Hazing policies deserve scrutiny
Daily Breeze 1/5/07
It's important, however, to put the prosecutors' investigation in perspective. It's also important for athletics departments at CSUDH and other schools and colleges in the South Bay not to read into the investigators' decision that hazing problems are nonexistent.
Prosecutors may have declined to file charges after reviewing the allegations of former soccer team member Holly Krueger, but this does not necessarily mean that current efforts against hazing are ideal. A future civil lawsuit could shed more light on this case because the standard of proof would be lower than the criminal justice system's "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Krueger alleged that she lost a spot on the team after she refused to take part in hazing activities that included excessive drinking.
CSUDH's anti-hazing policy states that no students may take part in acts that result in "bodily danger, physical harm, or personal degradation or disgrace resulting in physical or mental harm" to fellow students.
Previously, CSUDH officials said that the Athletics Department had conducted its own internal investigation and that "individuals involved were dealt with appropriately." In the wake of the attention this case has received, it would make sense for athletics departments in the region to reassess their procedures for preventing hazing incidents and to make public procedural changes. More public education about hazing would also be welcome.
While prosecutors were unable to prove any criminal violations in this
case, that's not a green light for administrators to simply accept the
notion that current policies on hazing are sufficient. The outcome of
the investigation should be viewed as an opportunity for colleges and
schools to redouble efforts to discourage acts of hazing in the future.