The parents of a teenager believed to have supplied the vodka involved in King's College student James Webster's binge-drinking death have been labelled "bankrupt of any morality".
The uncle of 16-year-old James Webster - whose death reignited the debate over teenage binge-drinking - said the parents of the other teenager had hired a lawyer and were not speaking to the Webster family "just to save their kid's arse".
"They've got something to hide - I just don't know what it is," Donald Webster said.
He and James' parents, Charles and Penny Webster, have been investigating the teenager's death since he drank a third of a bottle of vodka at a birthday party in May and could not be roused in the morning.
They have decided not to name the teen who is understood to have supplied the liquor.
Desperate for answers, the Websters asked King's College headmaster Bradley Fenner to pass a message to the 17-year-old's family.
An email from a lawyer acting for the boy's family followed.
To say that we're gob-smacked by this is an understatement. It would be one thing for the 17-year-old himself to try to deny any liability for this tragedy, but what example are his parents setting?
Perhaps we're old-fashioned, but we strongly believe in the concept of parental responsibility. If this was one of our children involved, we would be taking action against them and we would be making them front up to the bereaved family and take accountability for their own actions. We certainly wouldn't be involved in an arse-covering execrcise where a lawyer is used as a firewall.
And we applaud John Banks for being one of the few to speak up on this issue, and to admit that his son had been involved in egging James Webster on. Banks has shown a level of humility which many may not have believed that he possessed, and has presonally taken responsibility for the conduct of his son, sans lawyers. Surely THAT is the kind of example that should be encouraged.
3 comments:
Don Webster is a lawyer.
That point isn't made in the piece. The underlying complaint is that the "supplier" is lawyered up. Well, so are the Webster's and other persons involved in this sad matter.
Banks had to front otherwise it would have been used by his politcal foes, and also becasue for a politician any opportunity to appear on TV is gold.
So I am rather cynical about the agendas behind this appearance and the whole exercise.
Oh, and by the way there is a coroners court hearing coming up.
That is the place where the facts of James' regrettable death can be established in a dispassionate formal setting, using sworn testimony rather than unsupported statements made through the media.
I remember the initial reports, of where this bottle of vodka came from, as the friend having stolen it from his recently deceased grandmother's liquor cabinet, without his parent's knowledge.
If that was the case, then pointing fingers and laying blame is far from constructive. I would think that those parents, as well as the friend, will suffer enough for the rest of their lives due to the guilt that they must be feeling.
If the parents, purchased a bottle of straight vodka, for a bunch of teenagers though, then i would be hiring a lawyer, and not saying much if i was them as well.
Kids that age are going to drink. It is a fact of life, and always has been. For as much criticism that so called "alcho - pops" or RTDs get in the media today, for targeting young people...i actually think they have a positive place in our drinking culture.
Our teenagers are going to drink. Give them a 4 pack of 5% vodka mixed with raro, over a bottle of straight vodka, any day.
In a perfect world, teenagers would not get drunk with their friends without their parent's knowledge...but we all know that is never going to happen.
A woman and her passive, submissive husband take their young children into a buffet restaurant with a bag to place under the table where all participated in filling with bacon for their breakfast the following day.
Then they wonder why they have to pick the kid up for shoplifting.
Post a Comment