CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — Two heavily redacted external reviews of the 2022 shooting at the University of Virginia that left three football players dead found several weaknesses in the school’s Threat Assessment Team and a culture that is "overly deferential to student autonomy."
The university asked Attorney General Jason Miyares to appoint external counsel to independently review the circumstances that led up to the shooting, as well as the university’s response.
The public and family members of the students killed or injured in the shooting have been heavily anticipating the release of the report, but large sections of the report are redacted.
In an executive summary accompanying the reports, the university said the redactions are “necessary student privacy and public safety redactions” under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).
In the report focused on the events that led up to the shooting, the authors found:
The Threat Assessment Team (TAT) lacked sufficient dedicated investigative resources in November of 2022 and its personnel was overextended.
In fall 2022, the TAT only had one full-time dedicated employee.
It also did not have a procedure to address non-cooperation with its investigations.
The university's student governance model, which delegates the University authority function to the student body in non-criminal student conduct matters, “results in University officials being unwilling or unable to assert authority and require student compliance with University directives without recourse to cumbersome and slow-moving student-run disciplinary bodies."
It further states that model “may impede the University’s ability to address non-compliance and enforce its rules in the area of public safety issues.”
The authors found all other colleges and universities they interviewed for comparison “reported that disciplinary actions related to student conduct were conducted through a University department," and other schools “showed a willingness to impose sanctions for non-compliance with [TAT] investigations or remedial measures instituted to mitigate the threat posed by an individual."
At Virginia Tech, the University of South Carolina, and Colorado State University, they have a “much more proactive approach to investigations, including outreach to key interlocutors who could contact a student who is not responding to communications from the TAT."
Moreover, students may not take the student governance model seriously, and the students responsible for deciding potential disciplinary action “lack the necessary expertise to address public safety concerns.”
The report also found the school did not have a case management model for addressing students in distress and information about student concerns “may become siloed across various divisions."
The shooter was known to UVA's TAT
Virginia colleges were required to create TATs after a student at Virginia Tech shot and killed 32 students in April 2007.
The University of Virginia even designated a professor, Dewey Cornell, who researches student threat assessments. Cornell also authored a guide on the topic that is used by other schools.
Christopher Darnell Jones Jr. was known to the TAT.
University spokesperson Brian Coy said UVA Student Affairs was reviewing a potential hazing issue on September 15, when a student said Jones had commented about possessing a gun. Coy claims the comment was not made in conjunction with a threat. Still, UVA Police Chief Tim Longo said the person in student affairs contacted the Threat Assessment Team.
Coy said university officials made contact with Jones' roommate who did not indicate the presence of any weapons, but Jones himself refused to cooperate.
Coy said that during the investigation, university officials discovered Jones was previously convicted of a misdemeanor concealed weapons violation in 2021. CBS 6 confirmed the misdemeanor happened in Chesterfield.
UVA Student Affairs opted to escalate Jones's case for disciplinary action on October 27 through the University Judiciary Committee, which is a student-run body authorized to investigate and adjudicate alleged conduct violations. But Coy said they still had not been able to reach Jones.
Coy said the committee sent Jones a letter alerting him to the possible discipline.
Yet, Coy said student affairs never actually transmitted its report on Jones to the University Judiciary Committee, so no action was taken.
Still, the report focused on the events that led up to the shooting “does not conclude that the facts available to the TAT prior to the shooting would have put a reasonable person on notice that Jones would have committed the type of acts for which he is now criminally charged."
CBS 6 is committed to sharing community voices on this important topic. Email your thoughts to the CBS 6 Newsroom.
📲: CONNECT WITH US
Blue Sky| Facebook| Instagram| X| Threads| TikTok| YouTube
