Harvard profs get busted for teen bacchanalia

posted at 8:48 am on June 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

One has to think that people become Harvard professors by having a certain amount of native intellect, but this story of a raid by police in Weare, Connecticut may shake that assumption.  Two medical-school professors either facilitated a drunken party involving 70 teenagers attending their daughter’s graduation party, or they got outsmarted — by dozens of drunken teenagers:

Two Massachusetts doctors, both who teach at Harvard Medical School, were arrested Sunday and charged with facilitating an underage drinking party in which 70 teenagers — mostly new graduates of St. Paul’s School in Concord — were placed into police custody.

Police said J. Wesley Boyd, 46, and Theonia Boyd, 49, were charged with facilitating an underage drinking party.

Boyd insists that he told the kids that alcohol wouldn’t be tolerated at his party.  He then told police that he had noticed one or two kids that might have been intoxicated, but that he didn’t see any evidence of them drinking.  That’s funny, because police saw plenty of it:

Boyd, a psychiatrist, said he never saw anyone drinking any alcohol. He acknowledged he may have thought one or two kids were intoxicated, but he couldn’t know for sure because he saw no one drinking.

He was surprised when police showed photos, taken after the arrests, with large numbers of beer containers in the yard, he said.

Shocked, shocked I am that police found this subtle evidence that Professor Boyd somehow missed!  All of that beer must have mysteriously materialized at the residence without Boyd’s eagle eye picking it up.

Even though the police did a better job of protecting the teens than the Boyds, the Boyds made sure to tell the press just how racist Weare’s finest were in dealing with the situation:

Meanwhile, he said police made derogatory comments about some of the students taken into custody. They called an Asian a special-needs student; told an African-American he must be at St. Paul’s on a basketball scholarship and described an Indian woman as a princess, Boyd said. A red-head was called “red,” he said.

“You pick the stereotype, there were derogatory remarks being made about that person,” he said.

Yeah!  You know, Boyd was just going to let them get tanked and get into the 30 cars impounded at the residence.  The police called a girl “Red” and another one “Princess.”  Let’s get some perspective here, people!

Boyd says he’ll fight the charges, presumably by telling a judge all about the racism inherent in the system.  Unless Boyd gets his representation from Harvard Law, his lawyer will probably advise him to shut the hell up and pay the fines.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The best part, these Harvard types are usually the same kind of folk who wax poetic about how people should be licensed to have children. Sharr on June 8, 2010 at 11:54 AM

And you can only get said license if you can send them here for the correct up-bringing.

St. Paul’s School, a private boarding school for grades nine through 12, was founded in 1856.

Just how much do these people know about life with teenagers? I am being a class snob.

Cindy Munford on June 8, 2010 at 12:00 PM

I am not arguing about this specific party. I just don’t think that the federal government should be mandating the drinking age, that is why it now 21 in all fifty states. You can enter into contracts, vote, get married, join the military, drive a car, get an abortion, but you can’t have a beer or glass of wine with your parents.

SC.Charlie on June 8, 2010 at 12:02 PM

dedalus on June 8, 2010 at 11:59 AM

My oldest, months from his eighteenth birthday, had a van full of peers on a food run to Taco Bell. All where taken to police precinct for being out after curfew (11:00 p.m.). Luckily they trusted him to drive the van and “offenders” to the precinct since it was a block or so away. All the parents had to come pick up their desperadoes. Just another funny parenthood story. Although the officers searched one kid with long hair and the van numerous times to no avail.

Cindy Munford on June 8, 2010 at 12:06 PM

SC.Charlie on June 8, 2010 at 12:02 PM

It does seem to be inconsistent. I remember when young men could get sent to die in war but not vote.

Cindy Munford on June 8, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Oh look! Here’s Theonia

Can you guess what she picked for “Music”.

Yep. Grateful Dead.

