OMG this is so big! Like WoW... OMG!!!!!!
Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
U.S. Department of Education investigating the University of Michigan
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:09 PM
#302
OMG this is so big! Like
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:10 PM
#303
OMG? More like
OMG? More like ZOMG!!!!1!!1!!
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:17 PM
#304
I guess you're being sarcastic
I guess you're being sarcastic but this is actually kind of a big deal.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:37 PM
#305
I will not read any of your posts that
are not prefaced by Yo:
February 3rd, 2012 at 6:15 PM
#306
Hold on and wait for the facts
This could be as simple as a father having a picture of his topless 2 year old daughter in the front yard pool. According to federal law; that is child porn.
So can we wait for the facts to come out before we jump to conclusions. Lets not be a sparty and jump to conclusions then gather the facts that support those ill-conceived conclusions.
February 3rd, 2012 at 6:42 PM
#307
Really?
Is a topless 2 year old actually child porn? I'm genuinely interested, as I've seen quite a few at the beach, &c.
February 3rd, 2012 at 8:20 PM
#308
Any photo that
shows the dark spot or nipple is porn. Anyone under the age of 18 that is photographed while topless is child porn.
For example a 17 year old married girl send a text message of herself topless to her 18 year old husband fighting in Iraq COULD be charged with a host of child porn crimes.
These laws need to be updated but it will be preceived as being "soft on child porn" No politician wants that label.
February 4th, 2012 at 12:05 AM
#309
I'm familiar with a case...
where someone in the phot department at the drug store saw a woman's (innocent, of course) picture of her child taking a bath, decided the positioning of the tub's faucet was suggestive, and called the cops. Obscenity, as always, was in the eye of the beholder, but her choice was between likely prison time or a guilty plea that now has her labeled as a sex offender.
I'd like to think the current case is something more, given the use of the adjective "masochistic", but who knows?
February 3rd, 2012 at 10:18 PM
#310
This is a really good point.
I don't know what it is about parents of 2-5 year olds who feel it necessary to post pictures of their kids taking baths on facebook, but technically it's classified as child porn.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:10 PM
#311
Can't wait till people equate this to the Penn St scandal
Just as they equated extra stretching to the scandal at Ohio.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:13 PM
#312
I'm going to go out on a limb
I'm going to go out on a limb and say this is a lot more serious than extra streching. And, it doesn't directly involve the football program, so I doubt the connection will be made.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:13 PM
#315
And gebe659
Drops into full trolling mode.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:14 PM
#316
How is this trolling? I
How is this trolling? I posted absolutely 0 commentary about this, and posted a link to a source. It's a story about UM, and this is a UM message board.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:25 PM
#317
Because you're an MSU fan
Who hasn't said anything in weeks, but pulls up a University but non-sports scandal topic at the University and just throws it out there. It's not even new news.
What was the motivation or point to the post? Are you suddenly concerned about the workings at the U? Or did you just want to stir shit up with a negative post about the school? If an admitted U-M fan goes on and posts "Police investigated basketball cover up of rape" on an MSU site, how do you think that will be received?
You did it to troll. Not actively flaming in your trolling doesn't make it not trolling.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:27 PM
#318
I also was the first to post
I also was the first to post here that Izzo was suspended for a recruiting violation last season. If it's newsworthy and it's relevant to this message board, I will post it.
Sorry, I guess.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:37 PM
#319
Now I can see a motivation to discuss something MSU
From an MSU fan. This is a topic that has been deleted by mods when respected users put up the subject. You may not have paid attention enough to see that, which is fine (at least it's not the OSU recruit rapes someone thread again), but if you're an outside fan, and you're posting this stuff, you need to do your homework. Otherwise it looks bad.
This story has been going on for at least a week. This is a modest addition to the story. So it's not newsworthy, and pseudo-appropriate. So the question is, again, why was THIS story, of all the news that has happened since the Izzo story you put up seemed more newsworthy to you than anything else that has happened? Why is an admitted MSU fan find this item more newsworthy than the rest? Still waiting....
Edit: And you self-upvoted your own post, so you at least have that going for you, which is nice.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:39 PM
#320
I hadn't seen that this story
I hadn't seen that this story had been posted. People are usually pretty quick to post newsworthy stuff. The Izzo story and this one were the only ones I saw that hadn't been posted or discussed here already. I also was the first to post that JoePa was dead, but it turns out that the website that posted it had jumped the gun.
So I've "broken" three stories on this board: one MSU, one Penn St., and one UM. If you want to consider that trolling, go right ahead.
