By Greg Forester, Staff Writer
Conflicting alcohol policies that could have life-or-death implications for Princeton University students are the subject of talks between officials from the school and Princeton Borough as the two sides continue to fight high-risk drinking.
Of particular importance to members of the student body is the need to reconcile borough ordinances that prohibit providing alcohol to minors and other infractions with the school’s medical assistance policy, which states that students who seek medical attention for themselves or another intoxicated person will not face alcohol-related disciplinary charges.
The policy is meant to eliminate hesitation or reluctance to seek for potentially lifesaving treatment because of fear of disciplinary ramifications, according to university spokeswoman Cass Cliatt.
”The policy is central to the university’s commitment to our belief that there should be no disincentive in calling on behalf of another person,” said Ms. Cliatt, who noted the policy does not conflict with state law and does not affect the legal process. “There should be no hesitation or second-guessing.”
Yet students believe disincentives remain as long as they face legal consequences in cases involving borough police.
Police charge students out of a responsibility to uphold borough ordinances and other law, said Lt. David Dudeck.
The department considers its enforcement of underage drinking infractions and other laws central to the borough’s attempt to rein in high-risk drinking, he said.
”We’re both trying to combat underage drinking in a way that is best for the students and to try to prevent someone from getting seriously injured or dying,” said Lt. Dudeck. “The attempt here is to slow this down, to make them more aware.”
Borough police and their enforcement of drinking laws in incidents normally falling under the medical assistance policy continues to be a burning issue on campus.
Connor Diemand-Yauman, the student government president-elect who is involved in the dialogue on drinking, has personal experience with the issue. He is fighting a charge of providing alcohol to minors that stems from an incident in which Mr. Diemand-Yauman called university Public Safety for help with an intoxicated friend.
The friend, who was consuming alcohol at Mr. Diemand-Yauman’s residence, became intoxicated.
Mr. Diemand-Yauman called for assistance without hesitation, aware of the university rules. After responding Public Safety officers called for an ambulance, Mr. Diemand-Yauman told his friends to be “forthcoming and as honest as possible” with Public Safety personnel who investigated the incident.
”I really trusted the system, and I thought we didn’t do anything wrong,” said Mr. Diemand-Yauman, 20. “I was proud of how we responded.”
However, a week after the incident, he was contacted by a borough detective, he said, then he received notice he was to be charged with providing alcohol to minors for his involvement in the incident.
As he fights the charge, addressing the alcohol policy issue has become a top priority for Mr. Diemand-Yauman.
He believes the student body was fully aware of the conflicting policy, and legal ramifications mitigated some of the medical assistance policy’s benefits.
School officials elsewhere in Mercer County are struggling with similar conflicts.
Rider University adopted a policy similar to Princeton’s out of the concern that erupted following the death of Gary DeVercelly, an 18-year-old student who died in March of 2007 after consuming a bottle of vodka at a fraternity house. That death — which followed the alcohol-related death of College of New Jersey student John Fiocco Jr. in March of 2006 — led to the development of a task force on alcohol and student life.
The task force provided the impetus for a “good Samaritan policy” similar to Princeton’s medical assistance policy, according to Daniel Higgins, Rider’s executive director of university communications.
”We want everyone to know that safety comes first, and that they should not be worrying about consequences from the school when someone’s health is at issue,” said Mr. Higgins. “They need to make that phone call.”
The Lawrence Township Police Department, which frequently responds to calls involving Rider University students, has taken a similar position on Rider alcohol infractions. Chief Dan Posluszny confirmed that, like Princeton University, Rider officials had engaged in a dialogue with township officials regarding alcohol and the good Samaritan policy.
However, the talks had not resulted in amended policies in Lawrence, according to Chief Posluszny.
Chief Posluszny said supporting relaxed enforcement or providing amnesty is “a difficult argument to make” in light of serious problems with high-risk drinking.
Like police in Princeton, Lawrence police have a responsibility to enforce ordinances against underage drinking, said Lt. Charles Edgar.
”When young persons drink to the point of losing consciousness, it needs to be dealt with according to the law,” he said. “We have an ordinance against (underage drinking), and it’s a serious situation.”
Lt. Edgar — like other police interviewed by The Packet — said the well being of a human being trumped fear of legal consequences.
”They have an obligation as a human being to provide assistance and deal with any legal ramifications that occur afterwards,” Lt. Edgar said.

