Internal review into U-M Hospital's handling of child porn case to be done in weeks
University of Michigan auditors expect to have a review of the university health system’s handling of a report of child pornography being found on a resident physician’s thumb drive done in a matter of weeks.
Stephen Jenson
University spokesman Rick Fitzgerald said Tuesday that the internal review began on Dec. 3 at the request of university President Mary Sue Coleman. Former resident physician Stephen Jenson, 36, had been suspended from his position just one day before because of a police investigation into allegations of child pornography possession.
The university fired Jenson on Dec. 16, Fitzgerald said. He was arraigned the next day on four charges of possessing child sexually abusive material and faces a preliminary exam on Feb. 16.
The initial report of the images came to hospital officials from a resident physician who found the images on a thumb drive in May, according to records. Her supervisors, hospital security and the Office of the General Counsel reviewed the case before an employee with the Office of the General Counsel decided there was not enough evidence to bring the case to police, records show.
It wasn’t until November that police were informed of the case, when a member of the hospital’s security staff came forward, records show.
University officials have condemned the gap between the initial report and police involvement and the internal review is meant to take a look at the processes that took place once the resident physician first came forward, Fitzgerald said.
“They’ll be talking to various people in the offices involved to get an understanding of how this was handled and the processes involved,” Fitzgerald said, “and they’ll be looking at what can be made better.”
The Office of University Audits is commonly turned to in a number of different situations, Fitzgerald said. The auditors participate in a number of investigations, spanning from financial audits of the university’s athletic department to management consulting work to help make departments more efficient, Fitzgerald said.
Related stories
- University of Michigan regent calls six month lapse in reporting child porn 'extraordinarily disappointing'
- U-M Health System CEO calls delay in reporting child porn 'painful moment in our history'
- University of Michigan officials didn't report child porn to police for 6 months
- University of Michigan officials weren't required by law to report child porn to state
Fitzgerald said there’s no deadline for the review to be finished, but it’s expected to be done in a matter of weeks.
“There is a clear sense of urgency for this,” he said.
“It’s hard to put an exact time frame on the work that remains to be done, but everyone understands it needs to be done swiftly.”
The auditors have already submitted some preliminary recommendations to the university, Fitzgerald said. Among them are developing a common set of guidelines for reporting security incidents throughout the university, consistent logging of all potential criminal activity in a reporting system shared by police and hospital security, joint training exercises and referring all computer forensic needs to university police.
When the internal review is finished, the university auditors will present their findings to Coleman and the university’s Board of Regents, which will make the report publicly available, Fitzgerald said.
Coleman spoke in December in the wake of the Penn State child abuse scandal about a task force the university is setting up to examine policies for recording, reporting and preventing sexual misconduct or abuse involving university employees and children, but that task force will not be involved in the review of Jenson’s case, Fitzgerald said.
“That’s a broader task force really designed to look at all university programs that include children and review safeguards in those programs,” Fitzgerald said. “It’s a completely different look at things.”
Kyle Feldscher covers cops and courts for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at kylefeldscher@annarbor.com or you can follow him on Twitter.
Comments
JMA2Y
Thu, Feb 2, 2012 : 6:21 p.m.
Some may not understand the U Audit process but the department is well staffed and well trained and will be able to do the job required. Auditors audit processes whereever and whatever that may be-laws, rules, financials, computers, etc. They look at how a process is set up, how it functions, and where are the holes. They have access to all the materials they need. They find the problems and devise solutions and make the presentation. It is then up to the dept. effected, and in this case, the Board of Regents, to adopt the solutions.
John
Thu, Feb 2, 2012 : 2:11 p.m.
Apparently the University and the Department of Pediatrics in particular did not learn from the Penn State case. The moment the thumb drive was found, viewed and reported, the University police should have been informed and an investigation requested. For God's sake this is the Pediatrics Department! These are the same people who are supposed to care for our children, not harm them or see them as prey. This is just another case of CYA, cover your A--. The Office of the General Counsel is a joke. Their main objective is to make sure there is no negative publicity for the University. By their inability to do the right thing, they failed every child who could have potentially been harmed by this predator!
Michigan Man
Thu, Feb 2, 2012 : 3:29 p.m.
John - Totally agree - add this case to the other Ann Arbor Pediatrician case - two different cases simultaneously - both within the past year - Top to bottom review of these cases needs immediate activation - status quo not doing the job - protecting children and adolescents in the Ann Arbor area seems to be lacking - results and findings need to be made public - Have on seen one Ann Arbor "leader" stand tall, speak to protecting children and adolescents and declare a new, higher community standard will be forthcoming.
anotheruofm
Thu, Feb 2, 2012 : 2:02 a.m.
