I don't think this case is nearly as black and white as some would suggest. While the 18 criticism makes sense, the chaperone was responsible for her well being nonetheless. My guess is that the specifics surrounding the alcohol is what was important in deciding the case. The Crossan's lawyer James Krueger said:
"If you're a good parent, you're not going to have problems," said Krueger, who has handled numerous cases of children injured while in the custody of someone other than their parents. "If you're a crappy parent, you are."
If the chaperone may have witnessed the girl drinking and didn't stop it then the chaperone is partly responsible, assuming one of the school trip rules was no drinking, regardless of the legal drinking age in Hawaii. The arbitrator (judge?) did say she was partially responsible, which I assume means that the dead girl was also responsible.
Obviously things would be different if the girl snuck in and popped some ecstasy in the hotel bathroom and tried to fly out the window, but the ruling seems justified here from what I can infer anyway.
|