(Page 19 of 44) - Comparing Judicial Institutions: Using Simulations and Active Learning to Facilitate Student Understanding authored by Weiden, David.

CASE LAW

Richards v. New Columbia, 908 A.2d. 1096 (1995).

Summary of Facts: On appeal. John Richards, leader of a gang known as the “Nines” was

convicted of 2nd degree murder under §2-745 and criminal hazing under the Anti-Hazing/Gang
Initiation Statute. As part of a gang initiation ritual, Richards instructed potential gang members
to lay on train tracks and count to ten after feeling the initial vibrations of an oncoming train.
After drinking heavily, Mark Yoba, a young man being initiated into the gang, lay on the tracks.
However, in his intoxicated state, Mr. Yoba did not start counting until the train was almost upon
him. Mr Yoba did not react quickly enough to move himself from harm’s way and was
consequently killed.

Holding: Although the behavior of Mr. Richards was hazardous, he should not be held

responsible for Mr. Yoba’s death. In analyzing culpability for this tragedy, the court must
examine the extent that outside pressure caused the victim to act in such a life-threatening
manner. Lying on train tracks is an obviously dangerous activity. Despite his intoxication, there
is no evidence that blood alcohol levels were high enough to completely impair Mr. Yoba’s
judgment. Despite intense peer pressure, Mr. Yoba should have been aware of the risks of
undertaking such an activity. The facts do not support conviction of 2nd degree murder.

Regarding criminal hazing, on the other hand, the activities that Mr. Richards selected for

initiation put people at serious risk of injury or death. As leader of the Nines, Mr. Richards could
have avoided this tragedy by not selecting such a dangerous activity. Judgment of the trial court
is affirmed on the charge of criminal hazing and reversed on the charge of 2nd degree murder.

Nichols v. New Columbia, 908 A.2d. 1011 (1995)

Summary of Facts: On appeal. Deborah Nichols, president of the Alpha Delta Alpha

sorority, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter under §4-1213 and criminal hazing under
§4-1213 of the New Columbia Code. As part of an annual sorority drinking competition, pledges
were told to compete against each other to see who could consume the greatest amount of beer.
Tamara Wilcox, a freshman at Dreyfuss University, was a pledge at Alpha Delta Alpha sorority.
As a pledge, Ms. Wilcox was required to engage in this drinking competition. The other
members of the sorority, as dictated by Ms. Nichols, told the pledges to continue to drink, despite
obvious signs of intoxication. Ms. Wilcox died of alcohol poisoning as a result of this hazing
activity.

Holding: Although Ms. Wilcox could have chosen not to drink, it is quite clear that she

was under a great deal of pressure to compete in the drinking contest. Under Ms. Nichols’
directive, members of the sorority continued that pressure despite the fact that Ms. Wilcox’s state
of intoxication made her incapable of making rational choices. This activity was clearly a