TX A&M Hazers in court

[hoosier]

November 12, 2003

Official: Student admitted to hazing

By CRAIG KAPITAN
Eagle Staff Writer
A Texas A&M University official on Tuesday recounted interviews with Parsons Mounted Cavalry students in which they said they beat and threw manure on younger members who needed to be disciplined.
The assertions came during cross-examination of Laura Sosh-Lightsy, a Department of Student Life employee who participated in both the investigation and disciplinary hearings for many of the students.
It was the second day in a row in which she testified during the civil trial.
Twenty-three students have sued A&M, asking a judge for a permanent injunction on punishment for 77 cavalry members accused by the university of hazing.
According to attorneys for the students, the group wasn’t given due process as the university went about investigating the allegations and giving each student disciplinary hearings to determine guilt.
The university has countered that regulations were followed. Assistant attorneys general representing the institution have pointed to frequent admissions from the students that they did engage in the activities.
Much of Sosh-Lightsy’s cross-examination Tuesday focused on student Barrett Breedlove. According to the official, Breedlove told investigators of receiving ax handle licks during several cavalry events and of being slapped, kicked and taken into “the box” in the past.
The box, Sosh-Lightsy said, was a metal tool shed that also was used for “one-on-one type discipline” by the Second Three, a group charged with doling out punishment.
“That is the area where the Second Three would take people who had major transgressions,” she said, explaining her findings that students in the shed might be beaten or have a mixture of water and horse feces poured on them. “It was a scare tactic-type thing.”
She said Breedlove also indicated to investigators that he had kicked and slapped students while part of the Second Three and had taken several students to “the stall,” another punishment area.
There, she reported Breedlove as saying, he kicked manure and sand on students, kicked them and used a belt on them.
Plaintiff attorneys objected to the descriptions, arguing that they were unnecessary because the judge isn’t being asked to determine guilt or innocence for the students — only if their rights to due process were violated.
District Judge Rick Davis allowed some of the testimony to be heard so university officials can attempt to refute other assertions from the students that unfair punishments were doled out in the disciplinary hearings.
According to Sosh-Lightsy’s notes of her discussions with Breedlove, he said he knew the activities constituted hazing at the time they occurred.
Attorneys for the students, however, have argued that hitting someone with an ax handle or hitting others for punishment purposes does not constitute hazing.
Sosh-Lightsy also spent much of the cross-examination describing the university’s investigation and hearing process.
When the investigation started in October 2002, students were called into a room of about seven investigators and asked to answer questions. If they chose to participate, they were later given an opportunity to review the investigators’ notes for accuracy before signing off on them, she said.
About 30 students cooperated with the interviews, she said.
The investigation was concluded at the end of October, and in April Sosh-Lightsy was appointed to assist in sending out charge letters to about 70 students thought to be involved in hazing and other infractions.
She also was ordered to help conduct disciplinary hearings for many of the students.
In drafting the charge letters, Sosh-Lightsy said she relied heavily on summaries from the earlier investigation and organizational charts showing students’ ranking at the time of the alleged infractions.
For instance, a student who was identified as part of the Second Three might be charged with hazing — even if he wasn’t mentioned specifically by name in the investigation files — because he held a position known for being the disciplinarian.
Once charged, students were given a two-hour slot in which they could review three binders of evidence gathered by investigators. They also could request more time for review if necessary, she said.
Videotaped interviews with many of the students were summarized to avoid redundant information, she said.
Attorneys for the students have contended that neither the charges nor the evidence were specific enough and that the students weren’t given enough time.
But in the nearly 50 hearings Sosh-Lightsy held before an temporary injunction was granted, none of the students said they didn’t understand the charges, she said Tuesday.
Also, she said, none stated that they needed more time to prepare, that they felt forced to give testimony or that they didn’t understand their right to remain silent.
Plaintiff attorney Ronald Hole, whose son Bryan Hole was among the students who were charged, did send an e-mail requesting that his son’s disciplinary hearing be postponed. Sosh-Lightsy said Tuesday that she rejected the request but would have considered it from Hole’s son at the hearing.
“We wanted to speak directly to Bryan,” she said. “We would expect Bryan would come and articulate why he needed an extension.”
Attorneys are expected to continue questioning Sosh-Lightsy at 9 a.m. Wednesday when the trial resumes in the 272nd District Courtroom of the Brazos County Courthouse.

