NEW: Regents Meeting, Benson Decision, Investigation Report -- Monday, 6/12

[Fight CU]

See something, say something.

MacIntyre has a reporting obligation for notification to both chain of command and OIEC.

This exchange shows that there was confusion on MacIntyre's behalf. (p. 58)

"MacIntyre said that the University tried to make him issue a statement written for him, but he refused to “go for it.” He explained, “I know what happened – they don’t know what happened, and it better be right.” MacIntyre said that he wanted his statement to be completely accurate. MacIntyre said he worked with George and Plati, then called Wayne and put her on speaker phone. He said Wayne was advising him while he was drafting his statement. Wayne confirmed that “we disagreed with what they were wanting to say.” MacIntyre again reiterated that he wanted his statement to be right. Wayne said that she said at the time, “I want to be clear, I am not giving you legal advice, I am giving Mike advice and want his statement to be accurate.” Wayne said that her role was to help MacIntyre, and that she “was focused on Mike and helping him.” She also said, “I was clear all along in being in sync with the school’s policies and he was talking to school people, not just me.”
George and Huff confirmed that MacIntyre took issue with the University’s proposed statement. George said that he, MacIntyre and Plati were in the conference room, and George got frustrated with MacIntyre. He said MacIntyre put Wayne on the phone, and that MacIntyre “wasn’t going to do anything other than say I [MacIntyre] did everything right, I followed what I am supposed to do and I’m not saying anything more.” George said that Wayne tried to address him, but that he said he did not need her counsel and would rely on University Counsel. George said that he left and went to Draper’s office. Huff confirmed that MacIntyre was frustrated and refused to use the University’s draft statement. He said that MacIntyre was adamant that “I did the right thing – I told my supervisor.”

 

[Deleted member 807]

He did express his concern for the victim. He made sure she was safe, which is the most important part of this. Once that was assured by the victim, he contacted legal. I am almost 100% certain that legal told him to sever all communications with her. That is the smartest course of action for Mike MacIntyre and for the university at large.

Would not be surprised if RG also directed him to cease communication with the victim. In that event, MM would be going against the advice of legal counsel and against the orders of a superior. You do not hold a high profile job making those kinds of decisions.

I agree that it is tragic that people have to protect themselves instead of being kind and caring to one another. That is the world we live in though. Especially when holding a high profile, high paying job like MacIntyre does.

Read the report. Mike MacIntyre went to his outside counsel, but did not also confer with CU's counsel. The report takes exception to the advise of outside counsel to sever communications with the complainant without also following policy.

An OIEC reporting event would have triggered qualified persons to reach out to the complainant with resources and options that MacIntyre was unable to provide. Such an action should have resulted in quicker and better information about the existence of the TRO.

 

[Duff Man]

No, of course not, there is a PC principle here to be pursued, why in the world would we wait on the courts? Why in the world would the presumption of innocence apply? Why in the world would the shakedown wait for the facts to be established? CU absolutely has to kowtow and fall on its sword. After all, this happened off campus....

So was CU misguided in forcing Tumpkin's resignation?

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

 

[JWP303]

What expense? If you look at what HCMM did, he followed exactly what she wanted. Made sure she was safe and part of that was keeping Tumpkin employed/busy. The only thing he cut off was turning into her Rabbi.

I mean there are two sides to every story - but if you just go by the SI story, this woman was isolated, at her breaking point - and she was left to feel that Mac did nothing. Just from a human standpoint - football aside for a moment - it doesn't feel right. He will contend he did everything correctly and had obligations to not deal with her personally once he had assurance she was safe - and maybe he's right... I just wonder that maybe if he had been more human about it, could any of the fallout have been prevented? It's all speculation but I wonder.

 

[hawg1]

You don't think RG has a personal attorney who was probably giving him the same advice?[/QUOTE

Maybe RG's attorney gave the same unfortunate advice.

In MM's case, That's part of what caused a deepening of the cascade of events.

 

[Buffnik]

So was CU misguided in forcing Tumpkin's resignation?

