He will be remembered for his 
decades of public service to the 
people of Southeast Michigan, his 
razor sharp wit and a lifetime of 
dedication to improving the lives 
of all who walk this earth.”
John Dingell recently entered 
hospice care following a cancer 
diagnosis. On Wednesday he 
tweeted that while he was too ill 
to post on social media, Debbie 
Dingell would continue to share 
messages on his behalf.
“The 
Lovely 
Deborah 
is 
insisting I rest and stay off here, 
but after long negotiations we’ve 
worked out a deal where she’ll 
keep up with Twitter for me as 
I dictate the messages,” John 
Dingell tweeted. “I want to thank 
you all for your incredibly kind 
words and prayers. You’re not 
done with me just yet.”
John Dingell retired from 
Congress in 2014. Debbie Dingell, 
who is his wife, won a campaign to 
occupy the seat he vacated.
Debbie 
Dingell 
missed 

President Donald Trump’s State 
of the Union on Tuesday, tweeting 
the following day John Dingell’s 
condition required her to stay 
home.
“Friends 
and 
colleagues 
know me and know I would be 
in Washington right now unless 
something 
was 
up,” 
Debbie 
Dingell wrote. “I am home with 
John and we have entered a new 
phase. He is my love and we have 
been a team for nearly 40 years.”
Debbie 
Dingell 
continued, 
“I will be taking each day as it 
comes. We thank people for their 
friendship and support and ask for 
prayers and privacy during this 
difficult time.”
John Dingell was a staunch 
advocate of the auto industry, 
in 
addition 
to 
promoting 
environmental protections, and 
working to expand health care.
In September, John Dingell was 
hospitalized for more than a week 
following a mild heart attack. After 
being admitted, he tweeted that 
“Rumors of my demise may have 
only been slightly exaggerated.” 
After 
his 
retirement, 
John 
Dingell’s social media accounts 

brought him continued fame. In 
2014, The Atlantic declared his 
Twitter account the best of any 
member of Congress.
On Thursday, President Mark 
Schlissel issued a statement on 
John Dingell’s passing, praising his 
legacy and offering condolences.
“John 
Dingell’s 
resolute 
devotion to the people of Michigan 
and our nation set a high standard 
to which we should all aspire in 
public service,” Schlissel said. 
“He fought for legislation and led 
change that made our state and 
nation better for all Americans 
– including civil rights, access to 
quality medical care, and clean air 
and water. I will always admire 
and remember his decades of 
thoughtful, optimistic leadership, 
grounded 
in 
a 
belief 
that 
healthy communities, economic 
prosperity, and environmental 
stewardship are all values that 
we could relentlessly pursue for 
the betterment of our society. I 
considered John a historically 
significant public servant and man 
of great gravitas.”
 

The Daily contacted multiple 
University officials, including 
representatives of Public Affairs, 
on Friday, Nov. 30, 2018, seeking 
comment for the Dec. 10 article 
about Shipps. OIE first contacted 
Jane on Monday, Dec. 3, 2018. It 
is unclear if OIE had already been 
made aware of Jane’s email, or if 
The Daily’s numerous emails to 
University personnel, including 
Public Affairs sent Nov. 30, 
2018, provoked this response the 
following Monday.
Starting in early December, 
Jane began receiving frequent 
communications from Elizabeth 
Seney, the assistant director and 
deputy Title IX Coordinator for 
Investigations in OIE. These 
communications indicated to her 
that the University had begun to 
take her complaint seriously.
“Elizabeth Seney has called 
me several times (I can’t say 
for sure how many, but I have a 
voicemail from her on 12/8/18), 
and she has emailed many 
times,” Jane wrote to The Daily 
in an email. “In her phone 
messages she was polite and just 
asked that I call her back, and 
that she would explain more 
once I spoke to her.”
***
When 
President 
Richard 
Nixon 
signed 
The 
Higher 
Education Amendments of 1972, 
he created a section commonly 
referred to as “Title IX” law. 
Title IX states: “No person in 
the United States shall, on the 
basis of sex, be excluded from 
participation in, be denied the 
benefits of, or be subjected 
to discrimination under any 
education program or activity 
receiving 
Federal 
financial 
assistance.”
The 
U.S. 
Department 
of 
Education’s 
interpretation 
of 
this law has evolved over time 
to include specific provisions 
regarding 
sexual 
violence 
and mandatory reporting of 
such violence. Under recent 
interpretations, the Department 
of Education has stipulated that 
certain employees be designated 
as 
“Responsible 
Employees,” 
employees required to “report 

