Principal to decide hazing incident outcome

(Deseret News ^ | February 5, 2003 | Suzanne Dean

[KneelBeforeZod]

MT. PLEASANT, Sanpete County — After a two-hour closed-door meeting Tuesday, the North Sanpete School Board left it to the school principal to resolve the case of two wrestlers who allegedly assaulted a smaller cheerleader.

Principal John Ericksen immediately met with parents of the wrestlers, who were among a crowd of about 150 citizens and media who jammed the special board meeting, and told him he was extending a two-day suspension to 10 days.

During that time, Ericksen said, he would further investigate the incident in which the wrestlers, both seniors and one a 275-pound heavyweight, allegedly pinned the 120-pound cheerleader, a sophomore, against a locker. The victim reported the wrestlers had pulled down his pants and shaved hair in his groin area with an electric razor.

Before the 10 days are up, the principal said he expected to decide what final action to take. But meanwhile, the wrestlers, members of a team vying for the state championship, may not wrestle, Ericksen told their parents. That means the two will miss a region meet, which could undermine the 275-pound wrestler's chances of taking state in his weight class.

However, it appeared school discipline may not be the wrestlers' most serious problem. Earlier Tuesday, Mt. Pleasant Police Chief Jim Wilberg said he was wrapping up an investigation and would be getting a report to the county attorney so the case could be screened for criminal charges. The parents of the victim have told Wilberg they want the alleged perpetrators prosecuted.

Since the incident, Ericksen, who has been in the North Sanpete school system for 31 years but became principal just four months ago, has not talked to reporters and has referred questions to district officials.

In an interview Tuesday, George Bench, assistant superintendent in the North Sanpete School District, said Ericksen's handling of the incident appeared to follow school policy. The problem, said Bench, was that while the incident occurred Jan. 22, the two wrestlers were not suspended until Monday. "It's pretty obvious the time frame was not appropriate. That's the issue most people have," he said.

At the special board meeting and in an interview afterward, the victim's father gave the family's version of the incident and the school's response.

He said his son told him the incident happened Wednesday, Jan. 22, about 2:50 p.m. When his son came home from school that night, he seemed agitated. But when the father and his wife asked the boy what was wrong, he said, "Never mind. I'll take care of it."

However, the victim's peers pressured him to tell school authorities. Two days later, on Friday, Jan. 24, the principal was informed.

According to the father, the principal called all of the boys into his office. He let the wrestlers off with a warning, telling them if anything similar happened again, they would be in serious trouble. The father reported that Ericksen had asked his son whether he wanted his parents to be notified. The boy, who his father described as terribly embarrassed by the incident, said he didn't want his parents to know.

However, many of the victim's friends told their parents what they knew. On Jan. 28, another mother visited the the victim's home. The parents were out of town. But the mother described the incident to the boy's grandmother, who lives with the family.

The parents returned home that evening and learned about the situation. The next morning, Jan. 29, the mother went to the school and told the principal she wanted more serious action taken against the wrestlers. But, the father said, several days passed and the family heard nothing.

The father said that finally last Saturday the family contacted the Mt. Pleasant Police. It turned out the police department had already received a report from another parent and had launched an investigation. The next day, last Sunday, the police chief visited the parents and their son to gather information.

On Monday, 12 days after the incident, the parents learned that Ericksen had suspended the wrestlers. Some time ago, the school board had scheduled a special meeting Tuesday with the South Sanpete School Board to discuss district issues. But Monday, the agenda was changed to address the alleged assault.

At the meeting, the board listened to public comments for about an hour before closing the session. Board president Kathryn Parnell said the grounds for the executive session was discussion of personnel matters. The majority of speakers deplored the incident and supported the victim. Patty Irons, Moroni, wife of one of the board members, said some local people have been "intimidated" and afraid to speak out about the apparent assault because the wrestlers belong to prominent families.

But she said people needed to take a stand. She described the incident as "a premeditated crime," saying "the principal should have acted the same day he heard about it."

Other speakers contended that other serious incidents have occurred at the school but the wrestlers were suspended because they are athletes. They argued the suspensions were punishing the whole wrestling team.

"The only reason we're here is because we've got a championship wrestler among the accused," said Bruce McDougal, attorney for one of the wrestlers. He claimed three other serious sexual harassment incidents had occurred this year at the high school and the longest suspension had been three days.

McDougal said the criminal prosecution the boys may face was punishment enough and urged board members to allow them to complete the wrestling season.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Sabertooth]

The majority of speakers deplored the incident and supported the victim. Patty Irons, Moroni, wife of one of the board members, said some local people have been "intimidated" and afraid to speak out about the apparent assault because the wrestlers belong to prominent families.

But she said people needed to take a stand. She described the incident as "a premeditated crime," saying "the principal should have acted the same day he heard about it."

Other speakers contended that other serious incidents have occurred at the school but the wrestlers were suspended because they are athletes. They argued the suspensions were punishing the whole wrestling team.

"The only reason we're here is because we've got a championship wrestler among the accused," said Bruce McDougal, attorney for one of the wrestlers. He claimed three other serious sexual harassment incidents had occurred this year at the high school and the longest suspension had been three days.