We all know the process is flawed. "the internal review is meant to take a look at the processes that took place once the resident physician first came forward, Fitzgerald said." How about looking and finding out what these people knew; Marilyn Hollier, Susan Balkema, Tony Denton, Suellyn Scarnecchia.
julieswhimsies
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 11:36 p.m.
Policies, procedures, blah, blah, blah. If a crime is reported anywhere in Ann Arbor, you call the police. I know the U of M believes they are a separate little fiefdom, but they are not. They should obey the same laws we obey. If I witness a crime, I report it to the police IMMEDIATELY! I don't filter it through Administrators, middlemen, and Attorneys. I can't talk about this story anymore. This story makes me gag.
UtrespassM
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 8:58 p.m.
It is unbelievable that the DPS didn't know after the incident was reported to hospital security. Who was in charge the criminal investigation team at UMPD lasy May? Ken maggee was sick, O'Dell was still at EMU.
a2citizen
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 9:39 p.m.
UMPD was not notified until November21.
BhavanaJagat
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 8:32 p.m.
The Eyes See what the Mind Knows : This is the dictum that we use in the practice of Clinical Medicine. Unless the mind is prepared, the eyes cannot function with the knowledge that they need to observe things. The auditors may not be mentally prepared to see the facts unless they had received prior training. If the academic program has inherent deficiencies, it will not be able to prepare residents for their future role. It is not simply about reporting suspicious events to Police department for investigation.
julieswhimsies
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 11:40 p.m.
Again. Blah, blah, blah. Sam is right. You do the right thing. What is the point in over-intellectualizing about it?
Sam Smith
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 9:42 p.m.
It's more of a question of right and wrong and doing the right thing.
leaguebus
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 7:15 p.m.
Coverup of what? Its out in the open, the U admitted they messed up and will institute policys so this will never happen again. Plus the offender was charged and fired. What more can they do that is not already done? Anyway, this is no where near what happened at Penn State.
Sam Smith
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 9:37 p.m.
Many consider this worse than Penn State. This involved a pediatrician and doctors who took an oath to do no harm. The fact that this was covered up, Jenson was still allowed to work is beyond disturbing. Trust has eroded. If a child was abused in Jenson's care do you think they'd admit it?
sHa
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 7:52 p.m.
If the "offender was charged and fired" as you have claimed (left in June according to UM's spokesperson), who in the General Counsel's office continued to sit on the information for MONTHS, deciding that the police did not need to be notified? If the "offender was charge and fired", who made the decision to fire him? If he was fired for deciding not to report a suspected crime, why didn't the people that fired him immediately notify the police? Some person(s) in the General Counsel's office, or elsewhere in the University, decided it was not important to notify the police; they made the decision to protect the University. In the meantime, Dr. Jenson continued to see children at the UM. If there is no Cover Up, then who are the people that didn't report a suspected crime of child porn to the police? I think the public has a right to know.
Trouble
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 6:28 p.m.
In the infamous words of Dr. Henry Lee... " Something not right here! ".
WalkingJoe
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 4:52 p.m.
It amazes me that schools such as UM and Penn State have so many supposedly smart people working for them that no one is smart enough to contact a law enforcement agency to see if there is a criminal case. They seem smart enough to try to cover it up so as not to sully the reputation of the schools. What about doing the right thing?
CincoDeMayo
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 4:33 p.m.
It might help if everyone who wants an external investigation contacts the governor, both state senators, and each regent (as suggested by JustMyOpinion in response to another article on the subject). Here are the links to do just that: <a href="http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277-57827-267869--,00.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277-57827-267869--,00.html</a> <a href="http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=MI" rel='nofollow'>http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=MI</a> <a href="http://www.regents.umich.edu/about/regents.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.regents.umich.edu/about/regents.html</a> You know that nothing significant will happen unless people continue to hammer away at this. They are hoping it will be forgotten. Take some action and get some results.
julieswhimsies
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 11:42 p.m.
Will do.
sHa
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 6:04 p.m.
Likewise!
Linda Peck
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 4:58 p.m.
Thank you, CincoDeMayo, I have written to them all!
SW40
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 4:27 p.m.
I believe we need an investigation into the internal investigation conducted as an external investigation by a University Committe tasked with overseeing investigations. What a joke, Universities love this idea that their "internal investigations" are appropriate to fix all problems. When a group of nit wits with no real power investigate something they are unqualified to investigate it has no standing. This is a criminal case, not just the found child pornography but also the cover-up/delay in reporting and should be investigated by an outside agency, like I don't know a law enforcement agency to see if criminal charges need to be waged against administrators who did indeed obstruct justice and allow a sexual deviant to continue working with children. Disgusting.
Craig Lounsbury
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 2:48 p.m.
as others are pointing out, an internal review is unacceptable. When screw ups like this occur only an "external review" is credible.
mtlaurel
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 3:19 p.m.
besides, the individuals probably have lawyered up and gleaning information will be fruitless." Reviews" will not assist in anything. A few important people know exactly what happened, I am sure of that.
