Well I Guess
Their Alcohol
Levels Were
Jumping
Around!
Case 5:
Drinking and
Vandalism
Jeffrey Cowart
Patrick Gentile
Jacob Thomas
Tyler Huey
Relevant Facts
4
teenagers: Michael Kralek, Yvonne
Auclaire, Steve Haines, and Jodi Porter
went to the Bixby Frog Festival with the
intention of drinking.
 The salesmen at the beer stands were not
told to check for IDs.
 The teenagers spent the day getting
drunk and playing on the beach until
Yvonne cut her foot.
Relevant Facts
 Michael
convinced the group to break
into a cabin for a bandage.
 The group started to rough house in the
cabin and destroyed the interior.
 The family that owned the cabin, the
Browns, came three days later and found
the cabin destroyed.
 They ended up paying $10,000 for repairs.
Relevant Facts
 Eye
witness accounts placed the
teenagers at the scene.
 Each teenager was given a $400 fine and
80 hours of community service.
 The Browns also sued the festival planning
committee for not checking the IDs at the
beer stands.
Testimonies


Bill Brown(cabin owner)- He and his wife
returned on July 24 and found it ruined. All
their furniture was ruined and smashed and
the vomit left a terrible odor. The break-in left
them feeling extremely violated.
Patricia Kralek(Michael’s mother)- She agreed
to let Michael go to the festival because she
didn’t know they would be drinking. She is
confused as to why they didn’t have a system
for checking IDs.
Testimonies


Ed Rice(beer stand vendor)- He worked at
Allen’s Liquor Store and was paid to work at
the festival. Mr. Allen was the head of the
festival planning committee and didn’t tell
them to check for IDs although they do at the
store.
Cheryl Knotts(member of the planning
committee)- There had been incidents in the
past with teens getting drunk and vandalizing
property, however they decided to drop the
subject at their meetings.
Testimonies


Jonathan Allen(chair of the planning
committee)- They decided that for the sake
of profit, they wouldn’t rope off areas for
drinking and wouldn’t check for IDs because
it would be too difficult. He made a profit off
the beer stands and isn’t ashamed of what
the teenagers did.
The four teenagers’ testimonies(since they
were all the same)- No one at the festival
asked for their IDs. None of them had ever
vandalized anything until they were under the
influence.
Additional Facts
 Two
out of the four teenagers said that it
was Michael who convinced them to do
things they wouldn’t normally do, such as
breaking into the cabin and stealing
alcohol once inside. The vendors at the
beer stands weren't told to check for IDs
and the planning committee didn’t make
strict rules pertaining to alcohol, even
though there had been incidents in the
past.
Cases Used in Court


Jones vs Anytown Raceway- “In order to sue
someone for negligence the plaintiff must
prove the defendant had a responsibility they
had to meet.” The festival planning
committee had a responsibility to check for
IDs at the festival.
Hacker vs Anytown American Legion- “When
an intoxicated person causes harm to
somebody else after consuming alcohol
illegally, it is the sellers’ responsibility.” Should
the owners of the beer stands be held
responsible for what happened?
Cases Used in Court
 Splett
vs Wheeler- “An alcohol seller is not
responsible for an injury because one
person was sold alcohol and happened
to cause the injury. There must be a
connection between the sale, the
consumption, and the injury.” This case
states that if the teenagers had bought
the alcohol but did not drink it and
caused the damage, the vendors
wouldn’t be held responsible.
Cases Used in Court


Holly vs Anytown Hotel- “The defendant being
sued for negligence does not need to know about
how they could cause an accident, but they
should know that there would be an accident.”
This shows that the teenagers knew that they took
a risk drinking, but they did it anyway.
Lu vs Lopez- “An accident is considered
foreseeable if the person of ordinary intelligence
could see that an accident was possible.” This
reinforces the fact that the teenagers knew what
they were doing and should be held responsible.
Laws Used in Court
 Anystate,
USA Statue- Person under 21;
illegal acts related to alcohol
 It is illegal for anyone who has a license to
sell liquor to anyone under the age of 21.
 It is illegal for anyone under 21 to drink
alcohol.
Laws Used in Court
 Anystate,
USA Statue: Civil Damages Act
 If someone suffers an injury by an
intoxicated person in any of the following
ways: bodily harm, property damages,
financial loss, and ability to work, the
person who suffered the injury can sue the
person who caused the intoxication
based in illegal sale of alcohol.
Other Relevant Info
 The
legal drinking age is 21.
 BAC for minors: 0-.02
 BAC for adult drivers: .08
What Should Happen?
 The
festival planning committee should be
held responsible. Even though the
teenagers did the vandalizing, it was their
responsibility to check the teenagers for
IDs and the failure to do so resulted in the
destruction of the cabin.
Audio