Former U-M resident physician Stephen Jenson out on promise to appear on federal child porn charges
- Previous coverage: University of Michigan regents order external probe of six-month child porn reporting lapse
A former resident physician at University of Michigan Hospital appeared Thursday in federal court in Detroit to face child pornography charges and was released on a promise to appear.
Stephen Jenson, 36, of Pittsfield Township, is charged with receipt of child pornography and possession of child pornography.
Jenson
Jenson appeared Thursday afternoon in front of U.S. Magistrate Judge Steven Whalen, who released him on a number of conditions. Those conditions include not contacting minor children or victims in the case and using a computer only to search for employment.
Whalen restricted Jenson's travel to the Eastern District of Michigan, but gave him permission to make a trip to Utah to deal with his father's estate. Jenson's father passed away two weeks ago.
Jenson worked at the hospital until late December. Records show the child porn was found in May, but University of Michigan officials waited six months to report it to police.
On Thursday afternoon, the University of Michigan Board of Regents ordered an external investigation into the handling of the case. The decision by the regents comes less than a week after the university released its internal review of the case, and administrators said there would be no external review.
State child pornography charges against Jenson were dismissed Thursday morning by Washtenaw County prosecutors in favor of federal prosecution.
Jenson is scheduled to return to court March 8.
Lee Higgins covers crime and courts for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached by phone at (734) 623-2527 and email at leehiggins@annarbor.com.
Comments
kp
Sat, Feb 25, 2012 : 7:06 p.m.
Hate to break it to you, but as a former foodservice employee at U of M, I know of at least 1 registered pedophile that was passing food trays in the old Mott Hospital. In reviewing his profile on the Washtenaw County Sex Offender Registry, he is listed as "compliant". Really??? How is daily contact with children for your job "compliant" ? I always knew the judges in that county were crooked, but no one in authority gives a crap about childrens' safety. I hope all those who helped with the coverup rot for eternity with their cherished Satan.
BhavanaJagat
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 4:42 p.m.
The legal standards for conviction : I am still doubtful if the crime has been reported properly. To report a crime, we need a person who is aware of some criminal activity. At the same time, a person is not at freedom to discover some criminal activity at his/her own initiative. I can report suspicious events but I may not be able to conduct a search for information that may lead me to some suspicious event. The female resident could only conduct a search for her intended purpose; the purpose that she had claimed was that of knowing the owner of a thumb drive that she had accidentally discovered. She has no freedom to go beyond the limits of that intended purpose. It would be totally illegal to search the contents of that thumb drive for a possible discovery of some suspicious content. Under Law, she has no freedom, or choice to report information to which she has no legal access. She has violated the Rules of Discovery and hence this case is not established on a solid foundation. It is in the interest of fairness, I would ask that this case must be dismissed for lack of Evidence.
EyeHeartA2
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 1:43 p.m.
Well, as long as he "promised", I guess we are all set. Say....didn't that guy in Isreal "promise" to come back too? Then, there is this: I will remember that I remain a member of society with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath" rel='nofollow'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath</a> So, yep, we're good. I'm sure of it.
UtrespassM
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 1:05 a.m.
You can not imaging how great the administrators are covering up whatever smell fishy. BTW, Don't try to think the DPS is a law enforcement like the other police, they only work for "Who Is in Charge". "Is it a crime? Should DPS involve, or investigate? " All upon what the administrator want. There would be no different if the female resident physician first reported to DPS instead of hospital security. There are uncountable cases of covering up. There are people abused for long time.
Sciomanone1
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 12:41 a.m.
That is nice that he was able to go, out of stae, it looks like someone is kind to other and has feeling for someone that is not even guility as of yet. It sure is sad that he does not have a job and he was not found guility as of yet. That is what happen when you work at the U of M Medical center, the friends of friends in Administration will cover up for each other and the Man can not work because he is just fired and NO One cares. It is strange if he is wrong and has done something to be fired for so many months ago, what will happen to the Administrators that just did not do nothing and he has been working during all this time of when this did happen?? It looks like it is another comer up, just like when I shared about Co-workers sleeping during work time during the midnight shift and the sleeping workers just got promoted to Supervisor and Manager and I was fired for thinking about the Patient care. The Head of Security and the Administration from the IT Computer Dept have Not been in the News, if that is not a cover up what is? They should be fired and see what it is like to be with out a job,
thedudeabides
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 12:07 a.m.
I disagree. I don't believe rule 11 is applicable here. If any come into play it will be rule 70-1.
Roadman
Thu, Feb 16, 2012 : 11:37 p.m.
