<p>Good precedent or bad precedent? Discuss.</p>
<p>I think it's a bit ridiculous. I understand that both families are grieving and hurting from their loss, but I fail to see a connection between their sons' drinking and a university official (unless the claim is that these university officials ought to have somehow prevented drinking from occurring in the fraternities). They weren't at the party, the party wasn't sanctioned or paid for by the school, and I fail to see how these two individuals (in particular) are criminally liable. It perhaps makes sense to file a civil lawsuit against the university, but I think even that's a stretch.</p>
<p>Besides the fact that these two students knowingly chose to rush a frat (on a campus where Greek life does not dominate the social scene). Bad things happen every year to students who rush frats. I don't endorse hazing, but I also don't endorse students who can't say no or walk away from a situation.</p>
<p>Don't most schools have policies on alcohol consumption that you sign? It might be lumped with a bunch of different policies, but it's probably in there somewhere...</p>
<p>And I know very little about law, but wouldn't that kind of negate the liable?</p>
<p>It's always someone else's fault.</p>
<p>If it happened on-campus, I think it's a good precedent.</p>
<p>I think it's ridiculous. Colleges have rules and security in place. Colleges are very clear on drinking policies, and so is federal law. You can't blame an official for what a college student (who is legally an adult) did. You can't put security and officials at every party; that's physically impossible for obvious reasons.</p>
<p>I think the worst thing about the US is unnecessary litigation and frivolous lawsuits. This case should be thrown out pretty quickly.</p>
<p>It's a little ridiculous but many colleges turn a blind eye to frat hazing and stuff that occasionally leads people to die from alcohol poisoning, etc. </p>
<p>Anything that might make college administrations listen up is worth it.</p>
<p>It's lives we're talking about here being lost, for the sake of partying, come on...</p>
<p>I seriously doubt they were "hazing" that guy. He's an 18 year old rushing a frat; he was probably drinking of his own accord, they do that. Maybe charging the students is alright, since they were sort of involved, but the dean of students? That's ridiculous. He had nothing to do with it. I'm sure they probably have a alcohol policy in place on-campus, I know my university does. That should negate them from any charges.</p>
<p>Oh how I love the "criminal" justice system.</p>
<p>It looks as if the father and his lawyer are attempting to bring the university into play. If the two school officials are found to be guilty it will be much easier to get a large settlement from the school when civil charges are filed. Nonetheless, it's going to be hard case to prove.</p>
<p>It really is quite alarming that they're facing charges. If idiots disregard their own health and safety, and willingly engage in behavior that carries great risk, choosing to do so in to fit in, they have only themselves to blame. Rather than point the finger at the school, perhaps the parents should reflect on where they failed to impart notions such as not giving in to peer pressure or drinking responsibly.</p>
<p>I don't see the point of this; I could understand if they were suing the higher-ups of the fraternity in question (what they did IS illegal) but I guess the frat wouldn't be as loaded as the university. <em>sigh</em></p>
<p>this is stupid.... the university had nothing to do with it</p>