Hazing at Indiana Sigma Nu: How did he cut his hand?
 

Representatives from Sigma Nu at IU to address hazing report

Herald-Times Report
Representatives from the national Sigma Nu organization met with Indiana University officials Wednesday, a week after a freshman reported he was injured in a hazing incident at the fraternity house.

The 18-year-old freshman told IU police that he had been treated at Bloomington Hospital six days earlier for three cuts to his right hand.

He said his injuries resulted from a pledge activity on Feb. 13 at the Sigma Nu fraternity house, said IU police Lt. Jerry Minger.

According to Minger, the fraternity members refused to speak with investigators until their attorneys from the national organization could advise them.

Dean of students Dick McKaig said the fraternity's national representatives met with him Wednesday morning and with Jim Gibson, the director of student activities, in the afternoon.

McKaig said he hopes the administration will receive the police report by next week and be able to begin the campus judicial process.

Honestly, I'd be surprised if this were true. Our Beta Eta chapter at IU is and has been for a long time one of the top groups on campus. I can only say that I'm sure that the truth will protect them.

I wonder if this guy really said it was a hazing incident, or the paper assumed. I'm sure there are ways that a hand can be cut during a perfectly non-hazing pledge activity.

I can think of lots of ways to cut your hand. :confused:

I wouldnt be surprised if it was hazing. IU has had trouble with a lot of its older and more prestigious chapters in recent years. The Pi chapter of Beta Theta Pi was kicked out two years ago and SAE was removed last year. There must be something to it if National Officers are already on the scene and the chapter is seeking legal counsel

Don't be so naive. Their own pledge said the injury happened at a pledging event.

Most of us know that new members (or EX new members) can say a lot of things. He could have just been angry because he was cut? Let's not jump to conclusions. The chapter and IHQ have yet to give their side.

In our chapter we tell our candidates how serious we are about not hazing. We inform them of what they *could* do if hazed. I have imagined a worst case scenario of a disgruntled candidate falsely accusing us of hazing.

The burden of proof is NOT on the accused.