How Cho fell through the cracks and got his guns

[Sydnie]

I had a long conversation with my sister last night who happens to be a counselor in the office that TDO'd Cho. She wasn't there at the time that the TDO was executed, but since all the happenings last week she has gotten quite the education on how his TDO was executed. She was in the office all week and many of the survivors were taken there for mental evaluation as well as any student having access to their office.

To make a long story short, Cho's room mate had notified the campus police that he thought Cho was having some serious issues. The campus police picked him up and took him to her office for evaluation. A TDO was filed so that he could be evaluated in a hospital setting. During his initial interview and intake, he was asked if he would volunteer to be placed in a facility for evaluation. Had he refused, he would have been "involuntarily committed" for evaluation. But, he agreed to "voluntarily" go to the facility so the TDO was processed differently from that point on. The restrictions that remained in place with the TDO was the requirement for a magistrate to evaluate him after his two day voluntary stay. If the magistrate felt that he was no longer a danger to himself or others the TDO would be vacated and his record would not show a forced commitment. That is exactly what happened. Rather than being evaluated at a state facility, which he would have been had it been a full force TDO, he was allowed to check into a private facility (still paid for by the state mind you). He was escorted to the facility by by the police but he was not handcuffed since he was cooperating with the treatment plan.

Two days later he was convincing enough to allow the magistrate to release him from the facility.

Now, because he had gone voluntarily instead of being forced in for the evaluation, he didn't have to acknowledge that hospitalization on the application for a gun in Virginia. Had he been committed on the full force of the TDO it would have been flagged on his background check and he would have been denied the purchase. He found a loophole, a small crack if you will, and he slipped right through it.

She also said that the news reports are very flawed (big surprise there, huh? ) and that they had been many reporters that had called her office pretending to need crisis care in an attempt to get into the office. She said it was the week from hell for her office.

She also said that in his history there was an incident in Korea before he came to the US that she thought played a big part in his pathology. I have not seen this tidbit in the news and I hesitate to post it even for fear that it will get her involved in the whole mess as a "leaker". But, if what she told me about his history is actually true it would explain why he was such an angry young man. Should it appear in print anywhere, I would then be happy to confirm that piece of the puzzle, but I just don't want to get her into any trouble at this point.

She also said that many kids, both from the college community there as well as the high school age (she called them the wannabes) were being TDO'd this week. She said they were taking no chances with anyone that might even be near the line at all.

She said that he had been processed correctly as the law requires. He was just able to control the pathology enough to convince the authorities that he was no longer a danger and was released.

Edited to add - a TDO is a temporary detention order

[Missy Vixen]

1. I hate to admit this

but I'm not familiar with the acronym TDO. Could you please explain?

Thank you so much,
Julie

[leftofthedial]

3. temporary dingleberry order

[Sydnie]

4. I'm sorry, I should have explained that

TDO = Temporary Detention Order.

[hollowdweller]

2. That's what I figured

I have a friend who was having some mental health problems and his wife forced him to go to the hospital, I mean he went himself but she got an order for him to go. Almost immediately the NJ state police showed up at his door and took all his guns and he has to petition the court to get them back.

[hippiechick]

5. TDO ??

[Sydnie]

7. Temporary detention order

A forced evaluation of sorts.

[maine_raptor]

6. Thanks Sydnie.

I suspected this ("He was just able to control the pathology enough to convince the authorities that he was no longer a danger and was released.") was the case.

I still maintain, though, that had the Assault Weapons Ban's notification clause been in place, Cho would have been "red flagged" during the insta-check at the time of purchase, no matter how he came to the attention of the mental health authorities.

That's the "crack"; the lack of any connection between the two databases.

[Sydnie]

8. It also is a HIPA crack as well

The privacy laws wouldn't have allowed the disclosure because he went voluntarily. It is a crack that exists but is legislated in such a way as making a fix damn near impossible.

[maine_raptor]

9. One would think that it could be, though.

How you get there (official mental health evaluation) should be irrelevant. If you are "sick" enough, in your view or someone else's, then your 2nd Amendment Right needs to be suspended*.

If a judge, or duly authorized metal heath professional, declares you a "possible" danger, then the "button" should be pushed that flags you in the gun DB. And when you are declared rational again, the flag is switched off.

The issue is one between privacy rights and public safety. When it comes to deadly force, call me old fashioned (or conservative, I don't care), but no one not in their right mind (metal health, drugs, alcohol, etc.) should be anywhere near a trigger.

And I also don't believe anything legislated, no matter how many knots, can't be undone. I've been there and done that.





