TeslaRedVictorBlue

January 19th, 2022 at 10:28 AM ^

It's not an argument to do anything. My point is that what happened here was awful, and those that continue to defend it, including Jimbo, should be lumped into the same category of those who defended Paterno. The whiff I speak of is the stench of denial. We should do better for the victims and better for the university.

snarling wolverine

January 19th, 2022 at 3:08 PM ^

The two are not the same.

Anderson was an actual MD employed by the university whose job entailed looking at peoples’ private parts.  Unfortunately he abused this power.

Sandusky was a football coach who had absolutely no business being near small children, much less in the shower room with them.

Could Bo have stopped Anderson?  Yes, but it’s more understandable why he (and all the other coaches) didn’t than why JoePa let Sandusky run amok.  Bo was dealing with the word of his players vs. the word of a team physician.  What would you do in that situation?

I think what the Anderson story shows is that we need better oversight of team medical officials in general.  We shouldn’t be leaving it up to a coach or AD who may not have any idea what proper medical protocol is.  We have a monstrous health system.  Have other MDs periodically review what university doctors are doing.

NateVolk

January 19th, 2022 at 2:12 PM ^

Schembechler was one of the most powerful public employees in the state for nearly 2 decades. 

It's fantasy to think he wasn't aware. Plus there is evidence he was told. He had absolute power to apply a unique level of pressure to end Anderson's association with the University.

Obviously it was easier to not do anything but simply maintain the status quo. And that's what he did.

Bacon and others are only parceling out any attempt at a defense here because he's a coaching legend in the biggest sport at the school. And they have a mythology built up about the man. And I feel them on that.

But they wouldn't bother and in fact would be drawing the obvious conclusion if it were say Mark Dantonio.

 

 

 

Bo Schemheckler

January 19th, 2022 at 9:02 AM ^

While we cannot fix the past I believe there are positives here in that the University did not sweep this under the rug, they acknowledged it and have done their best to help. This at least tells me there are positive steps being taken to ensure this does not happen again which I believe is the best that can be done in a situation like this one. Even something as tame as the Schlissel affair (assuming it was consensual and not in any way coerced) was brought to light and dealt with immediately.  

BTB grad

January 19th, 2022 at 9:45 AM ^

I’m actually super cynical about the Schlissel part. While this Anderson case didn’t generally seem to be swept under the rug (probably helps that it was under such a microscope), the U has a rather shitty record of not taking allegations against professors/administrators seriously. 8 cases against tenured professors/admins (including the U’s second highest ranking officer who had two decades of misconduct) have come to public light since just Sept 2018 and almost all of them had years of misconduct/allegations before anything was done. And now the leader of the office supposed to investigate these things is in a lawsuit that she mishandled sexual assault & racial discrimination cases in her prior job. Schlissel was on his way out, the Board hated him, and they could save $2-3M by not paying him his parachute contract. None of his wrongdoings come to light complete with published emails/texts if they loved him and wanted him to continue to be at the helm for years to come. Because the leadership has time and time again shown they’ll look the other way and drag their feet on these things if they need/want to. This time the timing was convenient. Too convenient imo knowing now that they dumped the good PR days before they knew the Anderson settlement would come out. The admin has to start rebuilding the trust again because all of this is frankly is embarrassing and sickening. Cutting a check is easy; let’s see what their actions are going forward when it’s not a lame duck president whose firing will save you millions.  

https://medium.com/@clairehao/gaslight-gatekeep-girlboss-schlissels-firing-is-a-meme-but-don-t-let-laughter-distract-you-7806aab80f88

 

energyblue1

January 19th, 2022 at 9:57 AM ^

Reporting those in power above you is a very dangerous thing to a career.  Hence why misconduct often was never reported and retaliation is a thing.  It is no wonder so many had to turn a blind eye so they didn't wreck their own careers.  People can get angry that things weren't reported all they want.  People can claim high ground and moral superiority from the outside.  Almost 100% of the time they didn't stand the fight themselves or left without reporting and still act superior to another who didn't report to stay out of the line of fire.  Not once ounce of this is a justification it's people simply didn't want the guns pointed at them for trying to do the right thing.  IE, no good deed goes unpunished.  

