A chilling sequence of events unfolded at Brown University, culminating in a tragedy that claimed the lives of two students and left nine critically injured. The perpetrator, identified as Claudio Neves-Valente, a 48-year-old former student and Portuguese national, ultimately took his own life days later, but the aftermath has revealed disturbing questions about the university’s security protocols and leadership.
At the center of the scrutiny is Rodney Chatman, Brown University’s security chief and vice president for public safety and emergency management. Emerging evidence suggests a pattern of security failures under his watch, creating a dangerous vulnerability on campus. Critics allege that Chatman’s approach to security prioritized unconventional philosophies over proven, effective law enforcement tactics.
Law enforcement veteran Paul Mauro, with 26 years of service with the NYPD, pointed to fundamental security lapses. During the critical finals week period, a door was reportedly propped open, circumventing keycard access. Furthermore, the university’s largest class lacked a uniformed security presence, and interior camera coverage appeared inadequate to monitor ingress and egress points.
These weren’t complex oversights, Mauro emphasized, but “ground-ball issues”—basic security measures that should have been in place. The absence of these safeguards created a “security vacuum” that may have allowed the shooter to operate with relative ease, prolonging the horrific event.
Beyond these immediate failures, a troubling picture of Chatman’s leadership has emerged. Reports describe a department plagued by shockingly low morale and a climate of fear, where challenging his policies could lead to retribution. This toxic environment, according to multiple sources, severely hampered the department’s ability to effectively protect the university community.
In both August and October, major police groups within the university – a patrol person’s association and a police sergeants’ union – issued votes of no confidence in Chatman and his deputy. The October vote specifically accused leadership of prioritizing administrative positions over frontline officers, further eroding morale and straining resources.
This isn’t the first time Chatman’s judgment has been questioned. Prior incidents, including a 2021 campus bomb threat and a 2023 shooting threat involving a football coach, raised concerns about his responsiveness and decision-making. In both cases, critics allege delays in alerting the appropriate authorities.
Adding to the controversy, Chatman previously lost a position at the University of Utah for failing to meet the necessary qualifications for the role. Despite this history, Brown University seemingly entrusted him with the critical responsibility of ensuring campus safety, a decision now under intense scrutiny in the wake of this devastating tragedy.
The events at Brown University serve as a stark reminder of the critical importance of robust security measures and effective leadership. The questions surrounding Chatman’s tenure demand answers, not only for the Brown community but for institutions of higher learning everywhere.
