Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Welcome to The 1909, the podcast that takes an in-depth look at The State News’ biggest stories of the week, while bringing in new perspectives from the reporters who wrote them.
(Alex) It's Thursday, September 14, and this is the 1909. The state news weekly news podcast featuring state news reporters talking about the news. I'm your host, Alex Walters. I know it's just week two of this new format but we're already breaking it just a bit. This week I'm joined by a nonstate news or we have Kenny Jacoby, the USA Today reporter behind the bombshell report revealing that MSU football coach Mel Tucker is under investigation for sexual harassment. Then I'll be joined by Theo share of the state news to talk about new details in the ongoing search for MSU is next president. With that, let's start the show. The interview you're about to hear was conducted over zoom. It has not been edited, but we do apologize for some interruptions and clarity. Alright, my next guest is here. Can you do to introduce yourself?
(Kenny) Hi, I'm Kenny Jacoby, investigative reporter for USA Today.
(Alex) Yeah, so you know, Kenny, a lot has happened since and if you're listening, it's Thursday. A lots happened since your report came out on Sunday, I guess mainly the suspension of Michigan State head coach, Mel Tucker in response. But do you want to you know, I know this isn't an easy question. For those who are you know, under rocks who are unaware of anything just kind of tell us you know, what did your story say how that came about?
(Kenny) Yeah, so the the story that we published on Saturday, detailed sexual harassment allegations against Michigan State football coach Mel Tucker, by a prominent rape survivor and activist named Brenda Tracy. This is a case that has been going on at Michigan State since December 2022. It has been quietly in the background while Mel Tucker has continued to work with the football team and coach games. And Brenda Tracy went public with the story over the weekend. And the crux of the allegations that are laid out in her complaint are that Mel Tucker made sexual comments and masturbated without her consent during a phone call in April 2022. In the context of their work relationship, Mel Tucker had hired Brenda Tracy to come speak to his players for the first time in August 2021. And invited her back to campus two more times after that they had developed a professional bond and eight months into relationship is when this incident occurred.
(Alex) And you know, since that story has come out a lot of the discussion in the you know, we've talked to students and faculty members, there's been a lot of punditry at various sports media, local media media, about whether or not MSU could have, you know, taken action sooner or should have taken action sooner. Because, you know, the suspension only came after your report sort of publicize this incident. You know, you're not somebody who's just, I guess, kind of aware of the intimate details of this case. But also, you know, you've investigated similar cases across the country at different universities. I guess, you know, I'm curious, what's your take on that? Do you think it's reasonable to say that MSU should have should have or could have taken action sooner or because of, you know, the confidentiality, that's sort of a part of this title nine process? Is that I guess, an unrealistic expectation to put on these administrators.
(Kenny) Yeah, you know, it was well within Michigan State's rights to have suspended Mel Tucker at the onset of the case, I believe, however, you know, doing so carries some consequences. That may be unintended. You know, I do understand a lot of the criticism over the last few days, you know, it seems like the appearance is MSU is being reactive, instead of proactive, issuing this suspension without pay only after the story became public. I would, you know, just note that, on the flip side of that, you know, hypothetically, if, if Michigan State were to have suspended him at the onset of this case, eight months ago, there would have been a lot of rumors and speculation going around, and everyone would want to know why Mel Tucker has been excluded from the football team. And that would be before Michigan State would have done any sort of fact finding investigation. And so that would have drawn a lot of attention to the case in in a way that many sexual harassment victims don't necessarily want. So it was a complicated decision, I think, and they can be I think the criticisms of it are valid, but you know, I also understand that it was a tricky sort of balance for them to strike.
(Alex) Hmm. And this is, you know, I don't know if you're comfortable talking about this yet, because it's sort of a development in the last couple hours. But Brenda Tracy now through her attorney has released a statement saying that part of the reason Then she came forward was because there was information that had already been shared, you know, somewhere along the process that was getting out to local media. And she said, I just wanted to do so with you on her own terms. Can you talk is that? I guess something you've seen before with schools with the names of claimants getting out in that way? Is that something she had discussed with you? Can you provide, I guess, any additional insight sort of being inside that decision making?