Wasn't his contract up within weeks?

I thought it was a good PR move to not wait. Especially on recruiting since we were coming out of the Dec/Jan dead period and couldn't use him on the trail anyway. And for him, he had to focus on his legal issues and probably was happy to settle his contract. It was the right decision from all aspects.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

Read the report. Mike MacIntyre went to his outside counsel, but did not also confer with CU's counsel. The report takes exception to the advise of outside counsel to sever communications with the complainant.

An OIEC reporting event would have triggered qualified persons to reach out to the complainant with resources and options that MacIntyre was unable to provide. Such an action should have resulted in quicker and better information about the existence of the TRO.

The investigation may take issue with him using outside counsel, but I certainly don't. What D1 Football coach in this country wouldn't lawyer up? The only difference is that I would think most of these universities have trained their personnel correctly so before lawyering up those coaches would have also understood their responsibility to report to their version of OIEC.

 

[Buffnik]

I mean there are two sides to every story - but if you just go by the SI story, this woman was isolated, at her breaking point - and she was left to feel that Mac did nothing. Just from a human standpoint - football aside for a moment - it doesn't feel right. He will contend he did everything correctly and had obligations to not deal with her personally once he had assurance she was safe - and maybe he's right... I just wonder that maybe if he had been more human about it, could any of the fallout have been prevented? It's all speculation but I wonder.

If HCMM (and his wife) were the only people she felt she had to talk to, that wasn't a situation that was possible within context.

 

[hawg1]

Why? It would be absolutely in the best interests of the Athletic Department as a whole. RG has to operate in his best interests, the University's best interests, and his department's best interests. Just as some will feel he has a responsibility to do right by the victim, he has responsibility to do right by those parties as well.

He has to balance both.

We are talking about a hypothetical. If this did happen, I trust RG to balance have balanced both sides of his responsibility. appropriately.

 

[hawg1]

No, of course not, there is a PC principle here to be pursued, why in the world would we wait on the courts? Why in the world would the presumption of innocence apply? Why in the world would the shakedown wait for the facts to be established? CU absolutely has to kowtow and fall on its sword. After all, this happened off campus....

This is not about judgement or the judiciary as noted above. This is about process. No matter what is decided in court, CU personnel did not act appropriately according to their process. There is nothing PC about that. You either violated the process or you didn't. The preponderance of the evidence, as noted in the report, say there were several violations of process.

 

[BuffLuke80]

Can't blame him for the confusion. The CHANCELLOR didn't even know there was a reporting responsibility.

That's exactly my problem with this, get some guidelines or whatever in place so there is no grey area. That way, people know how to go about handling said situation. They should've already done it if they haven't.

 

[JWP303]

If HCMM (and his wife) were the only people she felt she had to talk to, that wasn't a situation that was possible within context.

I don't follow this point...

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

That's exactly my problem with this, get some guidelines or whatever in place so there is no grey area. That way, people know how to go about handling said situation. They should've already done it if they haven't.

That is the biggest part of this investigation IMO. It was determined that there were procedures in place, but that the coach, AD, and Chancellor were unaware of them. It is the responsibility of the Chancellor to ensure his employees understand university procedures through training.

Honestly surprised PD is going to keep his job after showing the level of incompetence that he has.

 

[hawg1]

That's exactly my problem with this, get some guidelines or whatever in place so there is no grey area. That way, people know how to go about handling said situation. They should've already done it if they haven't.

Contracts are being rewritten all over the country today. Presidents are calling their OIEC equivalents and their direct reports. Universities are double checking their compliance and training.

That's a good thing. It could save someone's life some day.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Can't blame him for the confusion. The CHANCELLOR didn't even know there was a reporting responsibility.

Ignorance of company policy is no excuse. At least not to a judge.

It shows inadequate measures within the university to comply with its own standards. It shows incompetence, which happens to be much better than negligence.

The difference between incompetence versus negligence in this case is a letter of repremand instead of dismissal.