Druggie.

moochy on June 8, 2010 at 12:17 PM

Bacchanalia? When I was a kid we called it a “kegger” but then, we weren’t as sophisticated as these Harvard folk.

pugwriter on June 8, 2010 at 9:34 AM

“Bacchanalia” is the most appropriate word since Harvard people believe they should be treated as though they’re from Olympus.

AaronGuzman on June 8, 2010 at 12:32 PM

I can’t believe I’m about to stick for a lefty Harvard prof, but this is pretty common practice for senior class parties at these private schools. The thinking is they’re going to drink anyway, so better to do it semi-supervised where driving is prohibited. Some people hold the party on a ranch and lock the gates so the kids can’t go anywhere. Some parties serve beer, and some just take a don’t ask, don’t tell policy on the drinking. Most of my friends my age agree with these actions–a few don’t.

My friends and I were able to drink legally at 18, and most of us think the current age is kind of silly and makes the kids drink in secret, which can be more dangerous. We got our seniors through the big parties safely with no incidents. YMMV.

juliesa on June 8, 2010 at 12:37 PM

And by underage drinking, I assume that you mean 18-year olds. Right? Because I’m of the firm opinion that 18 should be the legal drinking age and have therefore facilitated at some point in the past responsible 18-20 year old adults who simply wanted to relax with a beer after a 14-hour workday. Frankly, I find it difficult to care one way or the other about people “facilitating” the drinking of 18+ year old men and women. They can vote, they get tried as adults, they can go to war. In every respect except one they are treated like adults: they are not allowed to drink.

And please, don’t lecture me on “it’s the law” because in this case the law is a ginormous ass. The federal government’s extortion of the states forcing them to raise their drinking ages was an abuse of power.

Physics Geek on June 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM

… You can enter into contracts, vote, get married, join the military, drive a car, get an abortion, but you can’t have a beer or glass of wine with your parents.

SC.Charlie on June 8, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Well, I’m old enough to remember when that argument was used to argue for it’s lowering. Which did not work out so well. And back when the States were left alone to choose the legal drinking age, people complained because the results weren’t consistent, which in certain border areas resulted in kids crossing the state line to get booze.

There is no such thing as a perfect solution. There isn’t even one that people won’t complain about.

LarryD on June 8, 2010 at 12:41 PM

Progressives. “the kids will do it anyway”. Sheesh.

kirkill on June 8, 2010 at 12:56 PM

Physics Geek on June 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM

That’s funny. It’s the same thing that the federal government is saying about the immigration laws. I can’t wait until I get my form with the choices of laws that I get to ignore.

Cindy Munford on June 8, 2010 at 1:15 PM

The tuition is $48,000 a year at St. Paul’s School. lol! You gotta love libs. Does calling someone with red hair “red” make me a gingerist?

bloggless on June 8, 2010 at 1:59 PM

I am not arguing about this specific party. I just don’t think that the federal government should be mandating the drinking age, that is why it now 21 in all fifty states. You can enter into contracts, vote, get married, join the military, drive a car, get an abortion, but you can’t have a beer or glass of wine with your parents.

SC.Charlie on June 8, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Agreed, the sale of alcohol to a customer is not interstate commerce. The sale to a retailer maybe, but you have to really stretch the meaning of the word to get it to qualify as interstate commerce.

Let the states decide.

Tim Burton on June 8, 2010 at 2:37 PM

Now what could a couple of 50 year old professors do with oh 35? drunken teen girls.
hehehe.
Gingerist? perfect.

docjohn52 on June 8, 2010 at 2:42 PM

The reasoning behind making the drinking age 21 rather than 18 is the social proximity of 18 year olds to 15,16, and 16 year olds versus that of someone who’s 21. At 18 a good number of your peers may be 16 or 17, even younger, as a good chunk of high school seniors turn 18 during the school year. 18 are also still very immature for the most part. Heck, now adays it seems many 21 year olds are as well, and even some 40 year olds haven’t matured beyond the “me first”, “if it feels good do it” and “social responsibility smmocial responsibility, I don’t care” myopic mindset of the average teenager.

