MSU Trustee tried to reveal names of young sex abuse victims

**downtowngarybrown** · February-18-18, 10:30 AM

Trustee Dan Kelly was elected in 2016.

"A Michigan State University trustee who pledged support for victims of sex abuse has opposed them repeatedly in courtrooms as a lawyer, a 7 Action News investigation has found.

Trustee Dan Kelly was elected to the board of trustees in 2016 as the Larry Nassar sex abuse scandal erupted. His university bio touts 25 years experience as an attorney representing school districts. In at least seven cases reviewed by 7 Action News, Kelly represented districts accused of failing to protect students from sex abuse."

https://www.wxyz.com/news/local-news...-them-in-court

**3WC** · February-18-18, 11:48 AM

Just keeps getting better doesn't it?

**EastsideAl** · February-19-18, 12:34 PM

All of this is so awful and tragic. Compounded by the fact that almost everything my dear alma mater, MSU, has done in response [[or non-response) has been terribly wrong-headed.

One thing that has become clear from this whole mess is that our method in this state of electing the boards of our major colleges, and thus using them as parking places for otherwise unwanted political hacks/contributors, is perhaps not the wisest method of governance.

**renf** · February-19-18, 01:07 PM

Will there be a movement to amend the Constitution and change how the trustees of the three large universities are selected?

**Atticus** · February-19-18, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by renf

Will there be a movement to amend the Constitution and change how the trustees of the three large universities are selected?

Change may happen in that regard, but it really won't accomplish anything. Just another wasted effort of time and money that doesn't solve anything.

Since it is Presidents Day, I will point out that there are many posters on this board who probably think a certain individual at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is also not appropriate for his position. And to keep it Bi-Partisan, I will also point out that others out there probably felt the same way about the previous commander-in-chief. So does that mean we should get rid of the elections altogether, because we are ending up with elected officials that people don't like?

Point being, if you think a person is unfit for a position, vote them out [[or don't vote them in to begin with). I fail to see how changing from an election to a "Governor Appointed" system [[or something else) really changes things.

And if we are really honest with ourselves about it, lets talk about today's system for how the BoTs are chosen at the three schools. Basically, every election people high up in the RNC and DNC put forth some names to run on the R and D tickets for the University Board positions. And since the only people that have a chance of winning have an R or D next to their name, the board is basically made up entirely of people chosen by the RNC and DNC leaderships.

Now imagine these positions were Governor appointed. In that case, it would then be a Republican or Democrat Governor who simply asked the RNC/DNC leadership "who should I pick?"... and voila you get the same people either way who make up these boards. Or even worse, the Governor could instead just pick one of their cronies or someone who donated a lot to their gubernatorial campaign. If nothing else, the current system is better because we get a mix of candidates from both parties, as opposed to just a board that is all Dems or all GOPs, depending on who is in power.

No, the election system isn't perfect. But it might be the least-bad solution. And the good news is, if you are appalled by the actions of the MSU BoT, the current system at least gives you the ability to vote them out of office.

**Scottathew** · February-19-18, 03:47 PM

Good analysis, Atticus.

I feel the big solution to many election woes is to implement instant run-off voting.

People could vote for who they really felt would do best, but then also still be able help pick between more popular candidates.

Basically, instant run-off voting allows people to vote third-party without penalty.

**Atticus** · February-19-18, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by downtowngarybrown

Trustee Dan Kelly was elected in 2016.

"A Michigan State University trustee who pledged support for victims of sex abuse has opposed them repeatedly in courtrooms as a lawyer, a 7 Action News investigation has found.

Trustee Dan Kelly was elected to the board of trustees in 2016 as the Larry Nassar sex abuse scandal erupted. His university bio touts 25 years experience as an attorney representing school districts. In at least seven cases reviewed by 7 Action News, Kelly represented districts accused of failing to protect students from sex abuse."

https://www.wxyz.com/news/local-news...-them-in-court

I am sorry, but stories like this are incredibly misleading, and frankly are just non-stories written to get clicks. I despise these articles, because stories like this give honest ammo to those who question the legitimacy of actual good media.

The problem is that everything in that article, while factually truthful, is not presented in full context and written in a way to make the reader believe something else. Kind of like someone saying "Its not like I would kill anyone", and then the media reporting that same person said "I would kill anyone". Technically true, but completely out of context.

