University officials charged for hazing

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by exlurker

Tom, from the several news reports I've seen, I think that technically they aren't being "sued." They have been indicted by a grand jury -- it's a criminal prosecution, not a civil lawsuit. But my terminology may be off somewhat.

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

[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

[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.

[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.