The last thing University of Alabama officials probably want is for internal communications regarding the Bishop tenure decision to become public.
The UAH shootings already have generated some peculiar actions from public officials. Two investigations were reopened in Bishop's native Massachusetts following the Huntsville incident. In one, Bishop was cleared in an attempted mail bombing that took place 17 years earlier. In the other, Bishop was charged with first-degree murder in the 1986 shooting death of her brother. Officials originally had determined that the shooting of Seth Bishop was an accident. It's hard to understand what evidence could have surfaced over 24 years that would have turned that case from an accidental death into first-degree murder.
Is anything likely to be accomplished from the Massachusetts murder indictment? Other than political grandstanding from District Attorney William R. Keating, probably not. According to a report from the Boston Globe, Keating's own words indicate that the legal proceeding is mostly for show:
Keating said an indictment warrant has been lodged with Alabama authorities. He indicated that he would give the Alabama triple murder case priority. Asked whether Bishop would ever be tried in Massachusetts for murder, Keating said, "You never know.''
Sounds rather disingenuous, doesn't it? Expect similar behavior from University of Alabama officials as the UAH lawsuits unfold.
Our guess is that, after some time for legal gamesmanship, the survivors and family members will receive substantial sums for their pain and suffering. We certainly hope that is the case. But the public likely will never know about the mismanagement that helped spark a tragedy in Huntsville.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