JustMyOpinion
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 2:33 p.m.
Wow, where to start with the problems here. Problem 1: An internal review is by definition biased. You work for the man, you don't shoot him. Problem 2: No lawyer is responsible for deciding to report a crime, that responsibility belongs to everyone who actually knows about it, as citizens. Crimes do not belong to a company and corporate lawyers in this case have only one goal which is to protect the company and limit their exposure. Not who you want making these calls. Problem 3 - and this one is shocking: "some preliminary recommendations to the university, Fitzgerald said. Among them are developing a common set of guidelines for reporting security incidents throughout the university, consistent logging of all potential criminal activity in a reporting system shared by police and hospital security," So an arguably world class institution, run by folks who make over half a million dollars each year at least 3 levels deep, cannot set up a command and accountability structure so basic as to address common reporting and common expectations of crime reporting? I would drum out the entire executive team immediately, for cause. Complete lack of comprehension how how to LEAD. Perhaps some professor can make a case study out of this on what a massive failure of leadership looks like when the foundations are set on mud - no matter how great what comes after, the mud will slide. There is a lot of mud to go around on this one. I am flabbergasted at the money paid for such incompetence, and it IS incompetence. To use a well worn but very apt saying from some German colleagues: A FISH STARTS ROTTING AT THE HEAD FIRST.
JMA2Y
Thu, Feb 2, 2012 : 6:26 p.m.
Unfortunately, at the U, schools and main campus and hospital campus are under separate leadership, have their separate IT dept., separate counsel staff, separate RISK, etc., and in this case, separate police/security depts. That means there's no one crime reporting method even though this should have been reported to DPS. But there isn't one logging system that hospital police must do that would tie into DPS. Basically, the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing because they are not on the same body.
a2citizen
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 1:20 p.m.
"...employee with the Office of the General Counsel decided there was not enough evidence to bring the case to police..." Two points: 1. I thought the police were tasked with deciding if there was enough evidence. 2. I cannot believe a single person could sign-off on a potentially criminal matter.
average joe
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 12:12 p.m.
From the Office of university audits 'standard practice guidelines'- "Under direction of the president of the University and the Finance, Audit and Investment Committee of the Board, the executive director of University Audits shall fulfill the Bylaw's requirements by reviewing risks, internal controls, quality, efficiency and effectiveness of University processes and systems. This direct reporting line to the president and to the Board of Regents ensures that University Audits shall remain independent." Ensures that this case will be independent? And notice that it outlines what arm of the regents (finance) is over-seeing it. The only way this whole PR nightmare will end is if the investigation is directed from outside the U/M.
justcurious
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 1:54 p.m.
These people deal with money - how to keep it and avoid losing it within the University.
Sam Smith
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 12:10 p.m.
Not impressed. An external investigation needs to be done. And this is how to make it better: Call the police immediately for crimes of this magnitude!
trespass
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 11:51 a.m.
If you look at the list of personnel in the Office of Internal Audits they are all a bunch of BBA and a few MBA business school graduates. Mostly accountants. What expertise do they have to investigate questions of law, corporate culture, administrative structure, etc? Who in that group knows how to interview witnesses? Do they have the resources to find emails, look at daily planners and tell if any records have been deleted to cover up facts, etc? Who in the group is senior enough to recommend firing the General Counsel or even President Coleman if she knew? This is a whitewash! There needs to be an external review similar to what was done for the NCAA investigation.
JMA2Y
Thu, Feb 2, 2012 : 6:19 p.m.
Auditors audit processes whereever and whatever that may be-laws, rules, financials, computers, etc. They look at how a process is set up, how it functions, and where are the holes.They find the problems and devise solutions and make the presentation. It is then up to the dept. effected, and in this case, the Board of Regents, to adopt the solutions. The U Audit team is very experienced and well trained. They have all the resources they need. People at the U quake when they see U Audits coming.
sHa
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 2:06 p.m.
How can the people in the Office of Internal Audits, all of whom work for the UM and depend on UM for their livelihood, possibly do an impartial evaluation of how UM handled this incident. Wouldn't their report be somewhat biased?
justcurious
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 1:55 p.m.
Well said.
15crown00
Wed, Feb 1, 2012 : 11:35 a.m.
if it started on 12-3-2011 we're almost at 60 days now (today is 2-1-12).how much more time they going to need? how silly of me . they have to get all the info together,review it,and get one consistent story out whether that be the whole truth and nothing but the truth or not. spokesperson said the problem was the procedures not the people.so who is responsible for the procedures?why the PEOPLE that developed them and implement them. it's a COVERUP nothing more nothing less.