Chi Psi Colorado Proceeds
 

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_5213016

This is the Gordie Bailey case out of Colorado. His mother is suing the fraternity. She is blaming Gordie's death on hazing.

Perhaps as important is that she is also suing seven individual members of the chapter.

I saw this mentioned on the news. Do I have standing to sue her for being stupid?

Really not trying to start a fight. I am sincerely curious about your statement/question.

Seriously?! You've got to be kidding.

His death is as much her fault as it is the fraternity's.

Again, if you could just explain a little more. Not being sarcastic at all, but I am interested in how you are connecting the charges that this kid was alledgedly blindfolded, led up into the mountains, was encouraged to drink a lot of alcohol, passed out and had slurs painted on his body his mother's fault?

And, again, I said alledgedly. Except for the known part of this tragedy, a young man dying, nothing else has been proven yet.

Yeah i'm gonna agree with LaneSig. How is any of that her fault?

This guy was a grown adult who participated in hazing. Maybe if she'd raised him better he would've had more sense. That's being blunt and an exaggeration of what I'm really saying here, but if she's trying to blame the fraternity, I don't think the fraternity would be wrong to turn around and try to put some of the blame on her. Why should she be entitled to recover money because her adult son did something stupid?

My opinion would be different if there were NEVER any acts of hazing that happened before this and he had no idea what was coming; or if something was slipped into his drink and he was, against his free will, unaware of what was happening; or if he was physically forced to do everything he did and could not possibly escape at any time. Is any of that the case here? All I've heard is that he was blindfolded and taken into the woods -- are you telling me that a healthy adult male couldn't have put the smackdown on anybody trying to blindfold him if he really didn't want to participate?

Yes, this is a tragedy and things like this should never happen again. Yes, these guys were assholes and they should've done something to help him when he was unconscious. However, parents blaming the fraternities is ridiculous. I'm sure my position is unpopular, but holy hell people should take responsibility for themselves and stop blaming others for their actions.

Wow. This is quite a statement.

Was this Young Man an Adult. Yes, but by law because of age, not His Mothers teachings. Being of state legal age does not make him a true adult nor does it excuse the members of the GLO from what happened does it?

Yes, you are correct, people should take the blame for their actions from both sides of the coin.

Is it a tragidy, hell yes it is. So, whose fault is it.

The mother who sent her son off to college or the members of the GLO that he joined to not be more responsible to protect him from harms way.

Adults, that is a very good question. Legal or maturity is the call it seems here.

From my point of view, he was obviously trying to be a normal pledge and did what the guys wanted him to do. Shit, I was naive as hell when I was a freshman in college. I did just about everything that they told me to do during pledgeship. I definitely knew my limits.......but I definitely wanted to participate in everything I could. I think when you are a pledge you absolutely have the notion that everything you are going through was endured by everyone else that went through before you. In a way, that makes pledgeship easier. I really don't think you can always blame parental upbringing when people our age make bad decisions (in some cases, sure you can. Absolutely)...i'll be the first to admit that. I was raised in a pretty strict household and was taught plenty about personal responsibility, accountability, respect, and all of that good stuff.............and I do dumb shit all of the time. Its college.

I do agree with you though on some points. I think blaming the fraternity from an organizational standpoint is pretty lame. If you want to go after individuals, with a valid reason, I can see that being ok.

The fraternity has the insurance policy, tons of assets, etc. You're more likely to get a big award from a jury against an organization than against an individual. Even though insurance coverage won't be discussed, there's not a juror in the world who is not at least going to let that run through his/her mind.

And then, joint and several liability should be a concept most in this thread are familiar with.

I have to agree with everything that macallan is saying (Don't die of shock, macallan.:D ). I am also getting real tired of organizations getting blamed when an individual/individuals do stupid stuff. There is absolutely no way that IHQs or chapter advisors can keep an eye on every single minute detail of what the members are doing. This isn't a situation like what was happening with the Catholic Diocese ("Oh, this member at State U is hazing pledges. Let's send him to University of Duh and maybe he'll stop hazing."). I do think that the individuals need to held responsible.

Understand. But, doesn't make it right.

I'm betting you were also taught that gentlemen drink responsibly and things of that nature. i.e, you didn't come to college just amazed that if you didn't eat all day and had 5 shots of Jack, you might be a tad-bit buzzed.

I think there are too many parents out there who keep their children shielded from everything, to the point that they don't educate them as to what to expect. (See: don't teach my kids about contraception because if you do, they'll Do It.)