MSU Trustee tried to reveal names of young sex abuse victims

[Meddle]

What are they hiding and why are they being allowed to get away with it?

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/artic...tied-to-nassar

[Meddle]

Apparently they get away with it because nobody cares enough to challenge them.

[Honky Tonk]

What are they hiding and why are they being allowed to get away with it?

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/artic...tied-to-nassar

Something is starting to smell funny in Lansing

[Atticus]

What are they hiding and why are they being allowed to get away with it?

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/artic...tied-to-nassar

Who said they are hiding something? Oh, that’s right, someone trying to generate some publicity implied they might be hiding something.

Well, Dan Gilbert went to MSU and Bedrock hasn’t [[to my knowledge) released any findings on the Nassar case, so clearly they are hiding something. In fact, the City of Detroit hasn’t released any documents either, and they employ some MSU grads as well. Must be a cover up.

I get it, failing media sources need clicks from suckers to stay in business. Thanks for helping their cause.

[Honky Tonk]

I get it,

Obviously not.

[Meddle]

Who said they are hiding something?

Didn't read the linked article did you?

[Meddle]

A few more:

https://www.freep.com/story/news/202...ag/6996628002/

https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/...ds/6974579002/

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...investigation/

https://www.wilx.com/2021/03/26/msu-...sar-documents/



Yes, there may be some overlap.

[Atticus]

A few more:

https://www.freep.com/story/news/202...ag/6996628002/

https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/...ds/6974579002/

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...investigation/

https://www.wilx.com/2021/03/26/msu-...sar-documents/



Yes, there may be some overlap.

It pained me, but I actually read all four of your links. Not one of the four said what was being hidden by these documents... nothing. Worse, there was no context for why an institution would choose to withhold them. Just unproven and implied misdoings. Piss poor journalism, but that is the norm these days [[for conservative and liberal “news” sources alike).

So to provide you some actual context, which all of the rags you linked failed to do, let’s talk about the types of documents that are typically protected by attorney-client privilege in large scale lawsuits like this.

Obviously bad things happened, and MSU was going to be forced to pay hundreds of millions in settlements. In such situations, the attorneys and institutions will always privately discuss several different legal strategies and contemplate different ways to best defend themselves to minimize the settlement. For instance, scenarios like to just admit guilt on some aspects [[when maybe you are not truly guilty) to get it over with quicker, or how much effort to spend in court against victims who were raped [[who have their own lawyers trying to maximize the settlement $ on their end), etc. Discussing those scenarios is not hiding something, but rather figuring out how to best defend yourself financially. If you were sued, I hope you would discuss legal strategies with your lawyers too. These documents very likely pertain to strategies implemented to minimize the legal settlement, and probably have nothing to do with covering up for some one.

Such constitutionally protected private discussions are very routine. And these discussions, if made public, could very easily be taken out of context to make the situation seem worse. For instance, if a newspaper got a hold of an “admitting guilt scenario” that was decided not be pursued, that could easily be falsely spun into “see, XYZ was guilty as shown here and no action was taken”.

It would be idiotic for MSU to share those documents. And that is why they are not, because the legal and political whiplash for doing so is far worse than the false look of impropriety being sold in the rags you linked.

And finally, look who is requesting them, Dana Nessel, a political figure. If you think any attorney general, liberal or conservative, wouldn’t take out-of-context quotes from that document, and spin them in ways to make themselves look good, I have some swamp land to sell you. Dana could use one of those discussions to open another investigation, and try and make her look good, even though there is nothing there.

You are being manipulated. And if you don’t believe me, ask any of your friends that you may have in the legal field why sharing attorneys-client privilege discussions is almost always a bad idea. The fact MSU didn’t isn’t likely because they are hiding something, but rather because they simply don’t want to pay out more $ in court cases.

[Meddle]

but rather figuring out how to best defend yourself financially.

Like I asked .... what are they hiding?

If there was nothing to hide there would be no need to figure out how to defend.

[Atticus]

Like I asked .... what are they hiding?

If there was nothing to hide there would be no need to figure out how to defend.

Did you even read my post? You would have found both answers if you did. Maybe it was over your head.

Let’s start with the basics. In law, there is criminal court and civil court. Criminal court is what put Nassar behind bars for life for the crimes he committed. Civil court is what is used to decide how much MSU needed pay [[how many hundreds of million $)in settlements to the survivors. To be protected from future civil court cases, there are hundreds of millions [[think dollar figures) of reasons why MSU would want to keep conversations with their lawyers private. This is mostly about financial payouts, and the games lawyers play on both sides.

The remainder deals with third unofficial court of public opinion. This is where Nessel is involved. She was trying to make herself look good by using a legal nothing burger and making herself sound like someone who is doing something. The local papers bought her hook, line, and sinker... and picked up some advertising dollar clicks in the process. Nessel is good at making herself look involved in fake cases, and that essentially is what this is.