[FSUZeta]

being hit with an ax handle and having feces poured over you by members of a group is not hazing? would they prefer assault?

[AGDee]

No doubt. They are lucky they weren't tried in criminal court and only had to deal with University sanctions.

Dee

[Lady Pi Phi]

Originally posted by FSUZeta
being hit with an ax handle and having feces poured over you by members of a group is not hazing? would they prefer assault?

My thoughts exactly!

[MereMere21]

This isn't the first time a unit of the Corp has been in the hot seat for hazing. Y'all know the beginning scene in "A Few Good Men" with the Marines and their rifles? They were from A&M's Corp of Cadets and their particular unit was disbanded shortly after for hazing - 1994? I can't recall the exact date.

I'm not going to pretend I know the inner workings of the Corp, but this isn't the first time I've heard of such atrocities. Most of it is swept under the rug by A&M officials afraid of bad publicity.

Originally posted by MereMere21
This isn't the first time a unit of the Corp has been in the hot seat for hazing. Y'all know the beginning scene in "A Few Good Men" with the Marines and their rifles? They were from A&M's Corp of Cadets and their particular unit was disbanded shortly after for hazing - 1994? I can't recall the exact date.

I'm not going to pretend I know the inner workings of the Corp, but this isn't the first time I've heard of such atrocities. Most of it is swept under the rug by A&M officials afraid of bad publicity.

Close.

Actually, that beginning scene was composed of FORMER members of the Fish Drill Team. FDT was disbanded in 96, for major hazing violations.

Ok. You have the Corps of Cadets, think of it like IFC. Each individual Corps outfit is like an individual chapter. There is a Corps Staff, which is equivalent to your IFC officers. Parson's MOunted Cavalry is an "elite" (and i use the quotations for a reason) unit that you may opt to "try out for" after your fish year in your individual outfit. For your entire sophomore year you basically relive your fish year, being required to provide care and upkeep to the PMC facilities as well as it's horses.

Now, the problem is this. PMC USED to be the cream of the crop. When it was founded in 73, Col Parsons was the commandant of cadets. Over the years it evovled into a different sort of entity, mostly "good ole boys" or guys who weren't exactly your exemplary cadets. I almost joined my sophomore year, but instead i decided to 'stay' with my outfit to help out. Lots of my buddies did go out. The incidents mentioned, and others far worse that haven't been mentioned have been going on for at least 10-15 years and were considered part of joining the Cav.

To me, it wasn't worth it to get treated like isht for an entire year, just to wear a yellow cord on my uniform.

Now, we non-Cav cadets "knew" what went on out there, as we heard stories from our buddies, but none of us knew first-hand or would take the anecdotes that we heard to the Commandant's Office. For the same reason that MereMere said, most of these issues would be handled in house, as opposed to giving the Corps a bad eye. What's ironic, is that i always envied the 'frat' guys when i was in the Corps, cuz i thought they could get away with anything, when i joined Sigma Nu i realized just how truly free we were in the Corps.

On this issue. Those guys will get what they deserve. IMO, by cleaning house and dismissing these kind of 'cadets' from the Corps, A&M will make immense strides in improving the quality of the Corps and the cadets in it. I'm extremely proud of the Commander of PMC that blew the whistle, he was a member of my outfit and a fish when i was a junior. It's sad, but he's now considered an outcast by the rest of PMC and some of the other cadets.

Note that this case is merely to decided if the cadets right to due process was violated by the university, as i believe the Brazos County DA declined to press charges.

Kitso
KS 361 apologies for the decadence-type length of my post