the examples shouldn't be in the handbook.

An appeals hearing in Clery Act cases is rare. Experts say institutions typically agree to fines and take corrective action or reach an agreement with the Education Department.

The Clery Act has gotten recent attention because of sex scandals at Penn State and Syracuse universities.

At Penn State, the department is conducting an investigation into whether the university failed to report incidents of sexual abuse in connection to allegations against former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky. An Education Department spokesman has said the department is also reviewing whether a similar investigation will take place at Syracuse. Three men, including two former ball boys, have accused former assistant basketball coach Bernie Fine of molesting them as minors.

Copyright © 2024 WPVI-TV. All Rights Reserved.