So MIT should have had reasonable cause to believe that there was a risk of suicide should they decide to prosecute a case? And that makes them responsible? Is that a road we want to go down?
It is my belief that MIT as an institution should have a policy on the appropriate severity of response to actions such as Aaron's. They need to for the simple reason that they have made a conscious decision to choose to make themselves a natural lightning rod for this type of incident. Therefore they help set the bar for what an appropriate reaction should be.
My further belief is that if this policy is set in accord with the bulk of opinion of MIT students and alums, then we'd have had a different result in this case.
This does not mean that they should be held to be at legal fault for the suicide. However if you have even a passing familiarity with root cause analysis you'll know the value of habitually fixing systemic issues you identify which are several layers removed from the ultimate failure.
I am cautiously optimistic that Abelson's report will address this issue.
They brought in the feds. There is evidence that they asked the prosecutor to go hard on Aaron. But the prosecutor is not directly affiliated with MIT.
See http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/01/15/humanity-deficit... for the article.
AS, for all of whatever it was good that he brought the world, was mentally ill. For whatever reason, he did not receive the help that is freely available in our society. (There was a lot more available before Reagan cut it to shreds, so he could pass on big bucks to his rich cronies, but I digress...)
THAT is the true tragedy here. Depression is a totally, totally fucked up brain function anomaly. People who have not experienced it are simply clueless and should STFU. The REST of you: get help. Get Help - Now!