Now it's socially unacceptable to turn a blind eye but what people have to endure is still not recognized either.  

FrankTigers2

January 19th, 2022 at 11:18 AM ^

the accusation is that this was swept under the rug for many years.

it only stopped being swept under the rug when it was so large that it couldnt be held under there anymore.

do not credit the university for finally doing the right thing after years of not doing the right thing.

LloydCarnac

January 19th, 2022 at 1:28 PM ^

"Nothing positive here, I hope the survivors can find some sort of peace. ." Gree4

Absolutely right. The money may be a consolation, but it doesn't erase the abuse trauma. And, every abuse survivor is challenged to find their peace, living their best lives regardless of financial compensation. The challenge is the same, money or not.

However, the financial settlement is an affirmation of the trauma. True reshaping of policy likely offers survivors best chance for finding peace. Policy change potentially and hopefully saves others from experiencing the same abuse in the future.

ndscott50

January 19th, 2022 at 11:34 AM ^

Eventually some portion of it will be paid by students. The amount works out to around $11,000 per student.  Even if insurance covers some of it that will of course result in higher premiums – though this likely has the effect of spreading costs across other universities insurance cost as well.  Unless the state is going to do some type of special allocation to cover it – that works out to $49 bucks per person in Michigan, the students eventually will cover part of the cost. Side note, I’m pretty sure the state is not going to allocate additional funds to cover this.  The University could also cut spending – which again means the students, employees, vendors, someone is going to pay either in cash or loss of services.

I suppose salary cuts or at least lowering the rate of pay increases are also an option.  That works out to needing to shave around $15,000 per employee over future years.  In the end it’s a mix of all these things as the University will have $490 million less dollars than it otherwise would have in the future. The victims deserve to be compensated. It’s too bad that almost everyone involved is dead or no longer at the university and will not see a dime of their personal wealth contributed.  Current and future generations pay for the sins of the past – so pretty much how it always works.  

1VaBlue1

January 19th, 2022 at 9:02 AM ^

That settlement equates to ~$467,000 per survivor (for the 1050 survivors).  Of course, it doesn't include the lawyer cut, which is probably ~40%, with another 15-20% in fees of some sort.  Like most class action settlements, I'm sure the lawyers will become millionaires while each plaintiff gets a check for $1.31...

XM - Mt 1822

January 19th, 2022 at 10:13 AM ^

not sure if this was a true 'class action' which would limit the fees allowed, but in general the attorneys would get 25-33% of the settlement amount.  that can vary though with bigger cases, and sometimes the fee structure is much more client-friendly if the matter did not involve litigation - which as i understand it, this one did not. 

further, there is no way that costs of the suit were an additional 15-20% since there was basically no litigation.   no costs invested in court reporters and depostions (which could've been thousands of witnesses), no expert witness fees, no subpoenas, no re-enactments like you can have in other types of cases (not this one), no site visits, no professional photographers to document injuries, scenes, etc, no accident reconstruction and on and on.  you get the picture, this was in a relative fashion, a quick and low-cost settlement from the plaintiffs' standpoint. 

1VaBlue1

January 19th, 2022 at 10:48 AM ^

Thank you for the legal detail, eagle!  I stabbed at the many class action suits that result in hundreds of millions for 'plaintiffs', where the plaintiffs actually received jack squat.  I've been included in a couple of these, actually, both dealt with stolen PII (OPM breach and TRL's (TransUnion?) financial bullshit).  Both of those resulted in 'free' online ID protection, which is something that costs a company like TRL virtually nothing (program setup costs are one time, but fairly high - maintenance is simple and cheap).

For the amount of money involved, TRL got off dirt cheap.  So cheap, that the 'penalty' amounted to a tax write-off and did nothing to change the way they do business.  As for OPM, the Director and the Cyber leads at the agency should have been looking at jail time.  Yet, they were allowed to retire with full benefits.

XM - Mt 1822

January 19th, 2022 at 10:58 AM ^

ha.  over the years i have gotten any number of notices about if you bought X product or owned Y stock from some time period you could be entitled to....nothing worth having.  i mean the postage would cost more than the settlement you'd get, and that's before you put value on your own time.  i have yet to ever respond to one of those. 

