Hazing Charges in Massachusetts Under G.L. c. 269, § 17

A fraternity member who forces pledges to drink, a team captain who paddles new players, and a club officer who keeps recruits awake all night can each face a hazing charge under G.L. c. 269, § 17. Massachusetts law defines hazing as any conduct or method of initiation into a student organization that willfully or recklessly endangers the physical or mental health of a student or any other person. The law applies on public and private property, on campus and off campus.

Hazing is a misdemeanor. A judge can sentence a person convicted as a principal organizer of hazing, or as a participant in hazing, to a fine of up to $3,000, up to one year in the house of correction, or both. The statute provides that consent is not a defense. A separate statute requires a person at the scene who knows that someone is a victim of hazing to report the hazing to law enforcement, and punishes a failure to report with a fine of up to $1,000. G.L. c. 269, §§ 17 and 18.

The police either arrest the person or apply for a criminal complaint. A person who is not arrested ordinarily receives a clerk-magistrate hearing before any complaint issues. G.L. c. 218, § 35A. A school or college can also discipline the student and the student organization under its own policies, whatever happens in court.

This page explains what the Commonwealth must prove, the failure-to-report offense, the other charges that can arise from the same conduct, the rules for high school students, the defenses, the possible outcomes, and the duties of schools and colleges. Attorney Joe Serpa has practiced Massachusetts criminal defense since 1995. He represents students accused of hazing at clerk-magistrate hearings, in the District Court and the Boston Municipal Court, and in the Juvenile Court.

What the Commonwealth Must Prove in a Hazing Case

The statute defines hazing as “any conduct or method of initiation into any student organization, whether on public or private property, which wilfully or recklessly endangers the physical or mental health of any student or other person.” G.L. c. 269, § 17. The Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was a principal organizer of hazing, as the statute defines it, or a participant in hazing.

The statute lists examples of hazing. The examples are whipping, beating, branding, forced calisthenics, exposure to the weather, and forced consumption of any food, liquor, beverage, drug, or other substance. The statute also covers any other brutal treatment or forced physical activity that is likely to harm a person’s physical health or safety, or that subjects a person to extreme mental stress, including extended deprivation of sleep or rest and extended isolation. G.L. c. 269, § 17.

The statute punishes conduct that endangers a person’s health. The Commonwealth does not have to prove that anyone was injured. The person whose health was endangered can be a student or any other person.

The statute applies to initiation into a student organization. The Appeals Court has held that the hazing statute applies to student organizations and not to a school itself. Perkins v. Commonwealth, 52 Mass. App. Ct. 175, 179. In Perkins, a State Police Academy cadet alleged that academy staff made her take part in physical training against a doctor’s advice and denied her enough water. The Appeals Court held that the academy was a school, not a student organization.

Consent and Hazing Charges

The hazing statute provides that consent is not a defense. G.L. c. 269, § 17. A defendant cannot defend a hazing charge by showing that the pledge or new member agreed to the activity, asked to take part, or volunteered for it. The Commonwealth does not have to prove that the pledge or new member resisted or objected.

The Appeals Court has also rejected the idea that hazing excuses an assault. In Commonwealth v. Taron T., 104 Mass. App. Ct. 219, a sixteen-year-old and two other students attacked three students in the freshman cabin at a high school soccer camp, using a broomstick. The juvenile was later adjudicated a youthful offender on charges of indecent assault and battery and assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon. He argued that the attack came from a culture of hazing in youth sports, not from sexual desire.

The Appeals Court stated that nothing in the statutes or case law suggests that hazing is a defense to assault and battery, and that hazing is itself a crime. The court also explained that the test for indecency is objective. The juvenile’s claim that he acted from a hazing motive therefore did not change whether his conduct was indecent.

Failure to Report Hazing

A person who knows that another person is the victim of hazing, and who is at the scene, must report the hazing to an appropriate law enforcement official as soon as reasonably practicable. G.L. c. 269, § 18. The duty applies only to the extent the person can report without danger or peril to the person or to others.