Principals let sexual predators off all the time. That's no excuse for letting the pervert wrestlers go. Big brave he-men, picking on a sophomore male cheerleader: how proud their parents must be.

The principal should be fired and sued. The wrestlers should be expelled, tried, and jailed.

If there really are old sex-harassment cases at that school, they fall within the statute of limitations. They should be dredged up, and the perps expelled, tried, and punished.

I sometimes wonder: How is the current system of coddling criminals and perverts more just than street justice? I'm not an advocate of vigilantism, but our principals and judges no longer inspire confidence.

[mhking]

"Hold muh beer 'n watch this!" PING....

If you want on or off this list, please let me know!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Let's press charges so we can see how long these two pervs last in prison...

[Movemout]

I don't believe that these wrestlers were sexual predators. I think they are garden variety bullies, also a form of predator. I hope the police charge them with assault for that is the crime committed here. That will cool their jets and it doesn't then the shot has been fired across their bow. I hope the sophomore can get past his humiliation but it will mark him for the next two years. Maybe his parents can get a sufficient settlement to be able to afford to place him in a better school.

[farmfriend]

My son put a stretchy book cover on his head, called it a girls pair of underwear and got suspended for 3 days. Just for some perspective on this story.

[Sabertooth]

I don't believe that these wrestlers were sexual predators.

They shaved the kid's pubic hair. I guarantee you, if a man forcibly shaves a womans pubic hair, they'll be charged with sexual assault or battery, depending on the jurisdiction, and would have to register as a sex offender.

That the victim was of the same sex doesn't make these wrestlers any different.

[Movemout]

As far as I know there have been bullies in every high school in every state. Doing this to a female would undoubtedly be a sexual assault. Male cheerleaders would surely be a target in a wrestler world. I have wrestled competitively, albeit long ago, and wrestlers are not reknowned for their tolerance. I think that this assault is just another example of jocks out of control. We have all seen it in our own experience. Remember that these are teens who haven't yet been able to form rational responses to acceptable behaviors that are outside their experential database. I think that a brush with the law will make these miscreants take notice that they are not in charge. Before you attack me, let me say that I don't think they are wrong, I know they are wrong.

[Sabertooth]

I think that this assault is just another example of jocks out of control. We have all seen it in our own experience. Remember that these are teens who haven't yet been able to form rational responses to acceptable behaviors that are outside their experential database. I think that a brush with the law will make these miscreants take notice that they are not in charge. Before you attack me, let me say that I don't think they are wrong, I know they are wrong.

No attack, but if you give them your recommended wrist-slapping, they won't know they're wrong.

Expel them. Send the clear message. This "boys will be boys" schtick doesn't cut it for a moment.

[Movemout]

Expelling them would be a perfectly acceptable solution to me. But, even if you you don't buy the "boys will be boys shtick," it will continue from generation to generation because it is a normal course of events. My "wrist-slapping" recommendation is that they be charged with assault. Their (adult?) peers should decide their fate.

The fact that one of these wrestlers is a competitive state level wrestler is probably influencing events. I say slap him down and be done with it.

[Sabertooth]

it will continue from generation to generation because it is a normal course of events.

Forcibly shaving pubic hair is a "normal course of events?"

It is sexual assault. You want to call it something else. That's denial. That's enabling.

We don't have to accept this behavior as "the normal course of events." This is not alpha male horseplay. Let's call it what it is: twisted, perverse, and sadistic.

[Movemout]

You are difficult. I have agreed with most everything you have said but you are stuck on the sexual angle of the assault. I don't think that these bullies had a sexual angle. They were after humiliation. It could be that this cheerleader was gay, I don't know. They didn't rape him so I assume they weren't gay. It was a criminal tresspass and should be handled accordingly.

[Sabertooth]

I have agreed with most everything you have said but you are stuck on the sexual angle of the assault. I don't think that these bullies had a sexual angle.

Actually that's where you're stuck, and you've conceded above that it's only because the victim is of the same sex as the perpetrators.

They were after humiliation. It could be that this cheerleader was gay, I don't know. They didn't rape him so I assume they weren't gay. It was a criminal tresspass and should be handled accordingly.

If the cheerleader was female, and had her pubic hair forceably shaved for the purpose of humiliation, but she wasn't technically "raped," the charge would still be sexual assault or battery. The male cheerleader should have the same protection.

[Experiment 6-2-6]

Sabertooth said it better than I could. Just because there was no "sex", doesn't mean it's not a sexual battery.

I mean, if they pinned YOU against the lockers, and started the electric clippers, I wonder how you would classify it?

the point is, if they had just shaved off part of his head, that would be hazing. But once ya get towards them private parts, it MAKES it sexual..

[Movemout]

Well, I guess I'm outvoted two to one on this matter. If I were the attorney prosecuting this case I would aim for just plain old battery. It would be much easier to prove. There is a certain paucity of facts available from the article. I think we can all agree that it is criminal behavior we see here. The sexual component is less clear to me.