incidents of sexual violence to 
the Title IX coordinator or other 
appropriate school designee.”
In 
1990, 
the 
federal 
government passed the Clery 
Act. 
The 
Clery 
Act 
places 
separate requirements on school 
employees regarding mandatory 
reporting, such as requiring 
certain employees classified as 
“Campus Security Authorities,” 
or CSAs, to report other serious 
crimes not covered by Title IX 
policy. 
University 
of 
Michigan 
policy combines these various 
reporting obligations into two 
discrete employee categories: 
“Responsible Employees” and 
“Non-Responsible Employees.” 
Responsible Employees include 
deans, 
associate 
deans 
and 
chairs of departments. They 
are commonly referred to as 
“mandatory reporters”. Many 
students will recognize these 
employees for the “RE” stickers 
they often place on their doors.
Responsible Employees are 
required to share allegations of 
“sexual assault, intimate partner 
violence, stalking, sexual or 
gender-based 
harassment, 
retaliation (and) violation of 
interim measures” with the 
University, 
specifically 
with 
OIE.
They are required to report 
these allegations in a timely 
manner, “as soon as possible” 
according 
to 
a 
training 
document on the University 
Human Resources website. They 
must turn over “all of the details 
known to (them), including the 
names of the persons involved, 
when (they) were told, precisely 
what information was shared, 
and (their) contact information.”
***
In October 2017, as the New 
Yorker and The New York Times 
published allegations of sexual 
misconduct 
against 
Harvey 
Weinstein 
and 
the 
cultural 
conversation 
around 
sexual 
misconduct began morphing into 
the #MeToo movement, Jane 
was reminded of her experience 
with Shipps in the late 1970s. 
In mid-October, she decided to 
email Racine. 
“I reached out to Melody 
Racine in October 2017 because 
I (had) recently had contact with 

another victim of Steve Shipps,” 
Jane told The Daily. “That 
certainly ignited something in 
me … I had attended my first 
Women’s March in January 2017 
and I know I was influenced 
by the growing message of 
empowerment for women. I 
felt that it was time to stand up 
for myself. I wasn’t sure who to 
contact, but I found Ms. Racine 
on the University of Michigan 
website.”
On Oct. 21, 2017 at 11:04 p.m., 
Jane sent an email to Racine 
with the subject line “Stephen 
Shipps.” In the email, she alleged 
she was raped by Shipps and 
shared her fears that Shipps had 
committed similar acts against 
other students.
“Recent events in the news 
have sparked memories from 
my past,” Jane wrote. “Honestly, 
I’ve written letters/emails in the 
past but have not sent because 
I didn’t see the point. I guess 
I’m emboldened now. Of course 
I expect absolutely nothing to 
come from this email. I don’t 
know you and there’s nothing 
you or anyone could do at this 
point anyway. So, here’s the 
thing … Stephen Shipps raped 
me when I was sixteen. Over the 
years, I’ve heard stories similar 
to mine regarding Mr. Shipps.”
Jane waited for a response 
from the University.
“My allegations seemed pretty 
serious, so I was a bit surprised 
and hurt that there was no 
response from Ms. Racine, who I 
felt should have an interest and 
responsibility to protect both the 
University of Michigan as well as 
its students,” she wrote.
After 19 days with no response 
from Racine or the University, 
Jane decided to contact Shipps 
directly.
“I guess I gained confidence 
after sending the first email, and 
was angry that I was ignored, so 
I went ahead and sent an email 
directly to Shipps a couple weeks 
later,” Jane wrote to The Daily. 
“It was a big step and a bit scary 
for me to sign my name to that 
email.” 
Jane sent an email to Shipps on 
Nov. 9, 2017 at 2:58 p.m. A copy of 
this email was provided to The 
Daily, though Jane has asked its 
full contents not be published. In 

this message, Jane describes her 
experience with Shipps. She also 
indicates she has heard he has 
committed similar misconduct 
against other students.
“What happened was actually 
statutory rape,” Jane wrote to 
Shipps. “I’ve lived with this for 
a long time. In case you don’t 
remember, it was probably 1978 
or 1979. I’d hope that you didn’t 
engage in this behavior with 
other young women, but I’ve 
heard that you did.”
***
On Oct. 21, 2017, the date she 
received Jane’s email, Racine 
was serving as the interim dean 
of the Music, Theatre & Dance 
School — a position classified 
both as a Responsible Employee 
and 
a 
Campus 
Security 
Authority. She held this position 
until September 2018, though 
she is currently on leave for the 
2018-2019 academic year.
She went on leave shortly 
after David Daniels, a Music, 
Theatre & Dance professor, was 
accused of sexual assault by 
opera singer Samuel Schultz. An 
investigation published by The 
Daily in November found Racine 
signed off on Daniels’ tenure 
application in May 2018, despite 
reports of sexual misconduct 
against Daniels being filed with 
OIE against him in March.
On Nov. 9, 2017, the date he 
received Jane’s email, Shipps was 
serving as the chair of Strings, 
a position he held until Dec. 7, 
2018 and a position that similarly 
classified him as a Responsible 
Employee and a Campus Security 
Authority. He had previously 
served as the associate dean 
for Academic Affairs in the 
Music, Theatre & Dance School, 
and the faculty director of the 
Strings Preparatory Academy, 
both positions classified as a 
Responsible Employee.
The incident Jane alleges 
occurred before Shipps worked 
at the University. As Shipps 
was a Responsible Employee, 
reporting this incident would 
have been self-incriminatory. 
While the University’s policy 
does not cover this specific type 
of situation, the Haven Training 
for Faculty and Staff, a training 
about 
sexual 
misconduct 
reporting 
all 
Responsible 

