Tennessee judge wants more information on copyright before ruling on school shooter’s writings
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A Tennessee judge appeared willing Wednesday to agree with a Nashville police attorney that a school shooter’s writings could be released as a public document once the investigation is officially closed.
But the parents of children at Covenant School added an extra twist to an already complicated case by claiming they had taken legal ownership of the writings of the shooter’s parents and now own the copyright.
None of the eight attorneys who argued before Davidson County Chancery Court Judge I’Ashea Myles during a two-day hearing claimed to be a copyright expert. Their answers to Myles’ pointed questions about the interplay between federal copyright protection and the Tennessee Public Records Act sometimes seemed to cloud matters further.
Ultimately, Myles said she would write an order with specific questions she wants answered. Only then will she decide when, if ever, the writings can be released to the public.
Police have said the writings they collected as part of their investigation into the March 27, 2023, Covenant School shooting, which left three 9-year-old children and three adult staff members dead, are public documents. However, they have said they cannot be released until their investigation is completed.
Those calling for the writings to be released immediately include news media, a Tennessee state senator, a gun rights group and a nonprofit law enforcement organization. They state that the open investigation is currently a formality. The shooter was killed at the scene by police and no other suspects have been identified.
Meanwhile, three other groups allowed to intervene in the case argued that none of the writings should ever be released.
In addition to the copyright issues, attorneys representing Covenant parents, Covenant School and Covenant Presbyterian Church presented a united front, arguing that the writings are covered by a Tennessee law that protects the privacy of information, documents and plans related to school safety. By giving the law the broadest possible interpretation, the writings could inspire copycats and therefore threaten the security of the Covenant, they argued.
Myles seemed to take an exception to that interpretation.
“At this time, you are asking me to adopt an interpretation of this statute that information written in a diary is to be interpreted as a plan regarding school safety,” she said. She noted that any decision she makes will certainly be appealed. will have to survive the scrutiny of a higher court.
Eric Osborne, the parents’ attorney, had another reason for keeping the writings secret. All children at Covenant School are victims under the Tennessee Constitution and have the right to be free from abuse, intimidation, and harassment. Making the writings public could be harmful to the children and against the law, he argued.
Myles once again returned to such a broad approach.
“Is ‘harm’ synonymous with harassment, intimidation and abuse?” she asked. “You’re asking this court to maybe create new law.”
Myles gave the example of a victim being cross-examined in a criminal trial. It may be disturbing, but it is not a violation of their constitutional rights, she said.
Myles added that she is reading the law to protect victims during the pending criminal proceedings. “To say it’s forever after the investigation is closed – I don’t see it,” she told Osborne.
He replied that there is no expiration date. “Once you are involved in the criminal justice system, you have the constitutional rights that Tennesseans have given to all victims,” Osborne said.
Myles then asked if there were any parents at the school who would like to release the writings. “You represent the interests of your clients. What you ask of the court puts a barrier to what they want. Are you elevating one group of parents over another?” she said.
Osborne said 103 of the 112 families with children at the school at the time of the March 27, 2023 attack endorsed their position that the writings should be suppressed.
At the end of the hearing, Myles made it clear that the decision was difficult.
“Before I became chancellor, I was human,” she said. “I’m a mother too.”
Although her “heart grieves” for the children, Myles says she has to put the emotions aside. “I have to take into account how I feel. I must interpret the law as written by the Legislature,” she said.