The statute requires a report to a law enforcement official. A report only to a coach, a dean, a resident assistant, or a team captain is not a report to a law enforcement official.

A judge can fine a person convicted of failing to report hazing up to $1,000. The statute does not allow a jail sentence. An employer, landlord, or licensing board that obtains a CORI report does not see a failure-to-report charge, because the CORI statute excludes offenses that are not punishable by incarceration. G.L. c. 6, § 167. The person’s own CORI report lists the charge, unless the record has been sealed or expunged.

Other Charges in Hazing Cases

The police can also apply for any of the following charges when the charge arises from the same conduct, alone or together with a hazing charge.

• Assault and battery under G.L. c. 265, § 13A, for hitting, paddling, or shoving a pledge or new member. A judge can sentence a person convicted of assault and battery to up to two and one-half years in the house of correction or a fine of up to $1,000.
• Assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon under G.L. c. 265, § 15A, when the conduct involves a paddle, a broomstick, or another object.
• Indecent assault and battery under G.L. c. 265, § 13H, when the conduct involves touching a private part of another person’s body.
• Furnishing alcohol to a person under 21 under G.L. c. 138, § 34, when members give alcohol to underage pledges on property the members own or control.
• Manslaughter under G.L. c. 265, § 13, when hazing causes a death.

Hazing Charges Against High School Students

The Juvenile Court hears a hazing charge against a student who was between 12 and 18 at the time of the conduct. Hazing is punishable by up to one year in the house of correction, so the first-offense rule for minor misdemeanors does not apply to hazing. The Juvenile Court can hear a hazing complaint against a child even when the complaint charges the child’s first offense. G.L. c. 119, § 52.

A failure-to-report charge is different, because § 18 punishes the offense only with a fine. The Juvenile Court cannot hear a first failure-to-report charge against a child between 12 and 18. G.L. c. 119, § 52. The firm’s page on juvenile delinquency defense explains the first-offense rule and how a case proceeds in the Juvenile Court.

CORI does not include an offense a person committed before turning 18, unless a court tried the person as an adult. G.L. c. 6, § 167. A high school can still discipline the student under the school’s hazing policy, which the school must adopt under G.L. c. 269, § 19.

How a Hazing Case Begins

A hazing investigation can begin with a report from a student, a parent, a hospital, or a school. Campus police and city police can investigate the same incident the school is investigating. School investigators can collect written statements, interview notes, and group chat screenshots that the police can later obtain.

A student who is asked to give a statement to the police or to a school investigator should speak with a lawyer first. The Commonwealth can use a statement the student gives in a school proceeding as evidence in a criminal case. The firm’s page on what to do when under criminal investigation explains the first steps.

A person who is not under arrest for a misdemeanor such as hazing ordinarily receives notice and a clerk-magistrate hearing before the court issues any complaint. G.L. c. 218, § 35A. At a clerk-magistrate hearing, the clerk-magistrate decides whether the application shows probable cause and whether to issue a complaint. A denial prevents a complaint and an arraignment from that application.

Defending a Hazing Charge

Counsel first examines the evidence on each element. The questions include whether the group is a student organization, whether the conduct was part of an initiation into the organization, whether the conduct endangered anyone’s physical or mental health, and whether the defendant organized or took part in the conduct rather than only being present.

Group chats, text messages, photos, and videos can be the central evidence in a hazing case. The police usually need a warrant to search a phone. The firm’s page on phone, computer, and digital device searches explains the warrant rules.

A defendant cannot rely on the consent of the pledge or new member. Counsel can still present evidence about what happened at the event, who planned it, and who took part.

Penalties and Case Outcomes

A judge can sentence a person convicted of hazing to a fine of up to $3,000, up to one year in the house of correction, or both. The statute sets no minimum sentence. G.L. c. 269, § 17.