(Kenny) Sure, you know, Brenda Tracy, she had expressed to me that she wanted to, if you go through the hearing this, and quickly complete the case, before going public with their story. But she understood that this is such a high profile situation, and that it would have been very painful for at any time, tells of it to leak and her to sort of, you know, be outed that she didn't want. And so, you know, her statement today from her attorney, essentially says that her hand was sort of full because some somehow, details of the case did get leaked out beyond the circle of people that were supposed to know about it. And she felt like it was sort of, she was sort of losing control over it, and decided to share her story at that point.
(Alex) And then, you know, last night Tucker released a statement, you know, for the, for the first time sort of publicly commenting on the accusations and the suspension. And you know, in short, he's kind of denied wrongdoing and characterized the investigation as sort of a malicious attempt to bring him down. But you and your colleague at the Lindsey State Journal did some interesting reporting, sort of taking a closer look at his statement. You want to talk about that a bit?
(Kenny) Yeah, Mel Tucker has maintained since first time he ever spoke to the school about the or that he has been falsely accused starting all sorts of. Oh, yeah, sure. Yeah, just man Tucker has maintained. Sure. Mel Tucker has maintained since getting of the case since the first time he spoke to the investigator that he has been falsely accused, that he consensual phone sex with Brent Lee, and that, in the months leading up to this call, developed a sort of mutual romance, the statement that he issued yesterday, you know, repeat a lot of the same claims saw him make in the investigation report, which Brendan provided us. But I think it's worth noting, and this is what my colleague and I reported last night is that the statement where Tucker goes into some detail about, you know, the what occurred during this year where he and Brenda were in communication. He contradicts several of the things that he told the investigator according to the case documents that have specifically, you know, we we noted that he said in his statement that he he did not cancel a visit for Brenda that had been planned for July 2022, which would have been three months after the incident occurred. He said also that he had in fact postponed that visit until January 2023. But what he told to the investigator, back when he gave his statement in March this year, was that he did in fact, cancel Brandis visit, and that he had no recollection of them ever discussing, bringing her back to campus in January 2023. Because he said that that would it make sense to do so when some of his new players wouldn't be on campus yet? So we do see him sort of changing his story in his statement. And as we noted in our original story, he's done this a few different times now.
(Alex) And does that have any ramification on the hearing process? Or is you know, just only the evidence and the statements that were set, when the investigative sort of part of the process concluded is that all the can go into the hearing or these contradictions that are coming up now, as it's become public? Could that affect the case?
(Kenny) Yeah, that's a great question. The inherent nature of these cases is that there are often no witnesses and no recordings. And so decisions of who is at fault often come down to whose account is more credible. And so these inconsistencies in Tucker's account of which there are several, could really, you know, come back to hurt his credibility later. And it could end up leading to a decision where the University says, you know, this person has made several contradictory statements, we can't necessarily take his word. And they may compare that to Brenda's statements and see whether she made similar inconsistencies. We're not aware of any and the investigation report did not cite any, they cited a few different ones involving Tucker. So that is the sort of thing that could result in him being found responsible if the university decides that his account is not creditable.
(Alex) And what about you know, this hearing that set for next month, there's been, I think, a lot of confusion about what that might look like how it can be similar and different from I guess, you know, sort of the trial process if this were to be a criminal proceeding? And can you talk through, you know, you're somebody who's covered a lot of these processes? What can people expect from one of these, you know, university lie hearings? What will they know, at various times? What will remain confidential? What can people expect for the beginning of October?
