I did not know about a Yale incident. The one I remember was at Smith. Even more distressing to hear it has happened multiple times.
7 Likes
I kind of remember it at Smith also, so it’s probably not as uncommon as it should be.
1 Like
I appreciate the sharing of this article, even though the content is quite depressing. I think that it’s important information to share, not as a disparagement of Lehigh, but to alert families. It could be that Lehigh takes action the way it did after the Clery incident. But knowing about these incidents helps families know to ask, what steps are you taking? Are colleges offering thoughts, prayers, and asking the government to take action? Or are they adding cameras with recording devices around campus, particularly where it intersects with the general public? Maybe putting in safe-boxes where people can swipe themselves in if they feel unsafe while awaiting campus police? Setting up walking-buddy systems?
Sadly, bad things can happen anywhere. It’s the response that it engenders that can influence the decision-making process.
6 Likes
What I hope that parents of high school and college students will take from these incidents is this:
We are responsible for teaching our children harm reduction strategies before they leave for college or adult life. Walking away from provocation, not enabling people to enter into dorms that the person opening the door does not personally know has a right to be in the building, even keeping Narcan in their dorm room in case a friend needs it and teaching them the signs of overdose and that today’s drugs aren’t fun- they kill.
I am doing this with mine and I hope other parents will do this with theirs, even if their child would not be an instigator of an incident like this.
It’s too much to expect deans of student life to teach all of these harm reduction strategies to 18 year old freshmen and have them practice them constantly throughout college if parents don’t teach it first at home.
2 Likes
Many students object to a constant level of surveillance and while it may help identify bad actors later, it doesnt prevent incidents from occurring. Teaching harm reduction strategies before teens leave home is wise.
I’m not a big fan of surveillance myself. But the kid ran after the truck. Maybe he was trying to get the license plate number, maybe he was trying to give them a piece of his mind, who knows. But if this kid hadn’t been walking with witnesses, the offenders could have alleged that this guy was the instigator, chasing them. Or that he instigated a fight with them, etc, etc. Unfortunately, there are too many cases where people with a darker skin color are made out to be the offenders rather than the victims. And sometimes it is only the fact that someone is making a video recording that either the incident stops or the “truth” comes to light when it’s a he said/they said situation, post-incident. When framed in this way, I suspect that a number of college students would understand the “surveillance,” particularly if the university indicates that footage is primarily only being reviewed if an incident occurs.
1 Like
On the campus that concerns me, students are furious about the proposal that they will
be surveilled on the small chance that it may help solve a once-every-several years crime. Most major US cities do not surveil citizens that way, though crimes are more common there.
Witnesses don’t prevent the type of collusion you are describing. And videos don’t always tell the whole story, hence the need for investigation when crimes occur. Ask any experienced law enforcement members.
I agree that campus outdoor camera systems could be a deterrent on campus, however. Colleges can’t be responsible for putting up systems in towns or cities that don’t already have them.
1 Like
The people in the car are not affiliated with Lehigh and are not from the Bethlehem area, police said
Unfortunately this could literally happen on any campus. I don’t think this should be a statement about Lehigh having racist students or being lax on safety. Campuses are open places and anyone can drive through and assault people. It sucks we choose to live this way and accept it.
1 Like
Every time I go to my daughter’s apartment (or before her dorm) and someone holds the door open for me, I worry.
What’s they point of having to swipe in?
It’s the manners we’ve taught that don’t allow a kid to close a door in front of you as you’re sitting there so that you have to swipe in- it’s just polite to hold it open. So that’s human nature and it could potentially cause issues.
1 Like
For all of the terrible things that have happened everywhere on campus, the recent comments seem to head toward students being scared and rude, and I wonder how long until a suggestion that they should all carrying guns?
Students on college campuses are safer than the local environments the schools occupy. A sense of community, lighting and monitoring, blue call boxes, and security officers add a layer of safety not available anywhere else.