In WXYZ article, it basically makes Kelly out to be a villain simply because as a lawyer he represented the "wrong side". Does that mean the lawyers who represented Larry Nassar were also bad people, because they too represented the wrong side? One of the great things about this country is that everyone, even monsters like Nassar, are entitled to a fair trial and proper representation. Which means as an attorney, sometimes it is your duty to represent the "wrong side". Unfortunately there has been a long history of the ignorant in this country harassing and threatening the very lawyers who are just doing their duty to ensure every person receives a fair trial, even a monster.

So yes, the school districts in those cases in the WXYZ article may have been on the wrong side, but just because Dan Kelley represented them in court doesn't mean he too should be cast as a villain. Shame on WXYZ for writing an article that basically implies otherwise.

**downtowngarybrown** · February-19-18, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Atticus

I am sorry, but stories like this are incredibly misleading, and frankly are just non-stories written to get clicks. I despise these articles, because stories like this give honest ammo to those who question the legitimacy of actual good media.

can't say i agree. given that the man is in charge of trying to fix the broken system that allowed a serial sex abuser to exist for 20 plus years, i think the fact that he has described child molestation as "very brief" and "on the outside of the clothes" and tried to name minor sex abuse victims is kind of relevant. at a minimum, i'd like to know that this is who we have on the board.

**archfan** · February-20-18, 01:59 AM

Atticus, one possibility is to make the BoT elections non-partisan, like we do for some judges. You still get party hacks running, but they don't get the extra endorsement [[or censure) of the D or R next to their name. You might occasionally get a 3rd party or independent elected, too.

**EGrant** · February-20-18, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by archfan

Atticus, one possibility is to make the BoT elections non-partisan, like we do for some judges. You still get party hacks running, but they don't get the extra endorsement [[or censure) of the D or R next to their name. You might occasionally get a 3rd party or independent elected, too.

Agree with this. How much does traditional party politics come into play on school boards?

**Atticus** · February-20-18, 08:08 AM

I agree a non-partisan election proposal may have merit. As EGrant mentioned, there is even less liberal/conservative politics in play with the BoTs, than with judges. So overall, this may be a better situation.

To be balanced, I also have to point out some drawbacks with that too. Low profile nonpartisan elections tend to elect people who have “better” last names. If your last name is Fitzgerald, or Kennedy, or something like that, you sound more official. The truth is, there are so many voters who don’t do their homework before voting, and when it comes to the lower profile elections where they know nothing about either candidate, they just vote whoever has an R or D [[depending on preference), or vote the most official sounding last name in the nonpartisan races. It is debatable, but arguably the RNC and DNC both have some minimum threshold a candidate needs to meet before being backed by that party, even for a BoT position.

It is interesting to consider the pros and cons of both sides. I will conclude though, and mention again that under the current system or the proposed non-partisan system, you are still afforded the opportunity to vote someone out in both cases. I think overall that is probably what is most important.

**aj3647** · February-20-18, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Atticus

Point being, if you think a person is unfit for a position, vote them out [[or don't vote them in to begin with). I fail to see how changing from an election to a "Governor Appointed" system [[or something else) really changes things.

Trustees are elected to eight year terms. EIGHT YEARS. That's twice as long as a Governor's terms and two years longer than a U.S. Senator. Which means those of us who are angry will have to wait the better part of a decade to "vote out" some of these trustees. That's unacceptable. It also insulates the trustees from their own terrible decisions, as voters typically have short memories.

At the very least, change it to four-year terms. It's bad enough I have to wait until 2020 to vote against that asshole Joel Ferguson.

**downtowngarybrown** · February-21-18, 08:40 PM

looks like nassar's victims don't want to wait until 2024.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...tee/110689790/

**Maof** · April-14-18, 01:41 PM

Never should've brought Engler in in the first place....he needs to go.

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/nassar...-1210580547659

**mikefmich** · April-14-18, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Maof

Never should've brought Engler in in the first place....he needs to go.

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/nassar...-1210580547659

He is a vile human being, the first politician I truly despised to the core. Of all the people to bring in.....

**EastsideAl** · April-15-18, 02:16 AM

The revolting mess at State just keeps getting worse and worse. The idiot board thought they could buy themselves some political cover with Engler. That wrong-headed idea has certainly backfired spectacularly. As an alum I cringed every time I received another "special message" email from president Engler, full of the worst kind of pollyannaish cheer against a background of a not-so-subtle attempt at defense of the indefensible.