(Kenny) Yeah, so my understanding is there's a hearing plan for October 5, and sixth, which is during Michigan states by week, and under the new title nine regulations are implemented in 2020. This is how the process goes in the sexual harassment harassment cases. Now, first, there is a fact finding investigation, in this case that was completed in July. And then the investigation report from that fact finding expedition gets sent on to a hearing officer. So Michigan State has hired another outside attorney to oversee the hearing. This hearing sort of resembles a trial. It's different. You know, it's these sorts of cases are just much different than, than criminal cases or even civil civil cases in court. But essentially, this is where both sides will get the opportunity to make their case to the hearing officer, to question witnesses, to ask questions about the evidence and make points. And at the end of it, the hearing officer is expected to write a report where she outlines her decision making and, you know, determines whether or not Tucker violated the school policies on sexual harassment and exploitation.
(Alex) And, you know, based on my understanding past public records request with the university, I know that, you know, if there's no finding, in the case against Tucker MSU, will not release that, but there is they will release it. So for people wondering, you know, how much of this process they're going to get to see, I guess, short of you know, either the claimant or respondent involved releasing it, you talk about what will become public, and what will stay sort of part of this secretive process?
(Kenny) Yeah, so there are a lot of different issues that can affect confidentiality, and these sorts of situations, generally, you know, in when when these cases involve a student, as a respondent, federal law, its schools from releasing details about about the process about the case, except for the final, if if the person is found responsible, when it comes to employees, the standards are a little bit different. And as I understand the university will have to make a judgment call about, you know, if he has not found at fault, you know, whether he a privacy interest in, you know, maintaining the confidentiality of these records, and certainly he does, but there's also an interest in the public knowing about what happened involving one of the highest paid employee public employees in the state. And so the university will have to pay those interests against each other and make a determination. And I think there's a good argument to make that because this case has already garnered so much media attention and interest from the public, that the university may release the documents reeks of the outcome. But if
if he is found at fault, I think it's almost certain that the records would would be made publicly available.
(Alex) All right, well, that's all I have for you. Today, Kenny, we have it thank you so much for coming on the show. And if people want to, you know as things develop, keep following your work and their coverage. What's the best way for people to keep up with you?
(Kenny) Yeah, I post all the articles I write on my Twitter account or ex, I guess it's called now. That's my handle is Kenny Jacoby. And you can also find my work at USA today.com.
(Alex) All right. Well, thank you so much for coming on the show again. It's great to have you.
(Kenny) All right. Thank you. Appreciate it.
(Alex) All right. My next guest is one of the best Theo's in collegiate journalism. And as far as I know, there are no nepotism allegations with this one. It's state news administration reporter Theo shear. Welcome back to the show.
(Theo) Thank you, Alex. It's great to be here.
(Alex) It's great to have you. So yeah. So you and I have spent the last couple of weeks doing some work looking into the current presidential search that's going on at MSU. So for those acquainted, you want to say, you know where? Where's MSU at?
(Theo) Well, Alex, right now, we're still taking applications. There's a place where you can submit applications and also recommend other people for the presidency. So we're still looking at those.
(Alex) I see. But of course, you know, we in the general public and the media, we don't know who any of those people are. We'll just know who they pick as president. Correct. Yep. The whole search is done in secrecy. Yeah. Which is interesting. I feel like if you were picking buzzwords that people use to criticize, and misuse, administration, transparency would probably be the first one that's been such a thing last few years, especially since the Nasser scandal, what's the what's the justification, I guess, for that secretive process, especially when trust and MSU leadership is in such short supply?
(Theo) Absolutely. Well, they say it's for the job safety of those candidates who are being reviewed right now. If they're at their job, and they find out that they're also a finalist at another search that could compromise their career. They look disloyal again. Exactly. Yeah.
(Alex) And so what about you know, even if we're not going to know who any of these candidates are, who the finalists are? What are ways that you know, people in general public care about this care about the next leader? What's the pitch, right is how they can get involved in the process?
(Theo) Well, there have been a few input sessions so far. As of right now, that's up to the Presidential Search Committee. It's made up of 20. Some people and they are working to look at candidates for the board.
(Alex) And I guess the design of the committee is supposed to be you know, if we can't all know what's going on, we're represented to an extent by the people on it correct. It's, you know, students, faculty, different groups.
