Times-Dispatch reporters Rex Bowman, Dave Ress, and Carlos Santos, along with editor John Hoke, exemplify public journalism at its best. They've been digging into 20,000 pages of documents related to the Virginia Tech massacre in April 2007.

Their unglamorous and laborious legwork has already improved our understanding of what happened that awful morning -- and in the days and months that followed. We know, for instance, that police missed an unlocked door at Norris Hall, scene of the worst slaughter. The reporters discovered a link between the shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, and a female student in West Ambler Johnston Hall, the dorm where the killing began.

We've learned more about professors' concerns about Cho and earlier problems in the killer's dorm. "Students who lived near Cho took it upon themselves to warn other students about his behavior. Dorm staff talked to Cho several times that year about complaints they'd received," the news story reported. The Tech papers also revealed lax security in the dorms months after the massacre.

Unfortunately, much about the Tech shootings and the university's response to it remains beyond the reach of journalists -- and the public we serve. University officials are withholding notes from emergency meetings of senior officials on the morning of the shootings, as well as a box of records about Cho, including e-mails from professors expressing their specific concerns about the shooter.

The Times-Dispatch gained access to the Tech files through the Freedom of Information Act, which protects the public from cover-ups by public officials, including the leaders of state universities.

Tech's refusal to make fuller disclosure is a disservice to the people of Virginia, the families of the victims, and the university. This newspaper is not engaging in a witch hunt. It is seeking facts. These Editorial Pages have been largely supportive of the Tech administration and its response to a tragedy that no one could have reasonably anticipated. Many of the knee-jerk critics in the days immediately following the shootings were the very same people who would have screamed about civil-liberty violations if Tech had taken tougher steps to restrain Cho. There are no easy answers.

But the school's unwillingness to fully disclose its records about an event that shook the world undermines our confidence -- and that of the citizenry. Especially galling is Tech's apparent hoarding of communications pertaining to Cho. The murderer is dead and has forfeited most rights to privacy. Why would the university protect him now?

The Tech killings unleashed a tidal wave of sympathy, goodwill, and respect for the university in Blacksburg -- and the thousands of people associated with the school. The tragedy spurred important reforms of Virginia's mental health laws. But the story is not over. We need to learn more. And Virginia Tech's decision to withhold information creates a cloud of suspicion that is both unnecessary and counterproductive.

Larry Hincker, a spokesman for Virginia Tech, told us yesterday that "it's very likely that many of the things that were not disclosed will be disclosed, including Cho's writings." He noted that the university has already provided the newspaper with 20,000 pages of documents. Hincker added that federal privacy laws could make it difficult, if not impossible, to release some records related to Cho, especially those concerning the shooter's mental health.

Still, Virginia Tech must strive to open every record -- without delay.