A recent incident at Brown University highlights severe lapses in communication and response systems regarding safety on campus. What happened here offers a cautionary tale about the importance of listening to groundswell concerns regarding potential threats.
Derek Lisi, a janitor at Brown for 15 years, reported suspicious behavior by a man who turned out to be the suspected shooter. His observations began in November, and he acted on those instincts, detailing his concerns twice to a security guard from a third-party company, Event Staffing Services (ESS). Yet his warnings seemed to vanish into thin air, demonstrating a glaring inadequacy in the university’s security measures.
The alleged shooter, Claudio Manuel Neves Valente, exhibited distressing behavior. Lisi described him as “pacing the hallways, peering into classrooms, and ducking into a bathroom to avoid being seen.” These actions should have prompted immediate action. Instead, Lisi’s attempts to raise the alarm went unacknowledged, leaving him feeling powerless. “Something’s off with this guy, so I gotta say something,” he expressed, highlighting his sense of duty to protect the community. Tragically, his voice went unheard until it was too late.
The reality of ESS’s role in campus security raises additional concerns. According to ESS President David Madonna, their duties are limited to monitoring crowd capacity and checking IDs at events—not ensuring safety or responding to imminent threats. Madonna confirmed that Lisi did report suspicious activity, but he was unable to confirm whether that report escalated to campus police. What is particularly troubling is the apparent confusion regarding who was responsible for addressing these threats. Lisi believed he was speaking to a campus security guard, which underscores the larger issue of clarity and accountability in safety protocols.
Even after the tragic events unfolded, Lisi took it upon himself to inform the proper authorities about his observations. He recognized the distinctive nature of the suspected shooter’s walk, which he relayed to the police, questioning why such details weren’t sufficient to trigger a response initially. However, these actions arrived too late, rendering them little more than a final attempt to make sense of the senseless.
In hindsight, Lisi reflects a profound disappointment, stating, “I just wish there was something I could have done.” This sentiment encapsulates a broader feeling of frustration that lingers in the community. The university faces scrutiny over its preparedness and the efficacy of its security measures, as critical moments slipped by without proper intervention.
This situation raises essential questions about campus safety and the responsibilities of those in charge. The tragic outcome showcases a breakdown that extends beyond individual accountability; it speaks to systemic failures that plague many institutions. In a world where vigilance is paramount, the need for clear communication and effective response strategies has never been more critical.
"*" indicates required fields
