Free Statement - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

STU DVORET
v.
MARICOPA COMMUNITY COLLEGES
CV O3-2133 PHX VAM
EXHIBIT I t0
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACTS
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
Case 2:03-cv—O2133—VAIVI Document 60-2 Filed O3/13/2006 Page1 0f4

1
i TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF BRIAN K. JOHNSON- January 25, 2006 16
i 1
1 1
J W 2 Q. Tell me, Doctor, in your own words, generally
V i 3 what the basis was for suspending Stu Dvoret.
1 { 4 A. We had been alerted by the nursing department
E 5 that he had made some threatening remarks and some!
i i 6 disparaging comments that related directly to the faculty
y j 7 within the nursing department.
1 8 The unfortunate timing of those remarks is
i 9 such that it was the day or two after a student at the
,} 10 University of Arizona had shot down a professor who was in
ll the medical school or someone who was definitely in
I 12 medical instruction.
g 13 So it was a heightened and highly sensitive
I A 14 environment from that standpoint that that student had
y 1 15 been stressed out over grades. And in addition to killing
16 his professor, had randomly shot at students throughout
if 17 the grounds of the university.
P 18 So when this student made those comments,
19 the members of the faculty expressed concern and then
I 20 specifically talked about the fear that other students had
i 21 demonstrated and had articulated.
i I 22 So the question of the safety of those
q 23 students and those employees was paramount.
I. 24
I 25
I -
’ GRIFFIN AND ASSOCIATES — (602) 264-2230
. Case 2:03-cv—O2133—VAIVI Document 60-2 Filed O3/13/2006 Page2of4

TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF BRIAN K. JOHNSON- January 25, 2006 27
_ 1
{ 1
2
3
5
6 it
A
8
9
10
11 {
12 Q
14 1
15
16
17 :
18
19 J
20
21
22 Q
23
24 Q. Sure. And I suspect that at this time, within a
25 few days after the shootings down at the University of
GRIFFIN AND ASSOCIATES — (602) 264-2230
I Case 2:03-cv—O2133—VAIVI Document 60-2 Filed O3/13/2006 Page3of4


I TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF BRIAN K. JOHNSON- January 25, 2006 28
I ,.I 1 Arizona, that people on the campus, particularly people in
I I I 2 the department of nursing, were emotionally or
3 psychologically on edge; is that a fair assessment?
I
4 A. Not by anything that I can determine. I don't
I 5 make that assumption. I understand how a person can make
6 that comment. I don't think that's fair. We are talking
I 7 about people that are trained in areas of trauma and who
I 8 are familiar with tragedy and human circumstances. So I'm
9 going to be a nay—sayer on that. I certainly don't
I IO challenge anybody that makes that jump, but I'm not there.
11 I think these are qualified teachers and if they, in fact,
I 12 say they heard some nasty things or that someone had
I I I 13 threatened them, that on the basis of the threat, we need
I4 to respond. And if, in fact, on the basis of that threat,
I 15 we respond by investigating the person who offered up the
16 threat, and we find that that person has a weapon, I don't
I
17 think there's in any way to associate that with, "Boy,
I 18 they must be paranoid because of what happened down at the
19 UofA." ,
I 20
I 21
22
I 23
24
I I
25
I GRIFFIN AND ASSOCIATES — (602) 264-2230
Case 2:03-cv—O2133—VAIVI Document 60-2 Filed O3/13/2006 Page 4 of 4
I

Case 2:03-cv-02133-VAM

Document 60-2

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02133-VAM

Document 60-2

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02133-VAM

Document 60-2

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02133-VAM

Document 60-2

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 4 of 4