By Robin Riskin

Twenty-nine students with citations for underage drinking from Lloyd Around the World huddled by the doors of the Havertown District Court Wednesday morning, October 28.

Five Fords fought the case. They were all found guilty.

The conviction will stay on their records, though they can get it expunged when they are 21. In the meantime, they are planning on appealing, which must occur by November 27.

After the hearing, twenty-four students signed up for the diversion program. This clears their record once they complete 32 hours of community service, 12 hours of alcohol classes, and pay $290 in fines and fees. They also have the option to fulfill eight of their hours by spending $55 on canned goods for a food pantry for the hungry.

Two of the 31 given citations (27 Haverford, four Bryn Mawr) were not present, one Ford because of swine flu, one Mawrtyr because the police had written down the wrong address. These two have a hearing scheduled for November 16. Both plan on fighting the case.

Of the 29, several students—all of whom wished to remain anonymous to avoid a record of their citation—still had not made final decisions as of that Wednesday morning.

A male sophomore thought he would fight the case, but he changed his mind after the hearing and signed up for the diversion program. He said later, “Just being in the court made me realize how difficult it would be to fight. It’s basically going to be my word versus a policeman’s words, and I don’t think I’m going to win that fight.”

One junior thought that she would plead guilty and have the citation expunged when she turned 21 in one month. After the judge explained that there is a two to three year waitlist for pardons for those who pled guilty, she opted for the diversion program. She said it wasn’t worth the risk of having the citation on her record, since she might want to be a teacher.

One freshman is waiting to hear her outcome, since she received a second citation about a month later. Normally, the diversion program is a first-time offense option, but she said that since her two citations were so close together, they “might not weigh as much.” She has another hearing November 16.

Initially, Lacianca had said the trials of those who chose to fight the charges would occur at a later date, but she decided to hold them that same day as everyone was there.

Attorney Anna Durbin, who came to Haverford’s forum after the Lloyd incident, represented the students. Their trials were held individually, but they are thinking of appealing as a group. Durbin said that the two not present will likely have their cases combined with the others’.

Dean of Student Life Steve Watter stayed for the hearing and some of the trials “to provide moral support and to observe the proceedings,” he said in an email.

After the first two trials, Lacianca and Walter Omlor, Delaware County’s Director of Community Service, made one last offer for the rest to do the diversion program. One junior and one freshman accepted, leaving five to contest the charges.

The freshman and junior were guaranteed inside work, which is generally administrative and preferable to outside manual labor. Omlor said that the offer was an executive decision made when it was almost 2 p.m. and no one had had lunch.

The students waiting for their trials were sequestered in the hall and were not allowed to know the previous trials’ outcomes. However, one who took the offer said it was “pretty obvious” from their expressions when the first two students walked out that they had been found guilty. She might have stayed to fight if she thought her outcome would be better, but she said, “I just wanted it to be over.”

Unless they win the appeal, the five found guilty have their driving licenses suspended for 90 days and must complete 12 hours of alcohol classes. Justice Lacianca did not impose the optional addition of 64 community service hours, saying that the Pennsylvania penalty was enough.

Lacianca explained during the hearing that those found guilty would have to pay $423 in fines, although she did not mention a fine when she made her sentence.

The students thought that their case was strong, but not all of them expected to win that day. Their sights are set on the appeal. (One of the five was female, but for the sake of anonymity—to avoid a record of their citation, and so that what they say cannot be used against them in the appeal—they are all referred to here as "he.")

One student who pled not guilty said that Durbin told them the higher courts will be more receptive to their appeals. In the lower courts, he said, “they want to punish you, that’s what they do. Our lawyer handed the judge a Supreme Court precedent that police can’t just come to a party and detain everyone, and then figure out who’s innocent or guilty, and the judge ignored it.”

He said, “I mean, this judge, obviously, if she had been competent, she would have been promoted to a higher level.”

Still, the students were disappointed with the results.

“It made me feel like they didn’t care what I had to say,” said another student. “This is really extreme, but it made me feel like I don’t actually have rights, the judge will just listen to what the police say.”

This student had been on the fence, visibly upset that day and unsure until the last moment whether he would plead not guilty. He said that if the police had read him his rights, he probably would have taken the community service option. But he felt like his rights had been violated, and he wanted to fight for justice.

As for the trials themselves, there were variations in individual circumstances, but for all, Durbin had two main arguments.

One, that the students should not have been detained, since the officers did not have reasonable suspicion these individuals were drinking.

Two, that the evidence should be suppressed, since the students had not been read their Miranda Rights—which state that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say can and will be used against them, and that they have the right to an attorney. A Pennsylvania Supreme Court case has set the precedent for dismissing evidence from interrogations if students have not been informed of these rights.

For most of the students, the officers who wrote up their citations were there to testify against them. None had read the Miranda Rights themselves, but they all said they had heard Sergeant William La Torre read the rights to the students assembled as a group on Lloyd Green. The students, meanwhile, said that they had not heard their rights, and certainly had not heard them individually.

As to whether the students were drinking that night, the officers could not recall in the large crowd whom they had seen with red cups. They said that they’d only sat down students who were seen drinking; Durbin said they should have kept evidence, that they had no substantial proof. For three of the students, the officers said they’d smelled alcohol on their breath—but this was after they’d been detained, not before.

Most of these students had admitted to drinking on the night of Lloyd when the officers questioned them—though under coercion, Durbin pointed out. One had had a quarter of a cosmopolitan; another had a blood alcohol content of only 0.006, with a breathalyzer that had not necessarily been calibrated recently. Others had not been offered breathalyzer tests at all.

During a break between trials, Justice Lacianca commented, “The Haverford township and this court take underage drinking very seriously.”

In the meantime, a number of the students have already started their hours. They headed out to Media, PA at 7:30 am on Saturday, October 31. While other students were putting on Halloween costumes, they were shrugging on orange community service vests. Then they went back to Haverford, and their daily life resumed.

Related articles

• What the Cited Students Are Doing Now
• Criminal Defense Experts Offer Legal Perspective on Lloyd Raids
• An Overview of Student Rights: Was the Lloyd Raid Legal?
• Lower Merion Police accused by Mawrters of racism and misconduct in Perry House incident
• What Happens If You Are Arrested?
• State Police Cite 31 Students for Underage Drinking at Lloyd Around the World
• Perry House incident to be reviewed by LMPD
• Our Undefined Generation
• The great social experiment
• Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, the Debate, the Election