The only negative athletic story I've ever broken on this message board was related to MSU...
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:49 PM
#321
Congratulations!
Congrations on being the first guy to post shitty news all the time!
Just stop. You've either been too early or late on 2/3 of your threads. You aren't going to win this one.
Besides, rival fan + posting negative news about blog's school = everyone annoyed.
This formula works for any college football blog.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:50 PM
#322
If you think you've "broken" a story here...
That was first posted....and deleted here back then-
http://mgoblog.com/comment/reply/64129/1458939
And your own link has backstory on it going to at least last Sunday-
More power to ya. You made MGoBlog see the light, yet again.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:27 PM
#323
Who on earth would upvote their own post?
I'm not even sure what that indicates, I haven't ever given it a lot of thought.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:36 PM
#324
Get over it
1. It is on topic and newsworthy that we are under investigation by the US Department of Education. There is no active thread to discuss this, so creating one isn't a problem.
2. There is no legitimate reason to censor this topic when we allow general UM news to be posted all the time. Especially since this is a big deal.
I don't care that there's an MSU fan posting this. He didn't gloat or even give his opinion on the issue. And the topic should have an active thread.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:48 PM
#325
It's too bad Mod/Contributor Seth disagrees with you.
you found the hole in our system. I just removed it -- really it's not a topic that this blog needs anyway. Right now the university is letting everyone know that what you don't do if you find child porn is put it back then not say anything. Sadly this is what a lot of people would do.
http://mgoblog.com/comment/reply/64129/1458939
If it wasn't appropriate for our Diarist of the Week (2 times in a row?), it's probably not a great topic for a fan of another school to be posting.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:52 PM
#326
The mods seem to be letting
The mods seem to be letting it stay up now. Why do you have such a problem with this information being talked about? Even if it was posted by a sparty.
February 3rd, 2012 at 5:24 PM
#327
I don't expect the mods to be on 24/7
And if they do, I'll wonder why it wasn't appropriate that CRex, one of our best users, was politely told it wasn't appropriate, but a Spartan CAN post it now. Because I still don't see how something many many Wolverines knew, but didn't see fit to post suddenly became more reasonable. And still haven't heard a good explanation why this particular user thought this particular story was suddenly more newsworthy.
I haven't knocked any other posters for discussing it in the thread. And if it's now appropriate, that's fine (just looking for consistency so we know how to act). But it doesn't change the fact that the MSU guy just posted it be rile up Michigan fans. The messenger matters as well as the message in how it's going to be received.
February 3rd, 2012 at 5:32 PM
#328
I agree that the person who
I agree that the person who reports something does matter. I wouldn't expect a warm welcome at rcmb if I posted a negative story about MSU. I just don't want us to start ignoring ugly news about Michigan just because it is ugly and we don't like it.
February 3rd, 2012 at 6:23 PM
#329
Why does it matter?
Are we taking offense at a MSU fan because we've been ignoring an ugly story. Furthermore, do we really want to conduct ourselves like the RCMB does?
February 3rd, 2012 at 6:22 PM
#330
The difference
1. CRex accidentally posted it as a diary, not a board post.
2. What Seth said was that the topic was simply one that the blog doesn't need, which is why he didn't feel the need to turn it into a board topic. He certainly seems to have no problem with a 70+ comment thread on the matter. Furthermore, the focus of this thread is not that an individual outside the AD affiliated with the university did somethin unconscionable, but that the university is under investigation by the US Deptartment of Education. That's kind of a big deal.
3. The messenger shouldn't matter if the topic is valid and the phrasing of the message isn't offensive. If you are allowing yourself to get riled up because an outsider brought up a serious topic concerning our school that hadn't been talked about, then you need to develop a thicker skin.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:47 PM
#331
Booooo
State sucks!! Gholston's a thug! Day-Day is fat! Three in a row!! Going down on Sunday.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:16 PM
#332
Not to downplay the truly
Not to downplay the truly horrid implications of this story, but-
Kellie Woodhouse. Wow.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:27 PM
#333
Woodhouse, well obviously.
Woodhouse, well obviously.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:57 PM
#334
Damn, meant to say "This. So many many times." to this reply
me, fail.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:55 PM
#335
This. So many many times.*
*
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:14 PM
#336
The article doesn't really
The article doesn't really say, but anyone have an idea why the legal office decided to drop the case?