Employees have to take every 
year to renew their status, makes 
Shipps’ and Racine’s reporting 
obligations quite clear.
“Schools must respond to 
sexual violence connected to 
the school’s education programs 
and activities, including academic, 
educational, extracurricular, and 
athletic activities,” the document 
notes. “If you are made aware of an 
incident involving a perpetrator 
from a different school: … if you 
are a Responsible Employee or 
CAS, this is a reportable incident. 
Follow your institution’s reporting 
policy.”
As such, Shipps and Racine 
were required under University 
policy to report the emails they 
received from Jane to OIE “as soon 
as possible upon learning of the 
behavior.”
It’s unclear if this happened in 
the year between when Jane sent 
her original emails and when she 
received a response. 
Though 
University 
spokeswoman Kim Broekhuizen 
refused 
to 
comment 
on 
the 
specifics of this case, she did 
describe the general process OIE 
uses when they learn of these 
concerns. She also noted that 
though it might have taken Jane 
a long time to hear from OIE, 
this does not necessarily mean an 
investigation of this complaint has 
not taken place.
“When OIE receives information 
about concerns, it assesses the 
information reported to identify — 
and take — appropriate next steps,” 
Broekhuizen said. “This process 
normally includes outreach to the 
person reporting the information, 
to provide them with details about 
resources and any options that 
may be available to them, and to 
gather additional information as 
necessary to review the concerns. 
In any instance, we would regret 
if that outreach didn’t happen, 
or didn’t happen quickly. But 
that does not mean a review or 
investigation of the allegations did 
not take place.”
***
On Oct. 29, 2018 at 11:04 a.m. 
— one year, one week, and one 
day after she first emailed Racine 
— Jane received an email from 
Margie Pillsbury, the University 
of Michigan Police Department 
Special Victims Unit detective 

within 
DPSS. 
In 
this 
email, 
Pillsbury stated she learned of 
Jane’s complaint that day. She 
offered to help connect Jane 
to law enforcement officials in 
the jurisdiction relevant to her 
complaint. 
She 
also 
provided 
Jane 
with 
information 
about 
confidential resources for sexual 
assault survivors.
The 
circumstances 
behind 
Pillsbury’s Oct. 29, 2018 email 
remain unclear. It is unclear why it 
took Pillsbury more than a year to 
respond to Jane’s initial email, and 
if Pillsbury has knowledge of both 
emails or only one.
It also remains unclear how 
Pillsbury 
became 
aware 
of 
Jane’s email on Oct. 29, 2018. 
University policy for “Responsible 
Employees,” as referenced above, 
required 
Jane’s 
email 
to 
be 
reported to the OIE, not DPSS. At 
this point in time, it is unclear if 
OIE was aware of Jane’s complaint.
When The Daily reached out 
to Pillsbury for comment, she 
forwarded the request to UMPD 
spokesperson Melissa Overton. 
Overton 
could 
not 
answer 
questions pertaining to the specific 
case.
***
Jane’s 
next 
communication 
from the University came Dec. 
3, 2018 at 1:23 p.m., when she 
received an email from Seney. This 
was the first time Jane received 
communications from OIE. At this 
point, it had been 13 months since 
Jane sent her email to Racine, and 
it had been five weeks since she 
was contacted by Pillsbury.
“The first emails from Margie 
Pillsbury (then later Elizabeth Seney) 
were a year after I first contacted 
Ms. Racine,” Jane said. “At first I 
didn’t respond because I was just 
busy and felt I didn’t have the time 
or emotional energy to talk about 
the assault. I soon realized that 
something must have happened to 
spur them to action, and I wondered 
whose side they were on. They didn’t 
gain my confidence when I read ‘The 
University takes sexual misconduct 
very seriously …’ I felt like the 
sentence needed clarification as 
to what exactly makes them take 
sexual misconduct seriously, and 
what the tipping point might be.”

In 
her 

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Friday, February 8, 2019 — 3

MISCONDUCT
From Page 1

J ULIANA H UX TABLE

Juliana Huxtable, an American artist, writer, performer and musician, gives a talk as part of the Penny Stamps Speaker Series in the Michigan Theater 
Thursday evening. Her art is part of the exhibition “Art in the Age of the Internet” on view at the UMMA through April 7th.

