<p>I have to laugh. A list was posted by a company which helps remove your name from the internet. It says it got the list from the source code and invites parents to contact the company to get their kids’ names removed!</p>
<p>And in comments to the newspaper and TV stories, people posted the name of the girl who stole the statue…who apparently was bragging about having done so…Looks like the fact that the info was being posted publicly is what lead her to return it.</p>
<p>PS: I decided to delete the link to the list posted by the company. No reason to help the company.</p>
<p>Not an opinion on the party itself, but allow me to remind some here about related matters.
First, let’s remember that if a party actually gets sued(in this case the landowner) he will have to spend quite a bit of money. Win or lose, he spends a lot.
That, by itself is sometimes cause for some attorneys to threaten suits on behalf of their client. Sometimes an effective defense(for the parents or kids) is to appear to be quite willing to make things tough on the owner. The owner might feel there is so much hassle it isn’t worth pursuing. No, it isn’t fair, and it isn’t right, but it can occur. Sadly, an attorney that is willing to take their case only as a tactic to defend the child is the very reason attorneys are not so highly regarded. These tactics are the reason so many in the profession are painted with a broad brush in a negative way. Attorneys aren’t typically hired to serve as moral judge, they are typically hired to represent the interests of their boss, the client.
“Let them sue! They can’t win!” is too idealistic, it is just not practical. No one could realistically be happy to be a defendant in court. But, just because some may threaten to sue does not mean they truly would, and it also does not necessarily mean they feel they have a justifiable cause of action.</p>
<p>The balls on these kids, and then the stupidity to post pictures blows my mind. I remember when shaming was used as an effective disincentive for bad behavior. The alternative of fines and jail seems worse to me. I hope the lawsuit threatening parents are given the third degree by a judge in court. </p>
<p>I earned a couple underage drinking tickets in high school which landed me six months of probation two different times. The punishment was never severe enough to make me consider changing my ways, I was just forced to behave for six months to get off so I could then resume. The best thing that could happen to these kids it to have the book thrown at them so they realize that there is consequences to stupid actions.</p>
<p>This is a joke, right? If I were Holloway I wouldn’t stop. I would press on with a campaign to publicly embarrass the brats and shame their idiot parents. I’d probably sue and post every document from pre-trial discovery onward, on the internet. For the culprits it would be a message akin to the punch line from that computer virus commercial on TV a few years ago: “good luck finding another job.” I think it was a ‘do you need to getaway?’ ad for Southwest Airlines.</p>
<p>Why do these people think anyone else has a responsibility to facilitate their kids’ college admissions by ignoring terrible behavior? One of the first pieces of advice I took from cc was to tell the kids early and often to stay on the right side of behavior all the way from freshman year to graduation.</p>
<p>Agree! But he’s ‘raising’ money on this website that jonri mentioned above to help cover damages, which doesn’t make sense, because his insurance should be paying for the damages. There’s just so many things not right about how the whole thing is being handled.</p>
<p>Again… conflicting stories. I read his principle residence is in Florida, that the NY property is a summer home. Even if it’s been listed for sale, he absolutely should have been carrying insurance on it. What if there’d been a fire, or damage from a hail storm, etc. So many ways the property could have been damaged, other than vandalism. If I were leaving a property vacant for such a long time, and knew that realtors would be showing this property while I’m living in another state, I’d make sure the place was insured. What if someone was injured on the property? I hope he is insured and that his insurance company goes after all these kids for damages. However, realistically, the money they’d have to spend in litigation with over 300 individual kids might not be worth it. </p>
<p>I have no idea about coverage for a lawsuit; if he had an umbrella policy, that would work. Again, if he would just turn all his evidence over to the sheriff’s office and let them handle it, and let all the kids suffer the consequences of the law, then I’d feel as if the right thing was being done, that the right kids were being held accountable. Can you imagine being a part of this sheriff’s office and trying to sort through all of this mess??</p>
<p>I think you are way off base…and, frankly, I’m just plain disgusted by your attitude. Mr. Holloway is the VICTIM. Somehow, you seem to have lost sight of that fact.</p>
<p>Being the victim doesn’t entitle someone to try to take justice in their own hands. </p>
<p>Where have I ever said he is NOT the victim? In fact, I suspect my expectations for what should happen to the ‘found guilty’ kids is probably harsher than most here would wish.</p>
<p>FWIW, Brian Holloway was in my freshman dorm a million years ago. He was then, and I presume he is still, a great guy. Smart, funny, self-deprecating. Generous with students who were less at ease socially. Never a player (in the derogatory sense). A stand up guy. I am as sure as I can be that he is acting with integrity here. Why would anyone assume otherwise, given what has been reported?</p>