I think it is important to not question the results of the investigation, but highlight that yesterday demonstrates what integrity, accountability, transparency, and responsibility looks like.

The old saying goes, it's not the crime that brings people down. It's the coverup.

CU vetted its dirty laundry for all to see. The truth will set you free.

 

[hawg1]

That is the biggest part of this investigation IMO. It was determined that there were procedures in place, but that the coach, AD, and Chancellor were unaware of them. It is the responsibility of the Chancellor to ensure his employees understand university procedures through training.

Honestly surprised PD is going to keep his job after showing the level of incompetence that he has.

This is egregious. He will retire. Additionally, his reticence to inform CU legal in a timely manner is equally or more egregious.

 

[hawg1]

The investigation may take issue with him using outside counsel, but I certainly don't. What D1 Football coach in this country wouldn't lawyer up? The only difference is that I would think most of these universities have trained their personnel correctly so before lawyering up those coaches would have also understood their responsibility to report to their version of OIEC.

The report does not take issue with him seeking counsel. That's his legal right. It comments on the guidance he got which was not appropriate in the report's opinion.

 

[Buffnik]

I don't follow this point...

It was a legal matter. Against his employee. He barely knew her. You wanted him to turn into his BFF and champion? Some people sure seem to think that was the reasonable expectation for HCMM.

 

[GoBuffs08]

Reading through all this ultimately Phil is the one that screwed everything up. MM told RG, RG told Phil. Phil being the incompetent that he is did nothing right. How Phil is still employed is what I don't understand.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Reading through all this ultimately Phil is the one that screwed everything up. MM told RG, RG told Phil. Phil being the incompetent that he is did nothing right. How Phil is still employed is what I don't understand.

Benson has DiStefano's back.

 

[Duff Man]

This is egregious. He will retire. Additionally, his reticence to inform CU legal in a timely manner is equally or more egregious.

That was probably the biggest "WTF" moment I had reading the report. Not only did he take a while to inform university counsel, but he also seemed to undersell the gravity of the situation when he did inform counsel.

 

[JWP303]

It was a legal matter. Against his employee. He barely knew her. You wanted him to turn into his BFF and champion? Some people sure seem to think that was the reasonable expectation for HCMM.

No I want him to respond like a sympathetic human being first and a guy who wants to keep his multi-million dollar contract second. It appears those two were reversed in this instance. Maybe that's naive and an unfair standard as you seem to be asserting, but I disagree.

 

[Buffnik]

No I want him to respond like a sympathetic human being first and a guy who wants to keep his multi-million dollar contract second. It appears those two were reversed in this instance. Maybe that's naive and an unfair standard as you seem to be asserting, but I disagree.

He made the call to her. He made sure she was safe. He didn't drop it or try to cover it up. I'm not sure what you want besides some ill-defined hand holding you think he was supposed to engage in.

 

[vinniew_11]

No I want him to respond like a sympathetic human being first and a guy who wants to keep his multi-million dollar contract second. It appears those two were reversed in this instance. Maybe that's naive and an unfair standard as you seem to be asserting, but I disagree.

It's this thought process I don't get. She just dropped a huge hand gernade on him and expected him to hand hold her through the process? Frankly, he honestly should have just said, "Go to the police. Don't put me in the middle." I don't doubt he was concerned for her, but SHE put HIM in a ****ty position.

 

[JWP303]

It's this thought process I don't get. She just dropped a huge hand gernade on him and expected him to hand hold her through the process? Frankly, he honestly should have just said, "Go to the police. Don't put me in the middle." I don't doubt he was concerned for her, but SHE put HIM in a ****ty position.

I might agree with you more if we were talking about some random job. But he isn't a McDonald's shift supervisor. There are a lot of variables here which make it's unique - the high profile nature of their jobs, the pay associated with their jobs, the interdependence between coaches on a staff... Plus all of the stigma and complications of domestic violence.

