<p>That cocaine stat is seriously scary. I hope it is based on an unrepresentative sample…</p>
<p>The question of when to report to the authorities someone who is breaking a rule or the law is not one that can be answered easily. The answer is the same that you get for many questions: it depends. It depends on the situation. How serious is the transgression, how harmful, how important to you personally, is there proof, are you sure it’s happening, how is it going to affect you. If those two students murdered someone, should you report the crime? The answer there is clear. Yes, you should. Hurt someone badly? Were breaking,entering and stealing? Dealing drugs? Smoking pot? Drinking? Cheated on an exam? Bought a term paper? Changed a grade? Hopped a train with a fake ticket? Have a fake id? Vandalized the library? Vandalized an unpopular professor’s office? The list goes on. Some thngs are definite yeses from nearly everyone. Some are definite no s. A lot in the gray area with different shades for everyone.</p>
<p>Many cases are such that the nuances and details make it reportable or not reportable. If you know you can be expelled for drug use in your house, and your roommates answer to your request to get the stuff out of there is to laugh at you, that to me constitutes grounds for a report. There may be others who don’t agree or won’t report, but I think most logical people, given the facts, would understand if someone does report. There also those who would report, but could understand why someone would not.</p>
<p>I don’t know if I would have reported the kids, but I certainly do not blame the one who did. Not one bit. No sympathy at all for the coke users.</p>
<p>I don’t think it is at all unreasonable to expect that there won’t be drugs visibly used in the common areas of the place where you live, particularly if you’ve already requested that these people desist. </p>
<p>Dartmouth12 creates an account here and basically trashes Aubert’s reputation – just as likely that Darmouth12 is good buddies with one of the arrested students. </p>
<p>The two guys arrested made the stupid choice to again use cocaine in the common room. It wasn’t as if this was the first time they’d done so. They flaunted their use, and someone finally was aggravated enough to call Dartmouth security. Darwin rules. </p>
<p>Just curious –
If they’d repeatedly been smoking cigarettes (the legal kind) in a no-smoking area, would it have been okay to call the authorities then? (Admission: I’ve complained when a local restaurant allowed smoking after the law prohibited it and the restaurant manager wouldn’t stop it.) How about if they repeatedly blocked a fire exit with furniture? (Some fraternity members got ticketed here for that one.) How about identifying who hurt a cop during a riot after a football game? Reporting that someone is selling date-rape drugs?</p>
<p>At what point is it okay to see something and say something?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is for you to decide. Aubart made his decision. We don’t all have to agree with it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would, assuming that the circumstances were the same.</p>
<p>
Let me answer this question with a question: What’s likely to happen if the authorities are called in this scenario?</p>
<p>I think you get it, Nightchef. Now, I mentioned that my son had the same sort of issue one year at school. He ended up moving out after he saw that his risks with what they were doing meant nothing to his housemates. Another alternative is to inform whoever is in charge of these things at the house, whether it is the RA or house president. But I don’t blame the kid for what he did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And your suspicions were/are incorrect. Dartmouth’s current handbook clearly states that any and all drugs and paraphernalia will be turned over to the local cops.</p>
<p>“Security officers will confiscate observed drug paraphernalia or apparently illegal drugs. Confiscated drugs are turned over to law enforcement authorities, who may initiate an investigation.”</p>
<p>[Alcohol</a> Policy](<a href=“http://www.dartmouth.edu/~deancoll/student-handbook/alcohol.html]Alcohol”>http://www.dartmouth.edu/~deancoll/student-handbook/alcohol.html)</p>
<p>And yes, these rules absolutely apply to the greek houses, as student organizations.</p>
<p>“These regulations apply to all Dartmouth students. They also apply in connection with student programs, events, and activities officially recognized by, and under the jurisdiction of, the College and its recognized student organizations, both on- and off-campus.”</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That was true before.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That was true before too. But the school required a warrant to turn over the drugs.</p>