Interesting case. There are going to be some Fourth Amendment search and seizure issues explored. The defense will likely argue as to what constitutes prohibited pornography. The prosecution will have to prove Jenson knew the content of what he was downloading. There may be a Rule 11 plea agreement if the case is not dismissed on other grounds.
Mick52
Mon, Feb 20, 2012 : 1:14 a.m.
Roadman, while an attorney may bring up the concerns you mentioned, I cannot see any reason anything you bring up here is an issue. To get a search warrant all the police require is probable cause there is evidence in the place they want to search. A well trained experienced detective will include in an affidavit that people involved in this maintain a collection. Whether or not he still has the thumb drive is immaterial. They were looking for the images. To find it would help, but it would be hard to establish a drive is the same one found by the witness anyway.
Eep
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 4:29 p.m.
Now I think you're being a bit too literal regarding probable cause and the place to be searched. The thumb drive is portable. As long as they had probable cause to believe it belonged to Jenson, there would be a real probability of finding it anyplace where he had regular access. This would include his home, his office, his locker, etc. The delay in bringing charges certainly isn't good for the prosecution, and 6 months could be seen as outrageous with regard to the University's institutional behavior, but in the context of a criminal case of this type - it just doesn't seem like a very significant delay. The witness saw a picture of a man laying on top of a naked child. Could anyone really doubt that her memory of this wasn't still fresh six months later? Don't get me wrong here - you are making good points, and these are things that Jenson's lawyer will almost certainly look at. But I don't think that the ultimate result is in as much doubt as you apparently do.
Roadman
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 4:35 a.m.
Right. Also, how was there probable cause to search his Pittsfield Township home when the thumb drive was found at work? Searching his locker or office space at work may be OK but where is the pornographic link to his home to establish probable cause to search there. The delay in bringing charges resulting in faded memories or lost evidence is grounds also for a Due Process Clause violation. See the Michigan Court of Appeals decision in People versus Bisard on that .
Eep
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 2:10 a.m.
Child porn doesn't get consumed the way that drugs do. You do raise an interesting issue with staleness - the delay certainly isn't good for the prosecution - but I think it's pretty reasonable to believe that a person who is interested in child porn will collect / keep the porn that he obtains indefinitely.
Roadman
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 1:53 a.m.
The female resident placed the thumb drive back into the computer and it was gone the next day. Jenson was not questioned at that time and the thumb drive was not recovered as a result of the initial investigation. It was not until November that the search warrant was issued and executed. The information contained in the affidavit in support of the search warrant may have ben fresh enough to support warrant issuance within a few days of the report of the female resident to security, but would there be probable cause to find the thumb drive or any child pornography six months later at the resident's home? Is there enough of a transient nature to downloaded child porn to expect a suspect to have such downloaded photos six months down the road? In cases involving contraband such as drugs there is usually questions of staleness of information where a warrant is not issued or executed immediately since the nature of those items are that they are moved frequentlya and consumed within a short time. Was there a reasonable probability that police would find the thumb drive or other child porn in Jenson's custody six months after the thumb drive was found. This is especially so if Jenson had word of the female residents report or Office of General Counsel investigation. Would he not be expected to deep-six any and all suspected porn ASAP?
Eep
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 1:13 a.m.
What 4th Amendment issues are you thinking of? I'm not seeing any possibility of a 4th Amendment problem with the female resident's initial opening of the files on the thumb drive - she wasn't a law enforcement officer or acting as an agent for law enforcement. I haven't read anything that even hints at a problem with the warrant itself, as far as the description of the place to be searched or the items to be seized, and also absolutely no hint of any problems with the way the warrant was actually executed. The only thing left is the magistrate's determination that probable cause existed to support the warrant, which seems to be based primarily on the statement of the female resident - her description of what she saw seems detailed enough, and there don't seem to be any problems with her credibility or reliability. Also no hint that the police did anything fraudulent or reckless, or any bias on the part of the magistrate. So... what potential problem are you seeing that I'm not?
RJA
Thu, Feb 16, 2012 : 10:59 p.m.
I'm sorry to hear that Jenson's father passed away just a couple weeks ago, when he couldn't be there. I trust he will return to court on March 8. With his personal problems, then the death of his father, he is not on easy street.
shutthefrtdoor
Fri, Feb 17, 2012 : 3:58 p.m.
He probably died from a broken heart...
Smart Logic
Thu, Feb 16, 2012 : 10:34 p.m.
Does anyone else hear the Law and Order doink doink sound when hearing he was released "ROR?"