In February 2006, the campus of Virginia Tech was rocked by an attack which left dozens dead and many other wounded. It ranks among one of the worst tragedies in the United States and the question on the minds of many still remains as to whether the authorities and doctors who had cared for the shooter, Seuing-Hui Cho, knew about his mental problems and whether actions could have been taken to prevent the shootings from ever happening. As is always the case in instances such as these, hindsight is always perfect, but evidence which came out last week has led many to again question whether mistakes were made in the way the case of Cho was handled.

It was reported that Dr. Robert Miller, the former head of the counseling center at Virginia Tech had apparently inadvertently taken Cho's files with him when he left his position at the school a year before Cho's attack took place. While going through the papers he had taken with him he came across the 10-page file and immediately turned it back to the campus. Campus officials turned it over to the police nearly six days after first getting it back from Dr. Miller and already conspiracy theorists are postulating that a cover-up exists and that file will apparently be the smoking gun that proves that Cho was diagnosed with problems a year before and that actions could have been taken at that time which would have prevented the shootings in the first place. Police have declined to comment and have merely stated that their investigation into the matter is continuing.

However, I don't wish to point blame in one direction or the other but what I do think disturbs me a little bit. People have been quick to point out that Cho's file is a private record which should never have left the office. Now though I'm a fairly organized person when it comes to my office papers I don't deny that in the shuffle often times it isn't surprising for a piece of paper to get buried in a stack and inadvertently get lost. Now again I'm not trying to exonerate Dr. Miller nor am I attempting to join the growing bandwagon that is calling for his arrest and investigation. I'm just saying what many others have said which is that he is human and can make mistakes. But not everyone wants to buy that.

In such cases, everyone wants to ensure that justice is served when a crime occurs. Cho took his own life so bringing him to justice isn't possible though people assume that by prosecuting those who knew him and 'could have' prevented the shootings should be held accountable. To those people I would simply ask them to look at the facts as they apply as part of the bigger picture. Certainly it's true that Cho exhibited signs of disturbing behavior and thoughts but that wouldn't have been enough to exclude him from school or put him under arrest. Had that happened I'm sure instead of looking to blame others for the shooting we'd be looking to blame others for removing him from school despite his behavior (i.e., 'discriminating against him due to mental disturbances').

But perhaps the fact that there are thousands of kids on campus who come to the counseling center and how many people must be coming there with disturbing thoughts of mayhem and destruction. I'm sure it's not as small as we'd like to think. I remember a schoolmate back in high school who used to describe events similar to what happened in Columbine (mind you this was years before that event ever occurred) and though some of us did let our counselors know, they didn't really think of it as more than hot air. But perhaps we should have paid attention to the warning signs, but do we honestly believe that having a file at that time would have cemented the decision that could have ultimately led to preventing the shooting? I don't think so. If it was that easy then why was the fact that the CIA delivered a report entitle "Bin Laden determined to strike within the United States" leafed through and forgotten until after September 11th? Perhaps a different perspective can help change how we attempt to pin blame.