Interim MSU Pres Engler triples down on protecting rape culture
This thread should be locked. It has nothing to do with Michigan sports. It immediately became political and will only continue to get worse in that sense.
The title and the original post were as about as inflammatory as it could get. And since then, the debate has been fairly measured.
Harvey Weinstein as director of media relations... lmfao. What a joke this all is.
Is your objection to the content of this speech or the forum being used to communincate it? You are asking the mods to make a difficult decision. Is this a public forum subject to the norms of reasonable disucussion or is it a private forum subject to a more stringent policy on discussing anything remotely political in nature?
I agree that this is skirting the no politics rule for this sports blog, but I feel very uncomfortable with the idea of censoring anything having to do with current events affecting the athletic programs of the institution we refer to as little brother. It seems relevant to me.
... superbly qualified for that job. MSU is lucky to get him.
I am not sure what you are driving at, with your Title IX compliance question. Over the course of many years, Title IX seems to have meant diddly squat at MSU. And Title IX earned U-M a big fat lawsuit in the Drew Sterrett case.
No; it is NOT a fact that Yound is at all "unfit." He's something of a legal superstar in the state of Michigan.
What the heck ARE "Young's views on sexual assaul and harassment in the workplace"? You seem to be talking about some personal views. Young's professional/considered/judicial views are in his opinions. And they are widely respected. Not by the plaintiff's bar, of course.
Engler, and Young, are primarily "divisive" because their long-time political enemies -- and there are quite a few -- want to make them divisive.
Yes, Young is particularly unsuited for any position within 100 miles of a Title IX office.
Why? Because his career would lead one to credibly doubt that he even believes in Title IX. Legally speaking, Young is the fox put in charge of the henhouse by Engler.
it should be noted that Young isn't in a vacuum here. Let's look at Engler's handling of the sexual assault/rape scandals in the state prision system. He fumbled that into the largest plantiff win in Michigan history. I think that fact makes it fair to say that Engler's judgement should not be accepted without question as you seem to be willing to do.
Again, I ask you. Which culture changing moves has Engler made up there?
One of the first things he did was fire Strampel. Nobody really knew why until about a week ago.
Also, Young doesn't have to believe in Title IX. He just has to be a competent lawyer. It's hardly the responsibility of a defendant in a lawsuit to hire someone who sympathizes with the plaintiffs. Anyone who did sympathize with the plaintiffs to the level demanded by the plaintiffs probably wouldn't come within 100 miles of MSU.
That is not Young's fucking job!!
He is "assisting the MSU Legal Team with the litigation resulting from Nassar’s misconduct." That's from the article that YOU posted. Did you read it?? In other words, he's helping their defense team defend them against all the lawsuits they face. He is NOT "reforming the department and rooting out incompetence and corruption."
Who the fuck do you think should defend them against the lawsuits, Gloria Steinem??
Direct quote:
Young’s opinion in the Brown case and other cases have some questioning his appointment as the lead counsel overseeing the multiple investigations and Title IX complaints involving allegations of sexual misconduct at MSU.
So, if you read this but didn't understand it - Young is in charge of helping to decide if complaints about how MSU handles/handled Title IX cases have merit.
Was just going to post that link. Young's job, it sounds like, is coordinating the various defenses and responses to external investigations and lawsuits, nothing to do with handling Title IX complaints through the university's internal procedures.
You mean that prison case that involved allegations from before the time that Engler became gofvernor, extended for years after the time that Engler left office, and into Govenor Granholm's second term, and implicataed a bunch of union-member MDOC corrections officers? That one?
...would be "accidental." Certainly not, on my end.
I got where you were coming from, before I got to the end of your subject headline.
How am I not being transparent?
This discussion on the culture at MSU.
Why? Who would mention that the prison guards were union members or bring other governor's into that discussion unless you are in the tank on this?
...of that case, and the settlement, that is now being used regularly by Engler's detractors to make a case that the action was Engler's fault, uniquely his fault, and that he unreasonably stonewalled it, etc., and cost the State of Michigan millions of dollars by his incompetence or negligence of malice or whatever.
Fact was, it was handled by the Michigan Attorney General's office, including during AG Jennifer Granholm's tenure, and the case was settled under Governor Granholm; not as soon as she became governor but rather in the seventh year of her two terms as governor.
The reason I mention the union-member MDOC officers is because in the cases that went to trial, those were the people who were defendants and the wrongdoers. Of course the State of Michigan was vicariously liable for them, but also those officers are some of the most elaborately-protected public empolyees in the State. It sure wasn't Governor Engler, or Governor Granholm, or any MDOC director, or warden, who assaulted female prisoners. It was the corrections officers.
If someone proposed Jennifer Granholm or the head of the DOC guards union to be put in charge of cleaning up the cesspool at MSU, I would oppose their appointments as well.
You have to be deeply in the tank to think in any way on earth John Engler was a fitting appointment to clean up this mess.
However, the reality is, he wasn't brough in to clean it up, was he?
I have read his opinions in the past and, while I am familiar with how some people view him, I don't get the sense he is judge who just takes knee-jerk reaction political positions. He seems smart and thoughtful (whether you agree with him or not).
However, I do not think sitting on the Michigan Supreme Court makes him "superbly qualified"... it does make him a bit of a legal superstar though.
In fact, his history on the bench s not experience in advocacy on behalf of clients. He is presented legal briefs and arguments by attorneys, but his role did not include zealous advoacy or the minutia of trial work.
His career on the Supreme Court qualifies him to work at a law firm as a recognizable name (client draw), as a well-connected representative (name on a brief), and as a fine reviewer of appellate briefs, etc. (oversight).
His day-to-day ability to be lead counsel is unkown.
