OMG this is so big! Like WoW... OMG!!!!!!
spoiler alert: i linked this
OMG this is so big! Like WoW... OMG!!!!!!
OMG? More like ZOMG!!!!1!!1!!
I guess you're being sarcastic but this is actually kind of a big deal.
are not prefaced by Yo:
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.
Is a topless 2 year old actually child porn? I'm genuinely interested, as I've seen quite a few at the beach, &c.
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.
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?
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.
Just as they equated extra stretching to the scandal at Ohio.
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.
Drops into full trolling mode.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
That was first posted....and deleted here back then-
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.
I'm not even sure what that indicates, I haven't ever given it a lot of thought.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
State sucks!! Gholston's a thug! Day-Day is fat! Three in a row!! Going down on Sunday.
Not to downplay the truly horrid implications of this story, but-
Kellie Woodhouse. Wow.
Woodhouse, well obviously.
The article doesn't really say, but anyone have an idea why the legal office decided to drop the case?
Insufficient evidence as far as I recall.
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.
Where is the OT??? This isn't a Jordan Diamond update!
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?
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.
Jenson=/=Jensen, just to be clear.
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).
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.
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.
Fuck's sake, when will it stop.
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.
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.
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.
My sentiments, exactly.
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.
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.
I prefer my photoshopped cats wearing green lemon helmets
I've always wondered.
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.
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?
For someone with an Ag degree, I'd expect you to know that's a pomelo
Can't find a lime big enough?
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.
if he just wouldn't have invented the Internet ..... /s
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"
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.
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.
makes me sick.
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.
They should have called the police just because they found the material and let the police figure out who it belonged to.
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.
...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.
soooo..where was Sandusky?
(and what does this have to do with mgoblog or um athletics??)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
that UM in the past has acted quickly on people viewing porn at work. Their inaction here is mystifying.
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.
When you make a donation to Mott it counts as a donation to the University. So I believe they are one in the same.
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.