The title of a recently released CBS News article is "Warning Signs IGNORED in Va. Tech Shooting. CBS Evening News: Author of New Book And Tutor To Killer Seung Hui-Cho Says She Sought Help For Him". Fresh revelations are only now emerging. "Warning signs" were "IGNORED", not "missed", as previous reports about this horrific crime had suggested.

The first sentence of this article is "The massacre in Binghamton, NY HAD CHILLING SIMILARITIES to the tragic shootings at Virginia Tech that left 33 people dead in 2007". The key phrase in this statement is clearly "had chilling similarities". What was that? Both Seung Hui-cho and the Binghamton New York killer were angry about something and were out to get revenge. The argument in the Cho case was that he was trying to be romantically involved with someone who would eventually become one of his victims, Emily Hilscher, who, according to Hilscher's friends, already had a boyfriend before matriculating at Virginia Tech. A short time later, a student advisor, Ryan Clark, was killed when he tried to break up the argument between Cho and Hilscher.

Nearly 2 years after the Virginia Tech Massacre on April 16, 2007, the memories are still vivid and painful for a former head of the English faculty at the university, Lucinda Roy, author of a new book, "No Right to Remain Silent". Here's what she had to say.

"This is a TRAGEDY that's about A FAILURE OF IMAGINATION". The key words in this statement are undoubtedly "tragedy" and "failure". Again, "No one connected all the dots", according to another report, to prevent this mass homicide from occurring.

"I mean, in many ways, PEOPLE COULDN'T IMAGINE something terrible happening on a campus as beautiful and pristine and picturesque as ours". "...people couldn't imagine" is undoubtedly the key phrase here. In other words, many people thought that after the 1999 Columbine massacre, surely, this wouldn't happen again. These complacent people got a nasty surprise.

The turning point was in 2005 when Prof. Roy was chair of the Virginia Tech English Department. According to CBS, "But Roy could imagine it. In the fall of 2005, a colleague had alerted her to Cho's disrturbing writings and disruptive behavior. Roy writes that Cho's classmates were afraid of him and that he was taking cell phone pictures of them under his desk". So, Cho was essentially harassing his classmates, especially young women and this may well have led to the confrontation with and the murder of Hilscher.

"Concerned, Roy decided to tutor him privately and found a student WEARING DARK REFLECTIVE SUNGLASSES AND ALMOST ALWAYS UNRESPONSIVE". At this point, Cho seemed to be merely "unresponsive". Unfortunately, for many of the victims on April 16 2007, this indifference turned to unreasonable and uncontrollable rage that caused Cho to lock classrooms, thus preventing escape, before carrying out his meticulous and methodical rampage.

Roy continued: "It's actually a bit terrifying to be with someone when you realize that all you are getting are things that bounce off them". Being with someone who is merely unresponsive is a totally different ballgame than being with someone who stalks others while planning a murderous bloodbath. In Cho's case, when he was with Prof. Roy, he was merely unresponsive, but there were many instances of his classmates feeling uncomfortable around him and in fact, several young women complained to police that Cho had been systematically stalking them and that is frightening.

"There are a few times when you get nervous enough that you really want to contact multiple people. And this seemed to me to be one of those times".

But Roy was ignored: "I was told - that would never happen. Because I was essentially requiring a student to seek counselling". In retrospect, Roy should have persisted because this is just like requiring a student on an academic warning or probation for having a cumulative GPA of less than 2.0 to get help academically and get their act together. Cho's issue was AN UNSTABLE MIND AND THIS IS MUCH MORE SERIOUS THAN ANYONE'S ACADEMIC STRUGGLES, BECAUSE LOOKING BACK NOW, HE WAS INDEED A SERIOUS THREAT TO HIMSELF AND OTHERS.

According to Ed Spencer, Virginia Tech's Vice President for Student Affairs, "She (i.e. Roy) indicated that she had worked out a satisfactory arrangement and DIDN'T FEEL THE NEED FOR ANY FURTHER INVOLVEMENT". Looking back now, this was yet another lack of oversight/blunder by Virginia Tech officials. They clearly should have followed up on Cho after meeting with Roy.

Roy was reflective: "If I'd met with him very quietly AND HADN'T BEEN CAMPAIGNING FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR, I would say that interpretation was possible". Cho clearly needed psychiatric help and he wasn't getting it and the fact that the entire campus knew about his mental instability only gave him more ammunition to carry out this horrific crime. If only Roy "hadn't been campaigning for the entire year" and worked with Cho privately, that could have made a difference.

"I had learned that he had gone over (to the counselling center) and gone over repeatedly, BUT WAS NEVER REALLY EXAMINED". Roy shouldn't have to take the blame alone, but we have to hold her accountable to a certain degree because Roy was tutoring Cho privately so she knew that he had a problem. Therefore, if the counselling center did not examine Cho properly, she should have said something or done something about it, or at least gone over to the counselling center to follow up on the Cho case and asked whether Cho had been doing the things that the counselling center required him to do.

Spencer added: "If a student has been through counselling, or maybe even intense counselling in middle school and high school, THAT IS PROTECTED INFORMATION". There is a fine line between protecting the privacy of one individual and protecting the safety of many people.

According to Lori Haas, whose daughter Emily was injured in the rampage initiated by Cho, "Cho was crying out for help. He sent up red flag after red flag after red flag". OK, so Haas is blaming Virginia Tech for missing clear warning signs of Cho's mental madness.

Finally, Roy remarked: "You get very, very few opportunities to help someone who is mentally disturbed. Very few. And when you get them, you must take (advantage of) them".

The bottom line is: Roy is reflective about what she did correctly/appropriately and things that she claims she didn't do so well while Lori Haas is still angry at Virginia Tech. Reflection is good, but two years after 32 innocent people (25 students & 7 professors) were locked in and brutally killed, we shouldn't be pointing fingers anymore. The victims wouldn't approve of that. It wouldn't be fair to them. All we can do is forge ahead now and do our best to make sure that this kind of nonsensical violence doesn't happen again.