Class Action Lawyer Pat Salvi attempts to re-define hazing

[BarefootCat]

Class action lawyer Pat Salvi was on the radio yesterday, trying to win in the court of public opinion before having to actually put out facts.

Most importantly, he is trying to re-define hazing:

1) Hazing can be any emotional uncertainty felt by the victim, regardless of what others perceive (so if 29 of 30 players feel there was no hazing, doesn't matter, the outlier was still hazed).

2) Hazing doesn't have to be on-going. If you get made to feel uncomfortable once, then you were hazed.

3) Hazing doesn't need to affect the person in the moment. You can have repressed feelings that come out decades later, you can change your mind, and if you say so, you were hazed. There is no statute-of-limitations, so it's completely acceptable to go back in time and drag others through lawsuits.

4) Hazing is not an individual activity, conducted by individual players. Rather, hazing is an institutional activity. Salvi, of course, refuses to name names or bring action against individuals because that's not where the money is.

5) Coaches, administrators, staff, etc. must accept a player's version of events and react accordingly. There is no such thing as tough love, come-to-jesus, get-over-it, maybe-you're-crazy, or give-the-other-person-the-benefit-of-the-doubt. If a player claims to be a victim, then everyone must accept he/she was a victim, and everyone else must adjust their actions.

- Is this the world we want to live in?
- Aren't the majority of 17-22 year-olds hormone-laced idiots trying to figure out their way in the world?
- Does encouraging people to think of themselves as victims make them any healthier?
- We all saw Kain Colter be used by Class Action Lawyers, have his friendships with his teammates fray, and then have his life spiral out of control. The one guy who always stood by Kain is Coach Fitzgerald.

Listen to class action lawyer Pat Salvi for yourself below. Note: the radio host is NU alum Dan Proft, who was very skeptical of Salvi's motives.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Hazing is obviously wrong, but God forbid anyone experiences any uncertainty in life, and the psychological discomfort that comes with not knowing if you are going to ace that exam, land that job, buy that house, have a healthy baby, have that biopsy turn up negative, survive that surgery, or win the bowling league.

 

[hdhntr1]

Class action lawyer Pat Salvi was on the radio yesterday, trying to win in the court of public opinion before having to actually put out facts.

Most importantly, he is trying to re-define hazing:

1) Hazing can be any emotional uncertainty felt by the victim, regardless of what others perceive (so if 29 of 30 players feel there was no hazing, doesn't matter, the outlier was still hazed).

2) Hazing doesn't have to be on-going. If you get made to feel uncomfortable once, then you were hazed.

3) Hazing doesn't need to affect the person in the moment. You can have repressed feelings that come out decades later, you can change your mind, and if you say so, you were hazed. There is no statute-of-limitations, so it's completely acceptable to go back in time and drag others through lawsuits.

4) Hazing is not an individual activity, conducted by individual players. Rather, hazing is an institutional activity. Salvi, of course, refuses to name names or bring action against individuals because that's not where the money is.

5) Coaches, administrators, staff, etc. must accept a player's version of events and react accordingly. There is no such thing as tough love, come-to-jesus, get-over-it, maybe-you're-crazy, or give-the-other-person-the-benefit-of-the-doubt. If a player claims to be a victim, then everyone must accept he/she was a victim, and everyone else must adjust their actions.

- Is this the world we want to live in?
- Aren't the majority 17-22 year-olds hormone-laced idiots trying to figure out their way in the world?
- Does encouraging people to think of themselves as victims make them any healthier?
- We all saw Kain Colter be used by Class Action Lawyers, have his friendships with his teammates fray, and then have his life spiral out of control. The one guy who always stood by Kain is Coach Fitzgerald.

Listen to class action lawyer Pat Salvi for yourself below. Note: the radio host is NU alum Dan Proft, who was very skeptical of Salvi's motives.

View embedded media

By his definition I am now a victim of hazing and he is the perpetrator. Should I hire him so I can sue him? Probably a class action lawsuit there as well

 

[doughuddl2]

Class action lawyer Pat Salvi was on the radio yesterday, trying to win in the court of public opinion before having to actually put out facts.

Most importantly, he is trying to re-define hazing:

1) Hazing can be any emotional uncertainty felt by the victim, regardless of what others perceive (so if 29 of 30 players feel there was no hazing, doesn't matter, the outlier was still hazed).

2) Hazing doesn't have to be on-going. If you get made to feel uncomfortable once, then you were hazed.

3) Hazing doesn't need to affect the person in the moment. You can have repressed feelings that come out decades later, you can change your mind, and if you say so, you were hazed. There is no statute-of-limitations, so it's completely acceptable to go back in time and drag others through lawsuits.