*And before I get jumped on by my fellow Du'rs for saying that Rights should be suspended, let me point out that many of our Rights are suspended everyday for what a majority would consider proper. Try asserting your Right against Search and Seizure when spending time in jail.

[jody]

12. I agree but what percentage of false diagnoses by psychiatrists/psychologists will enter NICS?

Corollary question, how difficult will it be for a person to appeal a false diagnosis that she/he is a threat to others?

[maine_raptor]

14. Right now a person can get their 2nd restored by appearing in court.

No system is perfect, but you can put safeguards in place.

[jody]

16. There is no way for a person convicted of a federal crime to get their 2nd restored. See

numerous sources on the web among which is the following.

Washington State “FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS”

Q: I was convicted of a federal crime that prohibits me from possessing firearms. Can I have my firearm rights restored in Washington?
A: You can have the right to possess firearms within the State of Washington restored by a Washington court, after which you could not be prosecuted by the State of Washington. However, you could be prosecuted by the federal government.
Until Congress restores funding to the ATF for reviewing applications to restore firearm rights, the only remedy available is a presidential pardon - an expensive and difficult option. Recently, in the case of Bean v. ATF, a federal district court granted a petition to restore firearm rights. The government appealed, and the 5th Circuit held that the refusal to review an application was effectively a denial, which paves the way for an appeal to federal court. Unfortunately, that decision was appealed and the U.S. Supreme court reversed the 5th circuit. You can read the opinion by clicking here. http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-704.ZO.html

[godai]

13. Maybe HIPA needs to be revised

Somehow, more information about mental health issues needs to get into the gun check database. Cho had been suicidal and should not have been eligible to buy a gun, at least for a period of time. The burden of proof should have been on him to provide documentation, probably from a psychiatrist, that he was mentally stable, and eligible for a gun purchase.

[Township75]

11. What is this?

"I still maintain, though, that had the Assault Weapons Ban's notification clause been in place, Cho would have been "red flagged" during the insta-check at the time of purchase, no matter how he came to the attention of the mental health authorities."

What is the notification clause you are referring to?

[maine_raptor]

15. The AWB had a provision in it.

It required, IIFRC, states to notify the background database, part of the "insta-check" feature, of persons who the state thought was mentality unstable. When certain provisions of the AWB were allowed to expire, at the behest of our late, great GOP lead Congress, that was one of them.

For some strange reason, in all the talk about the incident and Cho's part in it, the MSM seems to be missing this point. At least I haven't heard much about it.

[Township75]

18. You sure about that?

"It required, IIFRC, states to notify the background database, part of the "insta-check" feature, of persons who the state thought was mentality unstable."

This would be news to me, as that should have been part of the Brady Bill not the AWB, and the Brady Bill has no sunset on it. I haven't heard anyone reporting that checks on an individual's mental stability were no longer taken. The AWB strictly covered firearms.

Do have a link or anything?

[godai]

10. Very informative. Seems the rules need to be re-evaluated

Cho had numerous 'run-ins' but, apparently, no individual incident was enough for him to be suspended from VT. How about some type of "3 strikes and you're out" rule? He had the stalking, confinement in a mental hospital (who decided he was well enough to leave? Was it a mental health professional?), apparently a fire in the dorm, no participation in class. It seems some mental health counselor should have talked with Cho (Did this maybe occur?) and, if he refused to communicate, a red flag should have been raised. He went for years not talking to most people but he could speak fine. It seems to me, the symptoms were there to do more than was done. No one connected the dots.

I'm not buying that this type of event is bound to occur in the US. Probably can't be eliminated (Cho might have killed elsewhere, but, then again, he might not have) but better efforts need to be devised to minimize such massacres. I'm still very bothered by the 2 hour delay, when the VT administration met for over an hour, deciding how to spin the 1st 2 murders, to minimize the effect on VT's reputation (IMHO).

[Sydnie]

17. He fell under the ADA and was protected by that

There is no way to do a dismissal from the university for mental illness. I also discussed that angle with my sister and she stated that he fell under the ADA laws and couldn't be discriminated against because of his mental illness alone. He had to had committed some criminal act before they could have taken that action.

As for the stalking, she said that the laws are very specific on just what is considered stalking in Virginia. He had to have repeated the action X number of times as well as having made a threat of some sort, that was credible, for him to have been subject to those laws. Apparently, he went just to the line but never crossed it. He wasn't technically considered a stalker by definition of the law. Even though there were multiple "victims" involved in the stalking inquiries, he never made a threat and stopped before he met the letter of the law in each case.

He was finding cracks all over the place to slip through.