Collegiate Times

I forgot to comment on the re-entry part. I totally agree with that policy. There should be no re-entry.

My previous comment stems from the fact that the people who denied her re-entry must have noticed she was intoxicated.

...or we could lay the blame on Morgan, where it belongs rather than looking for someone else to pin it on.

What happened to her was truly terrible, but her own actions put her in the situation that ultimately led to her death. She certainly didn't deserve to die, but I fail to understand why the security company should be held accountable for her recklessness. Should she have been reported? Maybe. But how does anyone know this for sure? Were you there?

As a society, it seems we are increasingly looking to point the finger at someone else when something is clearly your own fault. Why can't individuals just accept responsibility for their own (or their daughter's) actions?

She was hardly "a kid," and wristbands as you suggest would be about as effective as a ticket stub. It's pretty common practice for large events to not allow re-admission once you've entered. She paid for her ticket, left of her own accord, walking right by the sign at the door that said "no re-entry."

There is nobody at fault here but Morgan, as far as her being locked out of the concert is concerned. How can you possibly lay the blame at anyone else's feet here?

Huh? she was drunk so she deserved to die? And how do you know she was sober when she got in?

I'll write off your callousness to "youth" but you should be so lucky to avoid tragedies that could always be blamed on you because of your decisions. By your logic, all murders could be blamed on the decisions of the victim. Sheesh.

I missed the part where ANYONE said "she was drunk so she deserved to die."

I also missed the part which logically explained how the security company should be held responsible...but that's because there IS no logical explanation.

oh, maybe I should have asked exactly what "we must accept responsibility for our own actions and their consequences" means, instead of assuming that it was shorthand for "she decided to get drunk, and while drunk left the venue, so the consequence of that action is she was murdered...she must accept the consequences of her actions."

So what exactly does "we must accept responsibility for our own actions and their consequences" mean?

and a paper-composite wristband that cannot be removed without destroying it is infinitely more effective than an easily transferred ticket stub. Harm coming to a person that is locked out of a venue, alone and known to be drunk, is forseeable. That's where the company is logically responsible for the harm. It's the same responsibility imposed on police for taking custody of a person, then dropping them off in a dangerous section of town; it's forseeable they could be harmed. The security company refused readmittance of someone who's reasoning capacity and judgment was admittedly impaired. By taking that action, they can logically be held responsible for the forseeable harm to the person locked-out. Especially when the company's accepted responsibility was "security."

I'd like to see them blame the victim. A jury will hate them for it.

i don't think anybody is blaming morgan for her murder. obviously the blame would be on the murderer. the question is to what extent, if any, is the security company responsible for morgan being vulnerable at the time she went missing and did her vulnerability have anything to do with her going missing (maybe she saw somebody she knew, so she went with that person and consequentially this decision had something to do with her death). the other question to answer might be is a security company responsible for more than just maintaining order or do they have to keep a watchful eye out for potentially vulnerable people. finally, and i don't know if this is any part of it because it wasn't mentioned in the article, do people know where she was "taken"? i would think that if they can't prove that she was taken outside of the arena entry/exit points then it doesn't matter whether or not the entry policy was in place because that wouldn't have anything to do with whether or not she was taken... maybe she went downtown somewhere afterwards and then something happened?? i dunno just a thought.

Agreed on your variables. Maybe another variable that the parents are trying to get to, is the possible involvement of an employee of the security company in her disappearance. Of course, I'm just speculating based upon a stereotype that security employees sometimes don't have the most stellar records or there wasn't a sufficient background check. A civil suit gives them a pretty good investigative tool regardless of the merits of the claims.

very good point, if anything, maybe this case is simply a tool to life up a stalled investigation and in hopes of determining events that occured and people involved at or around the time she was last seen that have yet to unravel.

I believe in this statement: "we must accept responsibility for our own actions and their consequences." And I believe that, in this case, what was meant was something along the lines of "Morgan elected to go to JPJ for the concert, then elected to leave the facility, knowing she would not be readmitted." Accepting responsibility means accepting that she would not be able to get back into JPJ. The consequences are being stuck outside until her friends came out.

Incidentally, JPJ isn't exactly in the "hood." Being stuck outside there isn't exactly like being left on the south side of Chicago. But that's really irrelevant. She made the decision to drink, she made the decision to leave the venue. I wish she had stayed inside, but she didn't. Security did their job by not letting her back in. I don't see how they can be held accountable for her death as a result of following reasonable policy.

Also - use of paper composite wristbands is impractical for large venues. It is an easy thing to buy from a third party, provided you have the correct color, and place on your own arm. No re-admittance policies make sense in large venues, as they prevent ticket fraud.

Springsteen never had a secretary.

Really? You think Patti Scialfa was a singer?