<p>The question is: does DSS give law enforcement the names of the people that had the drugs?</p>
<p>(thanks for looking up the current policy)</p>
<p>Quote:
If they’d repeatedly been smoking cigarettes (the legal kind) in a no-smoking area, would it have been okay to call the authorities then?</p>
<p>Let me answer this question with a question: What’s likely to happen if the authorities are called in this scenario? </p>
<p>Well, depending on whether this was the first violation or not, it could have been a $500 or $1000 fine, I think. I remember that it escalated, and apparently a few restaurants had to be hit with some of the increasing fines before they got the message that they had to tell patrons to put out their cigarettes, but I don’t need to worry about secondhand smoke exposure any more.</p>
<p>^A fine for the individuals, or the house? And would anybody have wound up with a criminal record? Would there have been any risk of serious discipline such as expulsion from the university?</p>
<p>Arabrab, for something like smoking cigarettes in a no smoking area, though it is possible that a fine could be imposed, it is more likely that the smokers would just be admonished and warned. If anyone would even respond to the report in a timely manner. Whole different thing from reporting cocaine.</p>
<p>Someone already posted that. The cited language is here:</p>
<p>“Security officers will confiscate observed drug paraphernalia or apparently illegal drugs. Confiscated drugs are turned over to law enforcement authorities, who may initiate an investigation.”</p>
<p>The question is will DSS hand over the names of students found with drugs? With the previous policy, DSS destroyed the paraphernalia and held the drugs and they were eventually turned over to the police. The current policy isn’t all that different with regard to the paraphernalia and drugs. In the previous policy, DSS had discretion in calling in the police to investigate and arrest at the scene. The current policy is unclear on whether DSS turns the names of the students over to the police. It only states that the college turns the drugs over to the police which is the same as the 1995 policy.</p>
<p>arabrab -</p>
<p>As I said, honestly, in my post(s) I am not close with any of the involved parties, but from how these individuals treat those who they do not know by name, etc. I have seen a great disparity. You are welcome to assume that I am a friend of the three students, but you would be wrong. I know them in a limited capacity, and hardly have a fond opinion of Lohse. I did not condone their actions, they deserve the punishment - as well as the opportunity for rehabilitation! - that they will undoubtedly receive in the coming future. I take issue with simply the manner in which they got in trouble - and the portrayal of Aubart as some kind of hero.</p>
<p>Also - the pool room of SAE is hardly a common room. It is separate room of the basement. (If I am correct about the room the articles are referring to.) The authorities were called in early last Thursday morning - or very late on Wednesday. Wednesday nights are “meetings” nights were fraternity brothers engage in some form of traditional bonding experience. There is (usually) a large amount of alcohol involved and “roasting” of brothers. I can certainly envision a scenario in which there is an altercation amongst the brothers and thus sparked the call to S&S.</p>
<p>Lastly, regarding my statistic of cocaine use on campus…that was a shot in the dark, I do not do coke, but it would not surprise me at all if 10% of students here did, and at the same time I would not be surprised if the number was lower.</p>
<p>The numbers that I’ve seen for large cities is about 1% to 2% based on estimates by police departments and analysis of rivers for a chemical that’s produced when humans ingest cocaine. The lower estimates are usually from police departments while the higher estimates are from the chemical analysis.</p>
<p>I’m sure that a little time with research databases would turn up anonymous survey results for selected colleges.</p>
<p>That’s a rather sound approach. I did not realize that cocaine use could be traced back through the water supply (to a degree sufficient to determine % of the population using the drug).</p>
<p>I am a junior at Dartmouth, and although I am not close to any of the men involved, I have interacted with Warthen, Lohse and Aubart on multiple occasions. I have no grudge against any of them.</p>