DANYEL THARAKAN/Daily

Additionally, those who do not 
disclose their felony charges and 
convictions face consequences up to, 
and including, dismissal.
Since its enactment, the policy 
has garnered attention and criticism 
among faculty.
Laurita Thomas, associate vice 
president for Human Resources, 
said the policy was created with the 
intention of making sure all members 
of the community feel safe on campus.
“We 
became 
aware 
of 
circumstances 
where 
we 
were 
not aware of this kind of situation 
across higher ed — not necessarily at 
Michigan,” Thomas said. “And many 
institutions have moved to enhance 
the safety of our community, and this 
knowledge will help us do that.”
* * * 
L. Rowell Huesmann, professor 
of 
communication 
studies 
and 
psychology, 
claims 
the 
policy 
infringes on the rights of students, 
faculty and staff. He discussed how, 
in the past, many people have been 
arrested for protesting and charged 

Read more online at 
michigandaily.com

FELONY
From Page 1

with felonies.
“I’m old enough to remember 
very clearly the Vietnam era and 
the Civil Rights era when a lot of 
University of Michigan faculty and 
students demonstrated, not just in 
Michigan but in the South, and a lot 
of them were arrested, a lot of them 
were charged,” Huesmann said. “And 
police liked to charge them with 
felonies, like resisting arrest.”
Huesmann discussed how the 
requirement to report all felony 
charges, regardless of whether an 
individual is guilty or not, could 
restrict free speech. He said the 
policy could instill a sense of fear into 
community members and make them 
question actions they have a right to 
exercise, such as peaceful protesting.
“I suspect it (arrests at protests) 
could easily happen again and people 
could engage in demonstrations 
and protests about civil rights and 
they could well be charged with the 
felony of resisting arrest, and this 
policy requires them within one 
week to report it to the University,” 
Huesmann said. “And that really is 
going to have an inhibiting effect on 
what people do.”
Huesmann sent an email to 
the Senate Advisory Committee 
on University Affairs voicing his 
concerns. He said he hopes the 
committee will issue a statement 
opposing the policy.
* * *
Law professor Samuel Gross said 
this policy should not interfere with 
current dismissal procedures.
“Michigan is an ‘employment-at-
will state,’ but the University policy 
on 
employment 
is 
considerably 
more restrictive,” Gross said. “Your 
boss could fire you (in the state of 
Michigan) because he’d rather hire 
his nephew, or because you came into 
work late once, or because you were 
in possession of marijuana. There’s 
no problem with that because they 
can also fire you for no reason. The 
University is much more restricted 
by its own policies.”
Thomas said the University will 
review the cases fairly and not use the 
policy as an excuse to fire employees.
“If you review our discipline 
policies in our SPG, we move toward 
a fair approach and process,” Thomas 
said. “We do not discharge people on 
a lark.” 
Another concern about the policy 
is whether the need to report not only 
convictions, but charges as well, is a 

violation of due process.
Ashley Lucas, director of the 
Prison Creative Arts Project and 
associate professor of theatre and 
drama, said in an email interview 
with The Daily the policy infringes 
on the rights of employees during 
the assessment process, when the 
University must act as a judge and 
determine the consequences for a 
felony charge.
“A 
requirement 
to 
report 
felony 
charges 
puts 
University 
administrators 
in 
the 
position 
of having to evaluate the guilt or 
innocence of a person who has not 
yet had the opportunity to have their 
case adjudicated in a court of law,” 
Lucas wrote. “This is a violation of 
our right to due process.”
Gross said while being charged 
with a crime is not the same as 
being convicted, an employer has 
the right to know and there is 
nothing intrinsically wrong with the 
gathering of all information.
“It is the case, and it’s very 
important, that being accused of a 
crime or arrested for a crime or held 
in pre-trial detention is not in itself 
proof or anything like proof that you 
committed a crime, and can’t be the 
subject of some types of actions,” 
Gross said. “But that doesn’t mean it’s 
not a fact that people can’t be made 
aware of … and that’s something an 
employer is entitled to know about.”
Thomas claimed the University 
is not violating employees’ right 
to due process and the safety of 
the community is the number one 
priority.
“Felony 
charges 
are 
very 
serious,” Thomas said. “It means 
that they have found enough 
evidence to do the charge, and 
so we will review charges in 
order to ensure the safety of our 
community.”
Gross 
discussed 
how 
the 
University 
could 
find 
out 
about all felony charges and 
convictions regardless of self-
reporting by simply going to 
the police and asking for a list. 
However, 
the 
requirement 
of self-disclosure makes the 
process more convenient for the 
University.

Read more online at 

michigandaily.com

DINGELL
From Page 1