**Zacha341** · April-15-18, 10:30 AM

Like yesterday. Bye!

Originally Posted by Maof

Never should've brought Engler in in the first place....he needs to go.

**Bham1982** · April-15-18, 11:37 AM

MSU needs to clean house.

Like anyone remotely associated with this sordid spectacle; certainly anyone who enabled this cover-up and intimidation of victims, needs to go, now.

**Atticus** · April-15-18, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

MSU needs to clean house.

Like anyone remotely associated with this sordid spectacle; certainly anyone who enabled this cover-up and intimidation of victims, needs to go, now.

Its a catch 22 though. MSU can't win because the Detroit papers stand to gain financially by creating a continuing narrative of wrong doings.

Ever since the Nassar trial, the FreePress and DetNews have both used FoxNews-style reporting, to create this big image of a cover up. It makes sense from a business standpoint, especially with both papers failing financially and instituting layoffs/buyouts constantly. So to generate more clicks, and thus ad revenue, they keep running stories that will generate clicks, sensationalized or not.

Earlier last week, we had one story about a former student who claimed she was offered no help... which of course is a story that will generate a bunch of clicks. And bypassing any form of balanced journalism, the story gets ran with nothing written telling the other side of the story. And then two days later, MSU basically refutes the whole thing providing very credible evidence to debunk most of the earlier claim. A good journalist would have taken the time to get both sides of the story before running something. But again, the financially struggling Detroit papers need the clicks for ad money, so ethics go out the window.

Back to the original point. Despite there being basically no evidence of a cover-up, the papers has basically created that false narrative through misleading stories. And now everyone believes there WAS a cover-up. This creates the catch-22 situation, in that MSU cannot fire or hold anyone accountable for the "cover-up" because it never happened. But people believe it happened, and so they are upset MSU is not holding someone accountable.

A man named Nassar did horrible things. He was convicted and is in jail for the rest of his life. His boss [[Strampel) was also a horrible individual, and will likely spend years in jail as well.... but despite all of the horrible things Strampel did, a Nassar cover up was not something he is being charged for, despite the media wanting you to believe otherwise.

Look, I am no Trump fan, and despise the tactics used by the Fox News reporting. But I am not going to be naive when the FreePress or Detroit News use the same play book, which is exactly what is happening here. Frankly, I find all of it disgusting.

**aj3647** · April-15-18, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by Atticus

Back to the original point. Despite there being basically no evidence of a cover-up, the papers has basically created that false narrative through misleading stories. And now everyone believes there WAS a cover-up. This creates the catch-22 situation, in that MSU cannot fire or hold anyone accountable for the "cover-up" because it never happened. But people believe it happened, and so they are upset MSU is not holding someone accountable.

MSU deliberately removed details that painted them in a negative light from the Title IX investigative report on Larry Nassar before sending it to the victims:

http://michiganradio.org/post/secret...use-victim-see

If you deliberately and purposefully attempt to hide or conceal information from people because it makes you look bad...that's a cover up.

**EGrant** · April-16-18, 09:02 AM

MSU probably also violated privacy law by revealing the details in their "rebuttal" to those News and Freep articles. Talk about throwing ethics out the window...

**EastsideAl** · April-17-18, 02:45 AM

Originally Posted by Atticus

Its a catch 22 though. MSU can't win because the Detroit papers stand to gain financially by creating a continuing narrative of wrong doings.

This claim seems to be the last refuge of the MSU-supporting diehards. Of course, as aj3647 points out, it just plain isn't true. But 'shoot the messenger' always seems to be a ready response to news people don't want to hear.

**Smirnoff** · April-17-18, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

MSU needs to clean house.

Like anyone remotely associated with this sordid spectacle; certainly anyone who enabled this cover-up and intimidation of victims, needs to go, now.

Go is a gift.....arrested is more appropriate.

**Maof** · June-22-18, 04:14 PM

https://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...ors/722323002/

And the board still wants him there? Get rid of them all!

**EastsideAl** · June-22-18, 06:06 PM

The situation at MSU is getting nothing but worse. Engler has turned out to be a terrible choice, just like I predicted he would. He was an execrable arrogant bully as governor, and now he's an execrable arrogant bully as MSU president.

Like most of my MSU graduate friends, I've told them loud and clear that the leadership and the trustees have brought nothing but shame and embarrassment to the institution. And that many will have to go, especially Engler, before they see another dime of my money.