Two Sigma Phi Epsilon (Sig Ep) fraternity brothers appeared yesterday before a clerk at the Somerville District Court to answer criminal charges that they had provided alcohol to a minor. The hearing produced no official ruling, but the clerk told the students that if they stay out of trouble for a year, all charges will be erased from their records.
"I would be surprised if there was a trial," said Dan Rabinovitz, a lawyer for Dwyer and Callora, who represented former Sig Ep president Eric Feigenbaum.
Senior Chris Albert was charged with the offense after police saw him serve alcohol to a minor at a party at his fraternity house. The Tufts University Police Department (TUPD) was investigating the gathering after encountering an intoxicated area-college student who said she had been served at Sig Ep. Feigenbaum, who was president of Sig Ep at the time, was also held responsible.
"It's kind of a slap on the wrist, but we do have to be careful from now on," Albert said. "[The clerk] gave us the impression that we were getting off easy, but the people after us wouldn't.... He actually said that he wanted this in the paper, so people know about it and get scared."
Although the issue appears resolved, charges against a second fraternity president are pending. And the precedent of charging fraternity presidents for criminal violations committed in their houses continues to affect the fraternity leadership structure and social life at Tufts.
According to Albert, the TUPD used Sig Ep to set an example for the Tufts Greek system. He and Feigenbaum are scapegoats, he said.
"I'm pissed because they had set a precedent," he said. "For them to go and do things differently without even giving us a warning, that's wrong. If they had taken us aside and said the next time they would press charges, that would have been fine."
Tufts' effort to hold fraternity presidents responsible for what happens at their parties was extended when the TUPD filed charges against the president of Theta Delta Chi, the fraternity commonly referred to as "123."
The criminal charges against the 123 president result from a Sept. 30 incident when TUPD officers encountered an intoxicated student who said that she attended a party at the 123 house. The charges were filed in early October, and the Somerville District Court will hear the case on Nov. 28.
Although similar, the two cases differ in the evidence the TUPD could present against the fraternity presidents. In the 123 incident, the police did not witness a 123 brother serve alcohol to a minor, but rather relied on the inebriated student's account. And although the president is not charged with having personally served alcohol, the TUPD is holding him responsible.
The implications of these two cases are taking a toll on campus social life, as fraternities are hosting smaller parties, and holding them less frequently, in an effort to avoid liability. The leadership structure of fraternities could be altered as well, since other presidents worry that they, too, are at risk of going to court.
"In my opinion, not many people will want to be house presidents if they are held liable for underage drinking or allegations of underage drinking in their house," said the president of 123, who requested anonymity. "The fact is that this could happen to any house at Tufts," he said,
The 123 president said he will not resign, explaining that leaving his post would not absolve him of the charges. It has been rumored that Alpha Epsilon Pi president David Singer resigned out of fear of prosecution, but Singer said that this was only a minor factor in his decision.
"It was definitely a thought and a concern, but it was not a focal point of why I resigned," he said. "I think liability is a strong consideration that fraternity presidents are going to have to take into account before they assume that position."
Director of Public Safety John King said that the University is not using these cases to set a precedent to deter fraternities from serving alcohol to minors. "I see these as two separate situations, and a set of facts and circumstances that are unique to each complaint," he said. "I don't think anyone could read into this that there are any messages being sent to any fraternities. There's no planned action to be bringing charges against all fraternity presidents."
However, there is a marked difference in the way the administration is dealing with fraternity responsibility issues this year, in part because of MIT's admission of liability in the death, due to drinking, of a freshman at the school in 1997.
"I guess that two [cases] does make somewhat of a pattern," Dean of Students Bruce Reitman said. "[The TUPD has] always had the ability to draw the line about whether to deal with the case internally. This year, that line includes situations where individuals have gotten seriously hurt."
King contends that there is no concerted crackdown on parties, and that the number of TUPD responses to reported disturbances this fall is nearly equivalent to last year. Between Sept. 1 and Oct. 17, there were three more replies than in the same period last year, and the total number of responses on campus has actually decreased.
While underage drinking has always existed at fraternities, the presidents have never been held legally responsible for students who drink in their houses. The 123 president said he thinks it is fair for the University to expect fraternity presidents to control their parties, but that Tufts should have informed fraternities of what he called a change in enforcement policy.
"In my opinion, every house president should have been informed by the administration that this year the school was cracking down on underage drinking to the extent that we would be held liable," he said. "That would have given me and every other president on this campus a chance to increase control of underage drinking at parties."