I guess I can just empathize with a woman who felt like she wanted to put an end to this situation without publicly blowing everything up. And then I can further empathize with how she might have felt once her very serious complaints seemingly fell on deaf ears (in HCMM's defense - he didn't do nothing, he escalated appropriately) - but again my whole point here is that I think you have some larger human responsibility to this woman if you're HCMM. He didn't have to be so clinical and cold with her.

 

[vinniew_11]

I might agree with you more if we were talking about some random job. But he isn't a McDonald's shift supervisor. There are a lot of variables here which make it's unique - the high profile nature of their jobs, the pay associated with their jobs, the interdependence between coaches on a staff... Plus all of the stigma and complications of domestic violence.

I guess I can just empathize with a woman who felt like she wanted to put an end to this situation without publicly blowing everything up. And then I can further empathize with how she might have felt once her very serious complaints seemingly fell on deaf ears (in HCMM's defense - he didn't do nothing, he escalated appropriately) - but again my whole point here is that I think you have some larger human responsibility to this woman if you're HCMM. He didn't have to be so clinical and cold with her.

I don't think he has any further obligation to her once he reported it up. Honestly, the legal ramifications alone is enough to cut ties. The human element? She was in Michigan. There isn't anything he can do. I'm sorry you feel he should have been her council but he's not. He's the first person in the chain of a complicated legal issue that SHE brought to HIM. She very well knows of battered woman groups she could get help with, if not, Google is her friend . Not from a person she knew in passing.

 

[JWP303]

I don't think he has any further obligation to her once he reported it up. Honestly, the legal ramifications alone is enough to cut ties. The human element? She was in Michigan. There isn't anything he can do. I'm sorry you feel he should have been her council but he's not. He's the first person in the chain of a complicated legal issue that SHE brought to HIM. She very well knows of battered woman groups she could get help with, if not, Google is her friend . Not from a person she knew in passing.

I think we can agree to disagree. It's a subjective view - I think he could have done more. Many don't think he was obligated to do so. He certainly could have handled it much worse, so there is a lot of perspective needed here.

 

[Buffnik]

I might agree with you more if we were talking about some random job. But he isn't a McDonald's shift supervisor. There are a lot of variables here which make it's unique - the high profile nature of their jobs, the pay associated with their jobs, the interdependence between coaches on a staff... Plus all of the stigma and complications of domestic violence.

I guess I can just empathize with a woman who felt like she wanted to put an end to this situation without publicly blowing everything up. And then I can further empathize with how she might have felt once her very serious complaints seemingly fell on deaf ears (in HCMM's defense - he didn't do nothing, he escalated appropriately) - but again my whole point here is that I think you have some larger human responsibility to this woman if you're HCMM. He didn't have to be so clinical and cold with her.

She said the relationship was over, they were in different states, and that she was safe. She said she didn't want the police involved and didn't want JT to lose his job over it. She only wanted HCMM to be aware of the situation. Understandably, she was confused and emotional. Probably PTSD or similar, assuming she had just come out the other end of 2 years of abuse. I don't blame her at all for not knowing what she wanted to happen at that point or for being inconsistent in what she thought or said she wanted to happen.

But she wasn't pushing for a course or action or a resolution. Instead, she wanted to not have been abused at all and wanted a shoulder to cry on. HCMM can't fix the past and wasn't that shoulder. He couldn't be that shoulder. All he could do is to move the process forward in a way that she made clear she didn't want to happen within a context of JT, when confronted, presumably saying that he didn't do it and that she's trying to make trouble for him over the breakup. And whether we like to admit it or not, people get nasty after breakups and make up all sorts of stories including abuse of themselves or children... which is why the proper course is:

1) Tell your boss.
2) Report to OIEC.
3) Follow direction from your boss & legal counsel.

You don't go cowboy to be her shoulder to cry on.

 

[vinniew_11]

And honestly, I bet if she had gone to the authorities herself, CU and it's football staff would have been incredibly sympathetic and would have provided her with a certain level of warmth that you seem to want. But by involving CU directly, that shuts that door quickly.