(Theo) That's the idea. However, I've heard a few complaints about representation on the committee, I interviewed Hannah Jeffery, the president of the Council of Graduate students recently, and, and she was worried about the number of business people on the board. She's one of three students that are represented. And she just worries about the balance there.
(Alex) I see. Yeah, and you know, a couple other things that we learned in our reporting, we did have a conversation with Dennis Tao, who's one of the members of the Board of Trustees. He was also chairing this search committee that's looking for the candidates. And you know, he he refused to say how many people have applied or refused to identify any of the candidates already told us a little bit more than we previously knew, which is that he wants somebody who has previous experience running what he calls large, complex, multibillion dollar organizations like MSU. That's his number one thing, a commitment to diversity is number two thing. And then he said, someone who recognizes that sports is the, quote, front porch of the university. So I guess you know, as to elaborate, he said that people in his words, rightly or wrongly, identify universities, by their sports programs. And so he thinks that a candidate who recognizes sort of the importance of MSU sports programs could help with in his mind application numbers, and also mainly with philanthropy, so with donations to the university. And then the other thing he said to that was interesting is that, you know, in the previous Stanley search, about four years ago, when MSU looked for the last president, there was a strong idea that they wanted someone who had been a president of an AAU University before, but dental told me this week, you know, that they're, they're not excluding anybody. And so even if they're not somebody with an academic background, if there's somebody in the business world, he said, or even he mentioned candidates in the military world, he said that they've gotten strong applications from them, and they're not going to be discounting them, you know, they're gonna be looking at anybody, regardless of background,
(Theo) there certainly is a variety of candidates, it really could be anybody. But what I wonder is did those candidates, the boards, chooses, does that have to be the choice?
(Alex) That's interesting thing to the other point that dental kind of said that I don't know if we've heard before from him is that you know, this committee, it's, I think, 24 members, they're going to put together finalists of like, these are the people who we think could be MSU. next president, and they're going to recommend them to the Board of Trustees, which is the governing organization elected by the people of Michigan that oversees MSU. But what Daniel said, who's in this interesting position of being both on the search committee and the board, he's one of the few people to do that. Is that the board could they could interview candidates who aren't search committee finalists, and they could even pick a candidate who's not a search committee finalist. So there's sort of a you know, there's going to be a bit of this black box, right? We're we're trusting as outsiders that the committee is going to pick these finalists and they're going to go to the board and they're going to select a president. But what he said is that, you know, what could actually happen sort of in these closed rooms is that they could, they could pick somebody else entirely, which is interesting. I don't know if that's a thing that we've heard from the board before.
(Theo) That is interesting. Are we going to know anything before the President is announced?
(Alex) You know, I mean, unless they decide to open it up a little bit more, and tell us some more about what's going on. I don't know for it to know anything more. You know, usually when we at the state news or other media outlets learn something about MSU that they don't want out there. It's almost always through a public records request. But they've been very, very careful about avoiding FOIA. In this process, they've hired you know, this outside search firm, to Isaacson Miller to orchestrate the whole thing, so that all the emails with candidates, the invoices for these different meetings and lunches and such, all that is to the search firms, so it's not subject to public records requests. And then the members of the committee have also received guidance about FOIA and how they can, you know, they are MSU employees, they use MSU emails that are subject to records request, but they got a memo from the General Counsel basically telling them how to handle FOIA what couldn't couldn't before it. We don't know what that guidance was, because actually, kind of Ironically, when we tried to get that through FOIA, we got it back completely redacted under the attorney client privilege exemption. But yeah, so I don't know Theo, I don't think we're going to know much more, at least not through any sort of official channels
(Theo) definitely be something to watch over these coming months. Yeah. And
(Alex) you know, you can stick with state news.com for all the coverage. Better. Thank you for coming on. Again. It's always great to have you.
(Theo) Thank you, Alex. Yeah, always love to be here.
(Alex) That's all for this week. We'll be back next Thursday with even more stories. Until then the stories we discussed today and plenty more available at state news.com. Thank you to our incredible podcast director Anthony Brinson, our guests Kenny and Theo and mostly to you for listening for the 1909 I'm Alex Walters.