4) Hazing is not an individual activity, conducted by individual players. Rather, hazing is an institutional activity. Salvi, of course, refuses to name names or bring action against individuals because that's not where the money is.

5) Coaches, administrators, staff, etc. must accept a player's version of events and react accordingly. There is no such thing as tough love, come-to-jesus, get-over-it, maybe-you're-crazy, or give-the-other-person-the-benefit-of-the-doubt. If a player claims to be a victim, then everyone must accept he/she was a victim, and everyone else must adjust their actions.

- Is this the world we want to live in?
- Aren't the majority of 17-22 year-olds hormone-laced idiots trying to figure out their way in the world?
- Does encouraging people to think of themselves as victims make them any healthier?
- We all saw Kain Colter be used by Class Action Lawyers, have his friendships with his teammates fray, and then have his life spiral out of control. The one guy who always stood by Kain is Coach Fitzgerald.

Listen to class action lawyer Pat Salvi for yourself below. Note: the radio host is NU alum Dan Proft, who was very skeptical of Salvi's motives.

View embedded media

So no hazing as far as you are concerned?

 

[wicker]

this logic seems to work for stand your ground laws

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Northwestern has a definition of "hazing" in its Student Code of Conduct.
Thats what matters, not the squawking of some vulture named Salvi.

"Hazing is defined as any action taken or situation created, intentionally or unintentionally, whether on or off University premises and whether presented as optional or required, to produce: mental, physical, or emotional discomfort; servitude; degradation; embarrassment; harassment; or ridicule for the purpose of initiation into, affiliation with, or admission to, or as a condition for continued membership in a group, team, or other organization, regardless of an individual’s willingness to participate."

 

[ricko654321]

Class action lawyer Pat Salvi was on the radio yesterday, trying to win in the court of public opinion before having to actually put out facts.

Most importantly, he is trying to re-define hazing:

1) Hazing can be any emotional uncertainty felt by the victim, regardless of what others perceive (so if 29 of 30 players feel there was no hazing, doesn't matter, the outlier was still hazed).

2) Hazing doesn't have to be on-going. If you get made to feel uncomfortable once, then you were hazed.

3) Hazing doesn't need to affect the person in the moment. You can have repressed feelings that come out decades later, you can change your mind, and if you say so, you were hazed. There is no statute-of-limitations, so it's completely acceptable to go back in time and drag others through lawsuits.

4) Hazing is not an individual activity, conducted by individual players. Rather, hazing is an institutional activity. Salvi, of course, refuses to name names or bring action against individuals because that's not where the money is.

5) Coaches, administrators, staff, etc. must accept a player's version of events and react accordingly. There is no such thing as tough love, come-to-jesus, get-over-it, maybe-you're-crazy, or give-the-other-person-the-benefit-of-the-doubt. If a player claims to be a victim, then everyone must accept he/she was a victim, and everyone else must adjust their actions.

- Is this the world we want to live in?
- Aren't the majority of 17-22 year-olds hormone-laced idiots trying to figure out their way in the world?
- Does encouraging people to think of themselves as victims make them any healthier?
- We all saw Kain Colter be used by Class Action Lawyers, have his friendships with his teammates fray, and then have his life spiral out of control. The one guy who always stood by Kain is Coach Fitzgerald.

Listen to class action lawyer Pat Salvi for yourself below. Note: the radio host is NU alum Dan Proft, who was very skeptical of Salvi's motives.

View embedded media

Yeah I do 2 hours of anti-harassment and discrimination training at least once per year (as I would imagine many of us do). While I'm not a lawyer, I feel slightly well informed enough to say I believe the "it only has to happen once" and "don't have to acknowledge it / no statute of limitations" thing doesn't really fly from a legal perspective. Generally speaking for the legal definition of harassment in a work setting (which I would think is closely related to harassment in terms of hazing? not a lawyer though) there would need to be repeated incidences, the victim would need to note to someone that they are unhappy with the activity and have a pattern of information suggesting that. If it is ignored or buried by the company (NU in this case) then they can have significant liability. If the person committing the harassment (can be sexual, race-based, hazing, just general harassment) is informed of it and continues to do so, then they can have personal liability.

Now we still don't know what the investigative report on football hazing said. And from what I understand some members of the baseball (and volleyball?) teams complained and felt their complaints were ignored by the AD. So that would suggest some of them might have a case. But you'd need to have documented those complaints along the way somewhere I would think, you couldn't just raise them now with no corroborating evidence. Perhaps if you have a lot of people willing to testify to support your statements and it's relatively recent (i.e. maybe the baseball situation? with so many transferring could see this being the case). Still though, it's probably pretty tough... and seems very far afield from what your list above describes, which I believe is not legally accurate.