The real issue is that both Young and Engler are "big names" who don't really offer much in the way of practical experience. They are both serving because of the political capital, not because of any particular skill.
They look like PR hires. And, itheir past statements should have been looked at in that light. But, MSU appears tone deaf again.
He was hired to somehow coordinate all of the counsel in the various components of civili litigation and public investigations.
How is he handling his inherent conflicts of interest in this new role?
And where does it say he's a professor at MSU?
Nope. Don't see him in the directory, which goes straight from Wittner to Zilberman and does list adjunct professors. Former adjunct professor he may be; current, he is apparently not. Perhaps they did foresee a potential or actual conflict of interest and don't have him teaching a class any more.
April 10th, 2018 at 12:41 AM ^
April 10th, 2018 at 12:37 PM ^
...and I am more convinced than ever that you are not worth any serious engagement on this issue.
Do you know what adjuncts do, at MSU's law school? In addition to my Michigan undergraduate degree, I actually have a degree from that law school. (At the time, it was the Detroit College of Law; before they built Comerica Park and Dennis Archer brokered the deal that finally gave Michigan State the law school they had craved for decades.)
You are somehow making the insane argument, that Bob Young has a "conflict" from acting as a lawyer representing MSU because he holds a very minor, financially insignificant, probably ceremonial, title within the MSU College of law.
You need to understand, it would not matter, what position Young held on the law school faculty; Young isn't serving as a judge on any MSU case at this time; Young isn't judging the school, or its staff, or faculty, or coaches. He is MSU's lawyer. MSU's advocate.
There is no conflict. You seem to fail to understand what it is Young is doing. I don't know if you want MSU to now be managed by therapists, or counseling psychologists, or clergymen, or professional ethicists of some other stripe. What MSU needs, in part, at this time are legal advisors. Lawyers to help them manage the many claims being made against them.
Your allegation that Bob Young has a conflict, if it were to make any sense at all, ought to include some notion that Bob Young cannot be faithful to the interests of MSU. And by no reckoning would Young's minor law school faculty role have any bearing on that.
There's no conflict of interest. None.
I did read the original link that you posted and then I clicked on "Faculty and Staff Directory" and his name is not on there. Oh, and then I clicked on "Faculty Bios" and his name is not on there either.
I can find you a link to Spike Albrecht's bio at Michigan but that doesn't mean he's currently on the roster.
Who's being sloppy?
Also, what's your opinion on Rosemarie Aquilina as Nassar's judge and sentencer?
April 10th, 2018 at 10:05 AM ^
He's clearly either a current faculty member, or if he's not current, he is on sabbatical or something.
Why are you being intentionally obtuse about this?
The point is I have proven Young is/was part of the MSU faculty, and this is an inherent conflict of interest and your retort is he is only listed on some MSU faculty pages, but not all.
April 10th, 2018 at 11:58 AM ^
I'm being obtuse because words mean things, and "current" does not mean "former." You said he's a current professor. He is not. If he were, he'd be listed. Also, adjunct professors don't go on sabbatical. You know what adjunct means, I hope. You have proven he was part of the faculty (kind of - adjunct professors are quite a different thing than full-fledged faculty) and yet you stated that he is part of the faculty, which is such a blatantly obvious different concept that there's really nothing obtuse about pointing that out.
Second, Judge Aquilina, who ran Nassar's trial, is an adjunct professor at MSU. If you think there's a conflict of interest in such a thing as "helping to decide which cases against MSU have merit and which should be fought" you would think that she'd recuse herself from, you know, presiding over the case and sentencing of the central employee in the entire issue.
So, either conflict of interest matters, in which case the whole goddamn Nassar verdict and trial should be thrown completely out the window and that's what you should be advocating for. Or it doesn't, and Young can continue doing the job that, as a prominent and highly capable lawyer, he is more than qualified to do. Or you're just picking and choosing what you get upset about for political or equally distasteful reasons.
Yeah... That begs the question. What will he be doing?
Reviewing what the investigators and counsel find to determine how it will play at trial?
His title is "lead counsel" and he is leading the advocacy with respect to the investigations and numerous lawsuits (and large settlements) that MSU faces.
How is he "superbly qualified" to do that? You would think you should choose someone who is used to coordinating multiple attorneys or invstigators. Maybe someone with experience doing that at a law firm?
The only thing he is subperbly qualified for is the be an arbitrator, judge, etc.
I don't have time to explain the differences in roles to you, but just because someone has experience in one role in the law does not make them "superbly qualified" to manage another role. (For example, a judge may adjudicate numerous traffic/criminal cases, but that doesnt make him a qualified police officer.)
He was appointed for political weight. That is all.
Meanwhile, here is Engler, Devos, and Secchia coming up with their next plan to save Izzo and Mork.
Tell me if you've heard this one guys...
MSU ptb and their fans have no interest in anything that upsets their own mythology about their 2 major sports.
They'd like to appear to be doing the right thing but it's not a must. But they definitely want to maintain the above mythology.
If you start from that conclusion, all the moves we keep reading about make perfect sense.
Count me as someone who can't talk sports with MSU fans right now. Even if it's to rub it in about basketball. I am in disbelief when I talk to them that they can tolerate any of what is going on at a school they claim to rabidly support. I wouldn't be able to stomach the retention of any coach at Michigan who operated programs like their Big 2 did.
Every school has an Autson Robertson, Nassar, Strampel, Fegusson, Payne, Walton, Appling, continue as if calculating pi...
Speaking to my Sparty friends has become an excersise in futility. It's hillarious. I'm just mocking them in a similar fasion to your post moving forward. If I were to become as delusional as they are I would want them to call me out. It's just common courtesy. Like pointing out a piece of toilet paper to stuck your friend's shoe.
for a 2015 incident. Engler is going to have to quadruple down now!