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:22 PM
#337
Insufficient evidence as far as I recall.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:07 PM
#338
failure of ethical education
the people in the OGC were trained, qua lawyers, to protect the legal interests of their clients, not to do what's right. so they dropped it because poor evidence gathering early on resulted in a case that wasn't then strong enough to keep the lawyers from worrying about the university getting sued if somebody did something about it. that's just a side effect of what lawyers are taught about their obligations as a matter of professional ethics.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:14 PM
#339
Where is the OT??? This isn't
Where is the OT??? This isn't a Jordan Diamond update!
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:58 PM
#340
Yeah..
Priorities...
/s
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:15 PM
#341
Wording of the charge?
the discovery of child pornography in an employee area of University Hospital.
I'm not familiar with the specifics of the charges and the story, but this makes it sound like child pornography was actually found at the hospital, not just at the resident's home. Also, is this all electronic, and not physical (if this is the case it could have just been in the guy's email or something)? Is this accurate?
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:19 PM
#342
Not his e-mail. They found a
Not his e-mail. They found a thumb drive with the child pornography. The guy who owns the thumb drive is Dr. Jenson, a resident who was specializing in pediatrics.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:37 PM
#343
:-o
Jenson=/=Jensen, just
:-o
Jenson=/=Jensen, just to be clear.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:50 PM
#344
previous article
I remember in a previous article it said that there had been no patient complaints of wrong doing. Obviously its an extra sensitive subject given hes a resident in pediatrics, but hopefully the investigation will show that no wrongdoing was done to any patients (consistent with the first article on the subject).
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:21 PM
#345
posted from iPhone
The article says that someone found a thumb drive at the hospital with child pornography on it as well as documents which contained the doctor's name.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:23 PM
#346
Yes, it was allegedly found
Yes, it was allegedly found at the hospital, and yes, it was electronic (I'm not sure if that's also true of what was allegedly found at the home). From the linked article:
In May a medical resident discovered a thumb drive containing masochistic child pornography and documents with fellow doctor Stephen Jenson's name on them. The resident reported her discovery to her supervisor and hospital security, but the university's legal office decided to drop the case instead of reporting it to police.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:16 PM
#350
Fuck's sake, when will it
Fuck's sake, when will it stop.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:22 PM
#351
it was on a personal
One image was seen, it was on a personal thumbdrive of a resident (doctor). Another resident saw it, left the area and when she came back it was gone.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:21 PM
#352
Per the article, it sounds
Per the article, it sounds like this was dead until a University employee followed-up on Nov. 18th to see why nothing had been done. That's 10 days after the Paterno thing blew up. Coincidence? Either way, glad to see that somebody stayed on it.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:25 PM
#353
No excuses
I won't draw any conclusions until the investigation is complete, but if the University did anything wrong, I hope the responsible parties are held fully accountable. No place for that shit here.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:38 PM
#354
My sentiments, exactly.
My sentiments, exactly.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:29 PM
#355
frankly, i don't understand
frankly, i don't understand the "i can't believe you posted this" response. this is legitimate news and reflects a mistake that our university made. UM is not infallible.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:51 PM
#356
I actually think that's a valid complaint
This is a blog about Michigan sports fergodsakes. We post photoshopped pictures of cats and Lloyd Brady. This isn't the 6 o'clock news.
I feel the same way about throwing up any bullshit on Paterno we can find, or garbage about little bro's football team beating up kids in their dorms.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:52 PM
#357
I prefer my photoshopped cats
I prefer my photoshopped cats wearing green lemon helmets
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:53 PM
#358
Isn't that a lime?
I've always wondered.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:57 PM
#359
You're right.....I meant to
You're right.....I meant to say melon and not lemon. There is no way a lime can be big enough to fit on a cat's head. Those things are tiny.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:01 PM
#360
That's what she said
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:06 PM
#361
Good point...
Although I supose you could get a lime on a very young kitten's head, but anyway, I'm guessing your picture is of a melon. I'm glad we have this straightened out. Who says Michigan and MSU fans can't get along?
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:35 PM
#362
For someone with an Ag
For someone with an Ag degree, I'd expect you to know that's a pomelo
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:56 PM
#363
Why paint get/make a lemon green?
Can't find a lime big enough?
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:52 PM
#364
It's about Michigan, though
There was a 50-comment thread yesterday about Madonna because she said that she wants her daughter to go to U of M. And this is more important than that.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:30 PM
#365
Damn ... its Al Gore's fault.
if he just wouldn't have invented the Internet ..... /s
Go Blue!