Murphy.

January 19th, 2022 at 9:03 AM ^

Over 1,000 people will share in the settlement! That's way more people than I thought would be affected - which comes out to less than $500K per person before any legal fees.

This is part of process, but I hope the university doesn't think writing a check is enough justice for this situation.

Wendyk5

January 19th, 2022 at 10:31 AM ^

As I read others' comments on why people don't come forward (because of concerns about their own careers), I understand but......that has to stop. Taking punitive action against the protectors, especially protectors of minors and young people abused by authority figures, instead of the perpetrators is inexcusable. 

Erik_in_Dayton

January 19th, 2022 at 10:45 AM ^

I admittedly have no hard data to point to here, but it certainly seems like we as a society are somewhat better about this than we were in the relatively recent past.  People must be much more aware of these things happening.  And there is more encouragement to come forward and more proactive steps taken to avoid abuse (adults not being alone with kids, for one).  That's not to say that we're anywhere close to having everyone come forward when they should, but it seems likely that we're closer than we were.

WestQuad

January 19th, 2022 at 9:46 AM ^

I'm being somewhat of an apologist here, but sexual abuse seems endemic in our society.  PSU, OSU, MSU, UofM, Catholic Church, Boy Scouts, etc.   Perverts seek out positions of trust in order to molest freely.  A kid from my church growing up turned out to be a pervert.  He married a woman specifically so that he could molest her children.  He was evidently molested as a child, but regardless he's in prison now. (or at least he was for 10+ years.)   

Point being is there are lots of criminal perverts out there.  It is hard to police and no one wants to be the whistle blower.  Whistle blowers usually don't fair well. With penalties/settlements like this one organizations will be incentivized to figure it out.  I'm guessing it will be used as a mechanism to make it easier for employers to fire people and strip away workers rights.

Further aside:  Not quite the same thing, but I have an abusive boss who is the founder of my division and now President of it after selling out.  He's made some of my team members cry during public beratings among other unpleasantness.  I had to take a training session on abusive people.  According to the training, I should report him to HR.   No way that would end well. 

Kilgore Trout

January 19th, 2022 at 10:17 AM ^

I agree with the endemic part in general, but I think there is still progress. I coach my daughter's softball team (9 year olds) and we have to take a training on a lot of this stuff to coach. A lot of it is obvious, but it's good that it gets reinforced so that coaches know what to watch out for and know what is expected of them. Obviously don't molest kids is expected, but there are other things that help you as a coach.

Wendyk5

January 19th, 2022 at 10:40 AM ^

My daughter played softball with a girl in our town whose father was a coach. My daughter never played on his team, but she did play against his teams on many occasions and she was friendly with his daughter. He was a universally disliked coach only because he was kind of an a**hole -- the type of guy who would challenge the 14 year old umpire and this was on a 10U team. Turns out, he was arrested for child pornography. He wasn't accused of molesting anyone, which was a relief, but this guy was just a regular dad doing regular sports dad things and we all thought the worst thing about him was that he was too intense to be coaching young girls. I feel bad for his daughter who is going to have a lot to deal with emotionally. 

XM - Mt 1822

January 19th, 2022 at 10:54 AM ^

wendy, question for you, seeking the women's standpoint.  it has been a theory over my life that the girls/women that were the wildest when they were young and had the most problems when they got older were the ones with 'daddy issues'.  and let me qualify that:  i don't mean that phrase in some sort of mocking fashion, but as a phrase that covers a lot of different types of abuse and neglect that we all know can manifest itself in a myriad of ways. 

agree, disagree, somewhere in between? 

Wendyk5

January 19th, 2022 at 2:14 PM ^

Well, I had so-called daddy issues. My parents were divorced, my father was somewhat absent and when he was around, was very harsh and critical. I was not wild at all. Oh, I smoked some pot in 9th grade and got into some very minor trouble that same year but you could count on one hand the number of times I got drunk in college, and after college, had a regular social life. Nothing wild. Got married when I was 30, stayed married, pretty staid life. I guess you would have to define "wild girl." I would imagine we all have different definitions of what that means.