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