University officials charged for hazing

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

You're not off at all. Being criminally charged is not the same as being sued.

True--I mispoke when I said "sue." They are being charged for these reasons, and they could also later be SUED for wrongful death if they lose in court.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

They are being charged for these reasons, and they could also later be SUED for wrongful death if they lose in court.

Technically, they could be sued for wrongful death regardless of how they do on the criminal charges. The elements of a claim for wrongful death are different from the elements for aggravated hazing, the crime with which they are charged. The burden of proof is different as well -- in a criminal case, guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Liability on a wrongful death claim only has to be shown by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not). That means that the same evidence might not be enough for a criminal conviction but might be enough for a civil judgment.

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Technically, they could be sued for wrongful death regardless of how they do on the criminal charges. The elements of a claim for wrongful death are different from the elements for aggravated hazing, the crime with which they are charged. The burden of proof is different as well -- in a criminal case, guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Liability on a wrongful death claim only has to be shown by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not). That means that the same evidence might not be enough for a criminal conviction but might be enough for a civil judgment.

True and true--so technically, I was correct in saying that they could be sued, in either case, but they have not been sued--YET.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

True and true--so technically, I was correct in saying that they could be sued, in either case, but they have not been sued--YET.

Exactly!

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Exactly!

Hahhaa.

[GreekGirl06]

As a student of rider University I have had the pleasure of knowing both of the officials that were charged in the indictment that Dean is actually a member of the community service fraternity Alpha phi Omega. The second official that was charged is the director of Greek life I've also gotten to know her as well the fraternity in question Phi Kappa Tau has officially been disbanded from our university campus nothing like this has ever happened in the history of our university as far as I know I can only hope that they will not disband all Greek organizations from campus seeing as how this was an isolated incident and has never happened in the universities 142 years.

But we as a college campus community have all bonded together Greeks and non-Greeks alike if to inshore that this never happens again

[Kevin]

Seeing as how Rider is a private school, I guess this could result in the closing of the entire greek system. No university official is going to want to risk being criminally prosecuted for something they would have had no way of knowing about.

It seems to be a ludicrous result that this could result in criminal prosecutions for the campus' officials. Fraternity officers, etc., I can see.. beyond that? No.

[Tom Earp]

Oh, once again, they are sued or criminaly charged for what ever for any reason, they are sued or brought up in a suit from their position only?

Well, if there is a definition of being Sued or Charged for a Criminal Act, I am still wondering why?

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Oh, once again, they are sued or criminaly charged for what ever for any reason, they are sued or brought up in a suit from their position only?

Well, if there is a definition of being Sued or Charged for a Criminal Act, I am still wondering why?

Tom you know I have no issue with you, but I explained above why they were being held accountable for the circumstance, and so have others... What do you need explained, exactly?

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

Tom you know I have no issue with you, but I explained above why they were being held accountable for the circumstance, and so have others... What do you need explained, exactly?

Nothing actually, I am just saying they are in the line of fire in a sue happy society or being charged because they work at this School, but were not involved!


True?

As D A said, if this progresses much further, will Colleges close as no one wants to work there for fear of being accused of a crime or sued? Well, kind of my interpretation! LOL!

[exlurker]

A recent article from the Times of Trenton NJ includes statements by -- among others -- some lawyers about the indictment of administrators:

http://blog.nj.com/timesupdates/2007...istrators.html

[UGAalum94]

I hope that the administrators are cleared and that they are able to seek some redress from being improperly charged and maybe tried.

(Of course, I'm assuming that they had no knowledge or participation in the fraternities unregistered event.)

Unless we want to go back to the days of college students being viewed as minors in the complete care of their universities despite in most cases these same students being over the legal age of majority (with of course alcohol purchase and/or consumption being the exception), its very difficult to see how in the world the administrators who supervise organizations can actually be considered guilty of committing crimes based on behavior they didn't engage in themselves and had no knowledge of.

It just seems crazy that they were indicted when there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the hazing would have been tolerated had they known of it or that they did know about it.

Do you really think we're better off treating college students like high school students in terms of university oversight of social events?

Doesn't this seem nuts?