One last piece of legal advice. If you ever get pulled over and an officer wants to inspect your car without a warrant, say no. You have nothing gain, even if you have nothing to hide. You never know what the officer might find and construe, again even if you have nothing to hide.

[Meddle]

Civil court is what is used to decide how much MSU needed pay [[how many hundreds of million $)in settlements to the survivors. To be protected from future civil court cases, there are hundreds of millions [[think dollar figures) of reasons why MSU would want to keep conversations with their lawyers private. This is mostly about financial payouts, and the games lawyers play on both sides.

So, what are they hiding?

[EastsideAl]

If it's a "nothing burger" then why is MSU hiding what they know from the state? How the hell do you know it's a "nothing burger" since MSU refuses to reveal the key information? And why in the world are you taking MSU's side, the side of an institution that shielded a serial abuser, here?

[Atticus]

If it's a "nothing burger" then why is MSU hiding what they know from the state? How the hell do you know it's a "nothing burger" since MSU refuses to reveal the key information? And why in the world are you taking MSU's side, the side of an institution that shielded a serial abuser, here?

I am against piss poor journalism, which is what this basically is. Clearly you and another poster fell for it, judging by your question of “why are you taking MSU’s side?”. That means these articles convinced you that MSU is clearly doing something wrong. They did something wrong by employing Nassar. They didn’t do anything wrong by not turning over Attorney-Client privileges documents.

As someone who has been involved in enough legal cases like this, the situation is painfully obvious what is happening. No, I don’t blame MSU one bit for not sharing their attorney-client privileges. Nor would any Attorney if they are truly being honest. But notice how the piss poor journalist who wrote the article didn’t even bother to reach out to any attorney, and pose that simple question of why would an organization not share those documents?

I can’t recall one case, ever, that I have been involved with where attorney-client privilege documents were voluntarily made public. None. You would think that bit of contextual information [[ i.e. informing the reader that attorney-client privilege is generally never made public, and the reasons why ) would be present in the article. It certainly would make the articles far more balanced. But if that context is left off, it creates a juicier narrative, even if it means the reader is misled to a false conclusion.

The authors goal is to trick you into believing something nefarious is occurring. Clearly it worked. The practice of document withholding for attorney-client privilege is very common place, and yes a giant legal nothing burger. You can re-read my earlier post or do a simple Google search to figure out the reasons why it is so common. But if you just want to manipulated into false reasonings, read the Freep and News.

They figured out a long time ago that false narratives make far more clickworthy stories than boring truths.

[Baselinepunk]

I am against piss poor journalism, which is what this basically is. Clearly you and another poster fell for it, judging by your question of “why are you taking MSU’s side?”. That means these articles convinced you that MSU is clearly doing something wrong. They did something wrong by employing Nassar. They didn’t do anything wrong by not turning over Attorney-Client privileges documents.

As someone who has been involved in enough legal cases like this, the situation is painfully obvious what is happening. No, I don’t blame MSU one bit for not sharing their attorney-client privileges. Nor would any Attorney if they are truly being honest. But notice how the piss poor journalist who wrote the article didn’t even bother to reach out to any attorney, and pose that simple question of why would an organization not share those documents?

I can’t recall one case, ever, that I have been involved with where attorney-client privilege documents were voluntarily made public. None. You would think that bit of contextual information [[ i.e. informing the reader that attorney-client privilege is generally never made public, and the reasons why ) would be present in the article. It certainly would make the articles far more balanced. But if that context is left off, it creates a juicier narrative, even if it means the reader is misled to a false conclusion.

The authors goal is to trick you into believing something nefarious is occurring. Clearly it worked. The practice of document withholding for attorney-client privilege is very common place, and yes a giant legal nothing burger. You can re-read my earlier post or do a simple Google search to figure out the reasons why it is so common. But if you just want to manipulated into false reasonings, read the Freep and News.

They figured out a long time ago that false narratives make far more clickworthy stories than boring truths.

Half-assed journalism has been the gold standard for decades.

Bullshit sells more than the truth.

[EastsideAl]

The only way this is problematic is that it doesn't tell the whole story. The fact is that the MSU trustees themselves asked for the state investigation since the university's own internal investigation was so clearly inadequate. But once the state investigation began to probe into the Board of Trustees itself, and the inadequacies of their actions [[or the facts of their inactions) in addressing and potentially enabling the Nassar situation, suddenly thousands of documents, including the findings of the internal investigation, were declared subject to attorney-client privilege by the MSU board.

Attorney-client privilege is generally very narrowly construed, and should not cover finding of facts, but that's basically how MSU has now chosen to use it. It is pretty damn clear that they are engaging in a gross expansion of "privilege" as a cover to keep hidden some facts they do not want to have revealed, and thus to scuttle an official investigation by the state government they exist under. An investigation that they requested in the first place in order to bring the truth to light, until that truth grew a little too close for comfort.