One of the things that I believe hampers student safety is the “war on alcohol” that most institutions take. Instead of feeling like the public safety officers are there to protect them, students often feel as though they are there to “enforce the rules”. Strict alcohol policies also encourage dangerous behaviors like “pre-gaming” with shots before attending college functions.
Students should feel that public safety is their first line of defense, and that can’t be the case if they are worried about the same individuals writing them up for having beer in their room.
NOTE - NOTHING I SAID IN THIS COMMENT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE INCIDENT AT LEHIGH THAT STARTED THIS DISCUSSION… just responding the tone of comment over the past day or so.
Smith.
Looks like arrests. I haven’t read the article yet.
2 Likes
From the article linked by @tsbna44:
Although the incident was initially reported as a hate crime, the DA’s investigation found that a hate crime charge, as currently written in Pennsylvania state law, was not supported by the evidence found in the case
Does anyone know what the standard is for a hate crime law in Pennsylvania is and if it’s different from other states? I’m glad the people were arrested, but it’s scary that one of the aggressors was brandishing a gun, and it’s absolutely befuddling to me that this doesn’t meet the standard for a hate crime, as the victim’s race seemed to be the cause of the entire incident happening.
1 Like
Oh they were brandishing a gun ? Thank god no one hurt.
If it’s not a hate crime is that like 20 hrs of service ? I mean simple assault and harassment. That’s like my parents got mad at me and sent me to my room. Nothing. Need to start locking losers up. And for a long time. If we did the earth of those who do others purposeful harm, it can be a better place. This is like - pick up trash on the side of the road for the day and all done.
Disgusting.
2 Likes
It is very difficult to charge these types of cases anywhere, including in jurisdictions where hate crimes are routinely prosecuted. The fact that the DA in Pennsylvania is bringing these charges at all is a sign that they are taking this seriously. If there is no video supporting either side, from the CNN report, this is sounds like a very difficult case to prosecute that would not be prosecuted if individuals with different descriptions were involved. Just speaking from experience. This is one of the major reasons why cities do have cameras in many places. It doesn’t deter all crime, but security video can help when evidence is easy to dispute. Security video devices on structures are the best deterrents. If there were cameras facing the doors to the dorm that the men entered, according to the article, than that may explain why the DA is willing to bring charges at all, given that these people were trespassing.
I have an educated guess. If the accused challenge the charges, the prosecutors will have to present their case to a jury in that area where the crime occurred. Prosecutors select charges that they are most likely to be able to get a guilty verdict from a jury with. Some are harder to prove beyond a reasonable doubt than others (the standard for criminal charges), particularly in circumstantial cases. It’s actually far more common for charges to be dropped than prosecuted, and this is often why.I wouldn’t find this news discouraging at all if you want to see these people held accountable.
People that do terrible things are everywhere. Let the prosecutors do their jobs and try not to judge them. We don’t have any reason to believe that they won’t based on what they have given to the media.
1 Like
I’m not trying to judge the prosecutors…I’m potentially judging the law. I understand when circumstances beyond one’s control can effect our jobs, particularly when employed by the government. But when this incident gets started by the aggressors yelling out a racial slur to the victim, I just don’t understand how that doesn’t get to qualify under hate crime status. I do understand that prosecutors will try to go for the sure thing to make sure someone is held accountable at all, but I would have at least thought that they could have added a hate crime on to the list of charges and then let the jury determine if it was assault with hate crime inspiration or just a plain assault. The fact that they can’t (or think they can’t) is what has me questioning the law.
We do not have all the facts; News reports are often inaccurate and incomplete. Prosecutors who have the entire file do the best they can in view of the totality of the case.
3 Likes
I do wonder though - if you read the article it saiys, “The victim told police that he ran after the vehicle and hit his hands on the trunk. He also briefly touched one of the occupants in the back seat of the car before he disengaged and continued walking home, the DA’s office said.”
Not a lawyer but I imagine the plaintiffs will call it a grounds for self defense although they chased him into a dorm. I assume they were close behind because otherwise, how did they get in? Then it said he had time to lock himself in a room.
Will be interesting to see it play out but hopefully these losers are punished severely even though it’s doubtful.