<p>Our system has 2 sides: criminal and civil. IMO, Holloway has every right in the world to try to determine the identity of the kids who trashed his property and to ask them to make restitution. He has a perfect right to sue them–something he has refrained from doing thus far. Instead, he has asked them to step forward, admit what they have done, and help clean up the mess.</p>
<p>It is NOT necessary to find the perpetrators “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” to bring a civil action against them and collect damages.</p>
<p>And as far as I know, there is NO law that requires Mr. Holloway to buy insurance. And it is almost impossible to buy insurance against vandalism of an unoccupied property. For all we know he does have liability insurance. That does not cover vandalism.</p>
<p>Somehow, you seem to think it would be perfectly fine for an insurance company to conduct an investigation but is somehow unethical for the property owner to do so. I think that’s absurd.</p>
<p>I think Mr. Holloway’s behavior is, for the most part, exemplary.</p>
<p>You wrote:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are entitled to your opinion…but I vehemently disagree. Just out of curiosity though…would it bother you if his insurance company had done the same thing?</p>
<p>Yes it would bother me; I don’t think it’s the insurance company’s place to do the initial investigation, but once guilt has been proven, then they should go after everyone who is guilty. I think the initial investigation should be left up to the law enforcement of the area he lives in. They (sheriff’s office or whoever’s jurisdiction it falls under) should be conducting the investigation and providing the evidence to whoever is entitled to it by law. They (again, sheriff’s office) can certainly obtain information from Holloway, but other than the kids whose pictures and tweets they have, I would hope they would thoroughly vet claims against any kids who they may not necessarily have pictures or tweets of/from, whose names only made ‘the list’ because someone else said they were there. </p>
<p>For all I know, perhaps Holloway has turned over his evidence to the sheriff’s office. Other than the fact that his website is public, I’ve not read anywhere that he has turned over evidence. If he doesn’t press charges, does the sheriff’s office have the right to subpoena or demand he turn evidence? I don’t know the answers to this. I don’t want to see kids go free because Holloway wants the chance to change some lives, so therefore decides not to turn evidence over. I’m sure there are kids on the list who do not have their pictures captured somewhere, or who did not tweet, but are still guilty, but I believe it is up to the justice system to identify them and decide whether or not they are guilty. </p>
<p>What frustrates me most, again, is the reporting. Of course it makes a sensational headline to report that these parents (again… how many??) are now going to sue him for whatever (I don’t even think I’ve found an article that specifically says defamation or libel) reason. And all these holes in the story… maybe they’ve been reported somewhere that I haven’t read. I think it’s going to be such a complicated investigation, that it’s going to take months for all the truth to come out. Certainly, in the meantime, some of these kids and their parents could have come forward, and I would hope a judge would take their confession and willingness to offer retribution into consideration (I think they should still be arrested and charged even if they DID come forward) when fining or sentencing them.</p>
<p>I live in the area and the Rensselaer County sheriffs deputies showed up at the house while the party was still going on and have been investigating since the beginning. The investigation is still ongoing. </p>
<p>I have neither heard or read anything that Mr. Holloway did not have homeowners insurance. I would assume he does - just as most people who own second homes have it. </p>
<p>I have a lake home in an area that has been devastated by wildfires in past years. I learned that many people in the area did not have insurance on their homes because they just couldn’t afford the premiums, which had risen sky high because it is a very remote area experiencing serious drought conditions without access to quick and expert fire departments. We are dependent upon volunteer fire departments, and being in a remote, rural area, there are not fire hydrants on every block. City water only recently became available (prior to that you would have to pump water from the lake and have special equipment to purify and store it). </p>
<p>I was shocked and saddened at the number of people who lost their homes and were unable to replace them.</p>
<p>Have no idea if this is accurate - but read today that the house was in foreclosure, essentially abandoned and already trashed. His paypal account asking for donations may have more to do with trying to save the house from foreclosure than anything else. Foreclosure sale scheduled for 10/29, supposedly.</p>
<p>One cannot get a mortgage in NYS if you don’t have homeowners ins. </p>
<p>I’d be shocked if he doesn’t have insurance even if he owns this home outright, as he seems to be a person of some means. Regardless, whether he does or does not - he is entitled to seek restitution from the people who damaged his home.</p>
<p>We couldn’t get homeowners insurance on our cabin at any cost, even though other people in the area had it. The agent told us that after 9/11, it got harder to insure a lot of things. So we’ll just have to hope it doesn’t catch on fire or get trashed by kids! Either event is possible.</p>