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:22 PM
#366
Ah, all those algorithms again.
On the plus side, I've wondered if it was a lime or a melon, and we worked that out!
90% of the Madonna articles need to substitute mom for Madonna and move on.
"Mom wants daughter to attend same school she attended"
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:44 PM
#367
At least it was reported and
At least it was reported and the suspect arrested and, so far at least, nothing about any children being hurt....bit different than a certain school in PA.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:49 PM
#368
Sure, it's very different
None-the-less (and at the risk of stating the obvious), children were hurt at some point in the making of the materials. Thus the law.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:46 PM
#369
this thread
makes me sick.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:53 PM
#370
Pretty unbelievable. I feel
Pretty unbelievable. I feel like the University and people in charge did the right thing. They made sure they had a solid case against the guy, made sure they had the RIGHT guy and did an entire investigation before making an arrest. I know it seems wrong in retrospect, but can you imagine if they got the wrong guy? Like someone else who used that same computer? How people would have hung that guy out to dry? Even if it comes to fruition that it was the wrong guy, damage is already done to that guys life.
Thanks annarbor.com
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:08 PM
#371
Here's the the thing, though
They should have called the police just because they found the material and let the police figure out who it belonged to.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:54 PM
#372
Sadly
Child pornography / abuse is a universal problem, and if you think it is not happening in your neighborhood, your school, or your workplace, you are mistaken.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:02 PM
#373
Good point.
If you to that list of sex crime offenders and enter your zip code, it can be pretty shocking what's in your own neighborhood. Here's the link:
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:59 PM
#374
It's never the crime itself...
...it's always the coverup that causes heads to roll. It will be interesting to see if it reaches all the way up the President.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:05 PM
#375
where was
soooo..where was Sandusky?
(and what does this have to do with mgoblog or um athletics??)
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:06 PM
#376
lets compare the differences
lets compare the differences here (superficially) to Penn State
1) This perp is arrested after 6 months (not a decade +)
2) Someone did an end around to make sure the perp was arrested
3) The guy possessed child porn, which is despicable, but hasn't been accused of making it or raping kids. The problem with this is that buying child porn creates the demand, so you can't really wash your hands of it with this rationale.
It will all come out in the wash. This sort of thing happens everywhere. I'm glad to see it in the sunlight.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:11 PM
#377
This certainly isn't the PSU situation
You could add to your list that Michigan probably had far fewer high-level people sit on the info...That said, this isn't nothing. The police should have been called right away.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:12 PM
#378
hospital accreditation is at risk, too
http://www.annarbor.com/news/crime/joint-commission-investigates-complai...
they'll obviously do whatever's necessary to stay accredited, but this is a big deal. no idea why people upthread are pretending it's not relevant news.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:20 PM
#379
The hospital CEO, Dr.
The hospital CEO, Dr. Pescovitz, recently sent out an email detailing the delay and vowing to investigate fully. Although i am not a university insider, I got the sense from the tone of the email that they will explpore the investigation to the fullest and I can only assume the US Dept of Education is getting involved to make sure that everything is done appropriately.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:23 PM
#380
A guy I worked with was fired for
having porn on his computer at work(UMHS). He was not union nor was he a doctor. My nurse buddy knew a guy who was fired for looking at work as well. He was a nurse.
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:29 PM
#381
While looking at porn at work
While looking at porn at work is not a good choice it is not illegal and I doubt the U.S Department of Ed would be investigating. Looking at child porn on the other hand is illegal and disgusting.
February 3rd, 2012 at 8:44 PM
#382
I understand. I am simply pointing out
that UM in the past has acted quickly on people viewing porn at work. Their inaction here is mystifying.
February 3rd, 2012 at 8:13 PM
#383
US Dept of Education
Probably has no jurisdiction over the issue. The UM Health System is a separate entity from U of M and the perpetrator in question was a physician, not medical student. Funding for medial resident education comes from the System and Medicare dollars but not the US Dept of Education.
February 3rd, 2012 at 10:33 PM
#384
I don't know.
When you make a donation to Mott it counts as a donation to the University. So I believe they are one in the same.
February 3rd, 2012 at 9:19 PM
#385
Michigan dodges a lot of
Michigan dodges a lot of bullets. When I was in the law school the very gay very liberal clinic director wouldn't let veterans join the clinc. I filed a civil rights complaint and the DOE said she was allowed to choose who she wanted to be a clinic student because they had to work closely with her. Looks like M ran out of luck, kiddie porn was the bridge too far.