I've got no problem with the charges against the people in the organization who were involved. But the administrator being held responsible isn't going to be a move in the right direction.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Nothing actually, I am just saying they are in the line of fire in a sue happy society or being charged because they work at this School, but were not involved!

True?

I have no idea, and neither do you.

They were not sued by some sue-happy litigant, Tom. They were indicted by a grand jury, which presumably heard sufficient evidence to believe that these two school officials should be charged with hazing.

New Jersey criminal law (N.J.S.A. 2C: 40-3a) says: "A person is guilty of hazing . . . if, in connection with initiation of applicants or members of student or fraternal organizations, he knowingly or recklessly organizes, promotes, facilitates, or engages in any conduct, other than competitive athletic events, which places or may place another person in danger of bodily injury." (My emphasis) It is "aggravated hazing" -- what these two officials have been charged with -- if death results.

I must assume, though it is only an assumption, that sufficient evidence was presented to the grand jury that these two officials had been criminally negligent, perhaps turning blind eyes, to the point where their negligence facilitated hazing.

I recognize as well as anyone that grand juries make mistakes and that DAs may not present cases based in fact to grand juries, although I continue to believe that the Duke lacrosse incidents of the world are the exception rather than the rule. Most DAs I know value their integrity enough to make that the case.

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

I hope that the administrators are cleared and that they are able to seek some redress from being improperly charged and maybe tried.

(Of course, I'm assuming that they had no knowledge or participation in the fraternities unregistered event.)

With the caveat given above that grand juries can be misled and can err, I am assuming that they would not have been indicted unless there was at least some evidence that they did have knowledge or but for their negligence should have had knowledge.

[DeltAlum]

Originally Posted by exlurker

A recent article from the Times of Trenton NJ includes statements by -- among others -- some lawyers about the indictment of administrators:]

Thanks for the link:

Three quotes from the article strike me:

"Bocchini (the County Attorney) said the indictment by the grand jury sends a "clear message that there is culpability involved in the ingestion of alcoholic beverages on college campuses. Rider University is involved in this today, but it could have been any college or university across the United States."

"Campbell's inclusion in the indictments could reverberate nationwide as colleges struggle to cope with underage drinking and on-campus fraternities. Fierberg said the indictment of an administration official sends a huge message to both fraternities and the campuses that house them.

"I am not aware of a similar circumstance and I think it speaks to the seriousness of the prosecution, the tremendous tragedy this family has unnecessarily experienced, and how young people on campuses must be protected by schools and school officials," he said.

The final underlined comment would seem to ask for a return to the In Loco Parentis situation that we lived with in the sixties.

The question is whether this message is being received by local chapters -- and whether anyone is taking this seriously.

You can be sure that the people in the administration buildings are.

Whether there is a conviction here, or a judgement against the uniersity in whatever lawsuit will probably follow, the outcome could have huge implications.

[dznat187]

From what I remember from the news coverage of this story, wasnt the fraternity 'shut down'. I think the fraternity was in trouble for other issues and were repremanded by the university. Wouldnt that mean the university did their job to prevent hazing.

It is ridiculous to expect university officials to know everything that is going on on campus and be able to control all students. Only brainwashing or mind control could do that. There will always be students who make bad decisions. Some will be more dangerous than others, but to blame university officials for the actions of students is very scary.

I work as a live-in fraternity advisor and this case has really frightened many of us who work in the field. As much as I can keep an eye on what is going on in my house, I can't be there at every moment of every day nor can I make good decisions for my fraternity men. I can educate them and be there for them but ultimately decisions are their's. Granted officials and advisors should be able to spot trouble issues.

I think this whole case will bring to the forefront the whole live-in/housemanager job. Many schools are beginning to require professional live-in advisors, like myself (with a masters) and are moving away from having members of the fraternity serve as the house manager/advisor. I think Rider is making good strides in changing these positions and hopefully other schools will see the benfit of this change and see how it is worth the added expenses.

I really am interested to see how this all pans out and what effect it has on those working in higher ed administration and specifically those working in greek advisor positions. In general greek life is entry level and does not pay that well. If you add in the possibility of being charged or sued because of a chapter's actions, there may be even fewer people willing to work in Greek life and the retention of greek advisors will continue to decline.

Natalie