Booze is still a very destructive force in our society, and I’m no teetotaler, I like my Guinness, and even a good single malt from time to time. But just because I enjoy something doesn’t mean I have to bury my head in the sand as to the enormous social cost that something has had, both in lives lost/ruined, and financial impacts.

flyfishingdad on June 8, 2010 at 3:01 PM

What the hell is going on here? First the beer pong non-scandal and now handwringing over 18 year olds having a beer? I’m willing to bet the majority here had a drink before they were 21 and they turned out okay. Most of them, anyway. Is Hot Air angling for Reason’s Nanny of the Month award? Because, I’m telling you, it’s not that fancy of a feather in your cap.

Whiskey Rebel on June 8, 2010 at 3:13 PM

And by underage drinking, I assume that you mean 18-year olds. Right?

You probably are, except for those pesky 17 year old graduates, like myself, and anyone else born in the summer.

MNHawk on June 8, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Personally, I don’t thin it is any of the government’s business to regulate drinking ages. That is a family matter. Kids are going to drink anyway and many parents try to make it safer by having parties where they can monitor it.

Does it always work? No. Too bad, that’s life and personal responsibility. Vice laws should be unconstitutional. Let’s just cut all government back by 80 -85% and take back our right to live free of government interference.

woodNfish on June 8, 2010 at 3:45 PM

My friends and I were able to drink legally at 18, and most of us think the current age is kind of silly and makes the kids drink in secret, which can be more dangerous. We got our seniors through the big parties safely with no incidents. YMMV.

juliesa on June 8, 2010 at 12:37 PM

I don’t agree with the law, so breaking it is okay.

Isn’t that the same argument that the illegals use?

John Deaux on June 8, 2010 at 3:58 PM

Wait – was the princess an Indian, Indian or a Native American? It’s an important distinction, you know.

Queen0fCups on June 8, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Boyd, a psychiatrist

This guy who doesn’t know what is happening in his own home under his own nose as he tells police is teaching Harvard students how to heal a person’s brain? Oy Vey! Hope those parents and society feel they’re getting their moneys worth.

Sultry Beauty on June 8, 2010 at 4:42 PM

I don’t agree with the law, so breaking it is okay.
Isn’t that the same argument that the illegals use?
John Deaux on June 8, 2010 at 3:58 PM

Do you really think that the all laws are comparable? Frankly, I think we spend more time enforcing the drinking age laws than our immigration laws, which is sad. Also, I think the organization MADD has become too powerful.

SC.Charlie on June 8, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Breaking news: Upon hearing of the disgraceful conduct of the police, President Obama declared that the police once again acted stupidly and is preparing for Beer Summit.

A spokesperson for the teens at the party was heard to respond “Woot! Kegger!”

malclave on June 8, 2010 at 5:15 PM

You can enter into contracts, vote, get married, join the military, drive a car, get an abortion, but you can’t have a beer or glass of wine with your parents.

SC.Charlie on June 8, 2010 at 12:02 PM

–You can have a glass of beer or wine with your parents in at least a few states. This law by Connecticut allows that, and so do laws in Texas and Wisconsin (and possibly other states).

Jimbo3 on June 8, 2010 at 5:21 PM

Forgive these dear lads and lasses. John Kerry was the speaker at their commencement. They were just trying to forget.

tessa on June 8, 2010 at 9:59 AM

St. Paul’s is Monsieur Kerri’s alma mater.

Del Dolemonte on June 8, 2010 at 5:41 PM

typical Lib, when in trouble with the law, make up stuff about the racist cops. This is Concord, Mass, not Starkville, Miss. Spare me the stores about the “racist” cops. See Professor Gates and the Cambridge police. This guy is trying the same tactic.

pgrossjr on June 8, 2010 at 7:07 PM

The police acted stupidly. I am Barack Obama and I support this ad.

retiredeagle on June 8, 2010 at 8:55 PM

The police have no business arresting anyone for drinking beer or anything else short of paint thinner. The law doesn’t get to define someone as only having certain rights and not others. If someone has reached the age of majority then that person has all of the rights (and responsibilities) that go along with that status. When the government plays favorites and defines some people as more equal than others, all of us are made less free.