A hazing case can end without a conviction. The clerk-magistrate can deny the complaint application. After arraignment, the district attorney’s office can enter a nolle prosequi, which ends the prosecution of the charge. A judge can dismiss the case, continue the case without a finding under G.L. c. 278, § 18, or place the defendant on pretrial probation. A judge or jury can find the defendant not guilty.

A judge can also treat a hazing charge as a civil infraction under G.L. c. 277, § 70C, unless the Commonwealth objects in writing. Section 70C excludes every offense in chapter 265 of the General Laws. A judge therefore cannot treat an assault and battery charge from the same incident as a civil infraction. The firm’s page on how to keep a criminal charge off your record explains the civil infraction motion.

A hazing conviction appears on the person’s Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI). A person convicted of hazing can ask the Commissioner of Probation to seal the record once three years have passed since the case ended. The person must have no new conviction during those three years. G.L. c. 276, § 100A. A person whose case was dismissed can ask a judge to seal the record. G.L. c. 276, § 100C.

Federal immigration law imposes its own consequences on a conviction or a continuance without a finding. A noncitizen charged with hazing should have an immigration lawyer review any proposed plea or admission before accepting it.

School and College Duties Under the Hazing Law

Every secondary school and every public and private college in Massachusetts must give a copy of the hazing statutes to every student group, student team, and student organization that is part of the school, is recognized by the school, uses the school’s name or facilities, or is known to the school as an unaffiliated group. Each group must give a copy to each member, pledge, and applicant for membership. The group’s designated officer must deliver an attested acknowledgment to the school every year. G.L. c. 269, § 19.

Each school must also give a copy of the statutes to every full-time student at enrollment and adopt a disciplinary policy for the organizers of and participants in hazing. Each school must file a yearly report certifying its compliance with the Board of Higher Education or, for a secondary school, the Board of Education. G.L. c. 269, § 19.

A college can discipline a student, and can suspend or withdraw its recognition of a student organization, under the college’s hazing policy, whatever happens in the criminal case. The firm’s page on college and university student criminal defense explains how a student can coordinate the court case with the school proceeding.

The federal Stop Campus Hazing Act requires a college that participates in federal student aid programs to include hazing incidents in its annual security report. The college must also publish a report of each finding that a student organization violated the college’s hazing policy. The published report names the organization and leaves out the names of individual students.

Speaking With Attorney Serpa

A student or parent who learns of a hazing investigation should speak with a lawyer before the student gives a statement to the police, a coach, or the school. Counsel can address the criminal case, the school proceeding, and any immigration or graduate school question at the same time. For a free and confidential consultation, call 617.936.0201. The Boston office is at 20 Park Plaza, Suite 400A. The Quincy office is at 500 Victory Road, Suite 400A.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Serpa Law Office Resources

• Minor in Possession of Alcohol in Massachusetts Under G.L. c. 138, § 34C
• Furnishing Alcohol to a Minor in Massachusetts Under G.L. c. 138, § 34
• Assault and Battery Charges in Massachusetts Under G.L. c. 265, § 13A
• Assault With a Dangerous Weapon and Assault and Battery With a Dangerous Weapon in Massachusetts
• Charged With Indecent Assault and Battery in Massachusetts: Defenses, Penalties, and the Sex Offender Registry
• College and University Student Criminal Defense Lawyer: Boston and Cambridge
• Massachusetts Student Criminal Defense FAQs
• What to Do When Your Child Is Arrested or Charged in Massachusetts: Juvenile Delinquency and Youthful Offender Defense
• Massachusetts Clerk-Magistrate Hearing Lawyer
• What to Do When Under Criminal Investigation in Massachusetts Before Charges Are Filed
• Phone, Computer, and Digital Device Searches in Massachusetts
• Who Sees a Massachusetts Criminal Record
• Massachusetts Criminal Charges Defense