I have several issues about this case, due to my unresolved questions I will remain neutral until further facts are given.
1. Supposedly the parents did not know their child was gay.
~~~ To me they lose credibility because you cannot walk into a courtroom and state we were so close, "he told us everything" obviously, he didn't.
If you as a parent were shell shocked about this information how do you blame Rutgers?
2. The RA.
~~~Anyone who has ever lived in a dorm knows the old cliche...somebody sneezes and the entire dorm says Bless you.
The fact is nothing is secret in a dorm. As much as students tried to "HIDE" the facts the RA's know, and it is their decision to turn a blind eye to what is occurring.
Rutgers employed the RA and thus, they are partially culpable if the RA knew that this webcast was common knowledge. The RA should have reported it to the administration.
3. Rutgers did acknowledge that the student came to them. That places some blood on their hands.
~~~Again, we don't know what he said to RU. Did he say, "I don't like my roommate" ~ common amongst Freshman or did he say "My roommate is webcasting me in private relationships"
The Facts are not in, only supposition is.
OBTW, anyone from NJ will remember back in the late 80s there was a lawsuit case from the parents of a child who died due to Hazing (alcohol posioning). If I recall correctly RU settled out of court. Also back in the early 80's a girl was raped during daylight hours on Campus by Kirkpatrick's Chapel and the parents also sued RU based on security.
New Brunswick is not a safe campus. RU is also a non-traditional campus because they are spread across miles and miles. Piscataway is not a 15 minute walk from New Brunswick, nor is Cook or Davidson. All of those campuses are considered RU main. You need to understand RU to understand how it operates.
-- Edited by pima on Sunday 26th of December 2010 10:54:32 AM
__________________
Raising a teenager is like nailing Jello to a tree
^lawsuits are what people with low character use to get undeserving money....I guess in hopes are easing pain in some cases, in other cases...pure greed.
I agree that the lawsuit shouldn't be filed. From everything we've heard on the news, the only thing Rutgers could have done differently is spy on the student dorms to monitor everyone's behavior, which is clearly ridiculous.
But I don't think the parents are trying to profit from the death of their son. When people bring lawsuits lilke this, it's usually because in their extreme grief they want to hold everyone accountable, and make someone pay for the pain they feel. They probably also intend to sue the students who did the filming, but we don't necessarily know that since they are not required to give individuals the same warning as they are required to give not-for-profit entities.
They filed a notice of intent not an actual lawsuit. You are required to serve notice within 90 days of the event or you lose the right to sue. It is possible that they are still looking to see if the university or its employees are negligent in any manner.
The parents of a Rutgers University student who committed suicide after his roommate and another student allegedly broadcast online his sexual encounter with another man have notified the school they may sue.
Jane and Joseph Clementi say the school should have done more to prevent the death of their son, Tyler. On Friday, they notified the university that they were filing a "notice of claim," meant to uphold their right to bring a lawsuit in the coming months, Rutgers spokesman E.J. Miranda said Wednesday.
"Subject to further investigation, it appears that Rutgers University failed to act, failed to put in place and/or failed to implement, and enforce policies and practices that would have prevented or deterred such acts, and that Rutgers failed to act timely and appropriately," the notice said. A copy of the notice was provided to CNN by the university.