You can thank MADD for this nonsense. Rather than punish drunk drivers, they lobbied the feds to punish teenagers. The end result was a ZERO percent decrease in the rate of drunk driving and the creation of an entirely new class of “criminals” where no “crime” had previously existed.

I’m 37 years old by the way, and a dedicated libertarian.

leereyno on June 8, 2010 at 9:39 PM

This is Concord, Mass, not Starkville, Miss. Spare me the stores about the “racist” cops. See Professor Gates and the Cambridge police. This guy is trying the same tactic.

pgrossjr on June 8, 2010 at 7:07 PM

Wrong Concord…St. Paul’s School is in Concord New Hampshire. As I note in an earlier post it’s Jeanne-Claude Kerri’s preppie alma mater.

Del Dolemonte on June 8, 2010 at 11:00 PM

Reminds me of the lefts Bush accusations that “Bush lied about going to war in Iraq”. If GW Bush, as the left claimed, was the dumbest president ever, HOW DOES “THE SMARTEST ADMINISTATION IN HISTORY” GET OUTSMARTED?

Answer: The left really are IDIOTS and believe in unicorns and rainbows as a result of appeasment to all oppressors. They are getting exposed by the new media and using their own words against them.

dthorny on June 9, 2010 at 2:45 AM

Times sure have changed . Back in my day as a cop we would just order the party goers to disburse and give one of the drunk females that looked to be a legal age a ride home . Homeish . Sure most cops were gay then too , not that there is anything wrong with that .

borntoraisehogs on June 9, 2010 at 3:11 AM

Weare is indeed in NH; story is from NH Union Leader, and
St Paul’s School is in Concord NH and has John Kerry as an alumnus.

raccoonradio on June 9, 2010 at 11:21 AM

NH Union Leader : WEARE – Police yesterday told quite a different story from what the two Harvard University professors said after being charged with facilitating a high school weekend booze bash that resulted in 70 students being detained by police.

When asked how much alcohol was at the party, Weare police Lt. Jim Carney replied, “You’d probably need a dump truck to get it out of there. We confiscated 20 or 30 cases (of beer) from the vehicles. That’s a small amount compared to what was at the house.”

Police said mostly beer and some hard liquor was found. Officers did not find illegal drugs. Numerous garbage bags and pizza boxes were piled in front of the home yesterday.

raccoonradio on June 9, 2010 at 11:47 AM

One has to think that people become Harvard professors by having a certain amount of native intellect,

Why?

Slowburn on June 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM

Boyd, a psychiatrist…

Well, that explains it.

SukieTawdry on June 9, 2010 at 6:44 PM

You can thank MADD for this nonsense. Rather than punish drunk drivers, they lobbied the feds to punish teenagers. The end result was a ZERO percent decrease in the rate of drunk driving and the creation of an entirely new class of “criminals” where no “crime” had previously existed. leereyno on June 8, 2010 at 9:39 PM

Okay let me try and wrap my mind around this one, one of my good friends Lance Corporal Jake Turbett, USMC can:
go off and enlist at the age of 18,
propose to and marry his wife at 19

and then die in arms of his buddies in some hell hole in Helmand Province, Afghanistan at the age of 20 but CAN’T EVER LEGALLY HAVE A BEER?!

Please tell me how this is right?

LCPL Jake Turbett,USMC
KIA 14 FEB 10-OEF
RIP

P.S. I’m 23 going on 24 years old and have yet to drink a drop of alcohol. I just think the law is a “ginormous ass” as a previous poster wrote. And used the story of my friend to illustrate it. Finally he is interred at Arlington National Cemetery, Plot 37 if anyone wants to truly be a jerk and try to “verify” my story.

SgtSVJones on June 9, 2010 at 10:05 PM

Comment pages: 1 2