<p>First, I want to correct the pervasive misconception that Warthen was one of the men doing coke. He has only been charged with witness tampering; he has not been charged on anything related to drugs. That’s a serious charge, but as Bay said, it’s not clear to anyone beyond those immediately involved what exactly happened re witness tampering/intimidation.</p>
<p>Lohse is kind of a ******. I don’t hate him, but I have no fond feelings for him either. I don’t know why he or Shea would do drugs in a somewhat public room, but if dartmouth12 is right and they were doing it in a room in the basement, I suppose I can see why. There tends to be a presumption of some privacy in the basement, especially in a room away from the main hubs of activity. Warthen seems like a pretty darn nice guy if you ask me, and it’s a shame he acted like a dick – if it’s true.</p>
<p>As for Aubart, I don’t share all the hate directed towards him, but I understand where it’s coming from. I’m uncomfortable judging people, and I really dislike how a lot of the people here feel compelled to judge all those involved in this incident. We don’t know exactly what went down, and just as importantly, we don’t personally know the people involved or their circumstances.</p>
<p>Shea had a pretty good rep on campus (and trust me, although we have a lot of attention prostitutes at Dartmouth, when you have a good rep the way he does, you are virtually always a really good person); not sure about Warthen, but I’ve never heard a word spoken against him till now. Aubart and Lohse are generally disliked, for obviously very different reasons.</p>
<p>A lot of the anger/hate directed at Aubart presently does not stem from him being a “snitch.” That might be the proximate cause, the proverbial back-breaking straw, but even before this, he was hated a great deal. The campus gossip site, boredatbaker, will probably be an eye-opener for a lot of people who don’t know the undercurrents of Dartmouth social life (and also provide the Greek haters a lot of ammo) – look at what a search for Aubart’s name turns up: [url=<a href=“http://www.boredatbaker.com/?m=search&query=phil+aubart]boredatbaker.com[/url”>http://www.boredatbaker.com/?m=search&query=phil+aubart]boredatbaker.com[/url</a>]</p>
<p>There are tons of posts about Aubart before last week, all of them negative (and immensely so, even by boredatbaker standards). It’s hard to be universally liked or disliked at Dartmouth, and Aubart was essentially universally disliked. If you’re straitlaced, you’ll have your enemies, but there are also folks who will stick by you. The only people I’ve seen sticking up for Aubart are those who don’t know him at all.</p>
<p>(For those speculating that it’s just because he’s a veteran/ROTC cadet and/or a conservative, this is very unlikely. There are a lot of veterans and conservatives at Dartmouth, and most of them have pretty stellar reputations here.)</p>
<p>The legal questions I think are straightforward: Aubart’s the good guy, the other three are going to the *<em>*can. But ethically it’s hazier. Aubart might have been trying to get back at someone. Lohse (or maybe Shea, though given what I’ve heard, it’s hard to see him doing it) might have been a huge a</em> to him. Maybe you think the simple act of buying coke is unethical (wonder what you make of diamond engagement rings, then), or maybe you think the negative effects of the drug trade primarily arise from the drug war.</p>
<p>Personally I don’t think there any heroes here, and it’s quite possible they’re all villains. The important takeaways from my post should be:</p>
<p>**1. Warthen did not do drugs, as far as we know; he’s been charged with witness tampering</p>
<ol>
<li>All the hate directed at Aubart by Dartmothians arises primarily from other things he’s done, the act of “snitching” is just icing on top**</li>
</ol>
<p>A 2004 study (68,000 students, 133 colleges) found 6% used cocaine within the last year and 2.7% within the last month (as reported by students at the time).</p>
<p>MEASURING OUTCOMES OF ALCOHOL, MARIJUANA, AND COCAINE USE AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS: A PRELIMINARY TEST OF THE SHORTENED INVENTORY OF PROBLEMS – ALCOHOL AND DRUGS</p>
<p>Journal of Drug Issues; Summer2007, Vol. 37 Issue 3, p549-567, 19p</p>
<p>Update: Another member of the Class of 2010, a female, and thus presumably not a member of the frat, has been arrested for cocaine use. [TheDartmouth.com</a> | Fourth student arrested in connection to drug incident](<a href=“http://thedartmouth.com/2010/05/24/news/arrest]TheDartmouth.com”>http://thedartmouth.com/2010/05/24/news/arrest).</p>
<p>dmouth11 – Great post. Well-written, informed and mature attitude. Thanks for all the clarifications. Yours should be the definitive voice on the subject.</p>