<p>“But I don’t think you can pin all the damage on the particular kids who attended that particular party if, in fact, kids had previously partied there and caused damage to that same property.”</p>
<p>It’s been reported that the kids were tweeting out what they were doing and posting pictures of the damage while they were at the party.</p>
<p>Take a look at the facebook page for helpmesave300. There are photos of the interior. This is a beautiful home. It has some furniture in it–including a beautiful dining room set. There is NO way that a bunch of kids could POSSIBLY think that this was a derelict house. </p>
<p>The one quasi-exception is a barn which the Holloways had converted into a basketball court. They let the kids who played there (with the Holloways 8 kids) spray paint their names on the inside of the barn. </p>
<p>Indeed, if you read the emails a few of the kids who attended sent Holloway (which he has posted), they don’t even CLAIM they thought the house was abandoned.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
or</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seriously…he didn’t see anyone damage anything except for 2 windows!</p>
<p>But note that the kids who went to the party didn’t even claim that the house was a wreck when they got there.</p>
<p>No, I don’t agree that you bear responsibility if you leave keys in your car and someone steals it. you may have made it easier, but the responsibility is entirely on the thief.</p>
<p>If the property was for sale, he had a realtor. I don’t believe that no one had checked on the property for years. In addition, the property was obviously maintained. Someone cut the grass, checked the furnace, etc. Even if HE wasn’t there, someone else saw the place. And if the “neighbors” noticed kids holding huge parties there before, why didn’t they say anything to the police? Even if they resented the rich guy from away, you can bet they wouldn’t be happy about wild parties with lots of kids.</p>
<p>I agree, Garland. Theft is theft. And it is a conscious choice. How easy it is to steal from someone makes no difference at all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seems these kids have stupidity problems on top of ethical challenges. So many people who throw parties greet guests at the door with cans of spray paint and say “By all means, pee on the living room carpet if you want!” or “Please, help yourself to statues or anything else that isn’t nailed down–or even anything that is.”</p>
<p>Oh, the kids are already using an argument analogous to "You left the keys in your car so it’s your fault:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fred Grillson is clearly oh-so-bright. :rollseyes:</p>
<p>When I was in high school, I remember going to big parties at houses that I heard from a friend, who heard from a friend about it. (I went it a private school, so people were from all over the area, unlike my kids who attend public school and live within 10 minute drive of classmates). It was generally considered a bonus if the parents weren’t home. </p>
<p>That said, I never witnessed anyone intentionally damaging property. We just wanted a place to gather and meet new people. </p>
<p>If my kid had attended this party, he would be on lockdown until he graduated high school.</p>
<p>In affluent towns in North Jersey, there have been many stories about kids destroying homes when parties get out of control. A novel I read once set in the area called them DABS parties (Drink and Break Stuff.) Often at some poor kid’s house who never invited anyone, but mentioned to someone his parents weren’t going to be home. I think that book about the Glen Ridge rape case talks about those sorts parties, too.</p>
<p>I just don’t get this at all.</p>
<p>I’m not sure I perceive the difference that the kids perceive between going to a party at a house where they know the parents are out of town (and don’t want them there)</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>going to a party at a house that is for sale and the owner doesn’t live there (and doesn’t want them there) </p>
<p>Either way–they know they don’t belong there!</p>
<p>What made it okay to go to a party at the house in either situation?</p>
<p>And to cause any kind of damage to any house in any situation??</p>
<p>No matter what the situation is with the owner of the house–no one belonged in the house unless he invited them.</p>
<p>From the pictures I have seen, the house was lovely and well furnished prior to the party. </p>
<p>And even if it had not been? So what. No one belonged there, period.</p>
<p>And whether or not it was in foreclosure? Irrelevant.</p>
<p>totally agree. The level of excuse-making is scary.</p>
<p>I just looked at the “save the 300” website. It is actually brilliant that Brian Holloway did this. Interspersed among the MANY tweets using real names are statements of concern for the kids who participated in the debauchery. By sympathizing with them rather than lashing out (even though he would have been well within his rights to do so) he engages curiosity-seekers and those who would help his cause while exposing the participants to even more public awareness. These kids deserve what they get, and I hope their parents DO sue so we can see their names as well.</p>
<p>And now he has decided to press charges. Don’t blame him.</p>
<p>[6</a> arrests in vandalism of ex-NFL player’s NY home - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN](<a href=“NFL News, Scores, Standings & Stats | FOX Sports”>6 arrested in player's home vandalism | FOX Sports)</p>
<p>The first six people have been arrested.</p>
<p>Local article on the arrests. </p>
<p>[Arrests</a> begin in Holloway house-trashing case - Times Union](<a href=“Police charge six in party vandalism”>Police charge six in party vandalism)</p>
<p>Seems to me that Holloway has bent over backward here.</p>
<p>I don’t understand some parents in the world. I doubt the suit would’ve been successful for the parents, but the fact that they threaten to sue (publicly, at that) rather than punish the kids themselves is beyond me. What happened to discipline?</p>
<p>I am slowly losing more and more hope :(</p>