Moreover, subsection (a) (3) provides an exemption which precludes acts occurring in the course of “customary athletic events” from being defined as hazing and limits the application of the term hazing to acts “associated with the initiation into or affiliation with any organization.”
Because of the threats and seriousness of the injuries sustained, coupled with the pouring of alcohol down Bob Wright’s throat, it does not seem reasonable that such a course of events would be considered customary athletic events, and thus, immune from enforcement under the statute.
Because of these facts, no exemption can be applied to cause the battery committed by the team members to fall outside of the statutory definition of hazing. As such, when they did commit the battery on Bob Wright, a hazing did occur… Brian Rice, September 2018