04-08-2015

CELEBRATING OUR ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIFTH YEAR OF EDITORIAL FREEDOM Wednesday, April 8, 2015

Ann Arbor, Michigan

Editor’s note: Emily Campbell, one of the subjects of this piece, is a copy editor at The Michigan Daily. Campbell was not involved in the editing process of this editorial or the Daily’s special report. *** In a phone interview with University spokesman Rick Fitzgerald on Tuesday afternoon, the Daily requested specific information about the sexual misconduct investigation process in order to clarify several aspects of a news report published in today’s edition of the paper. On behalf of the University, Fitzgerald declined to comment and said the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy would suffice in answering the Daily’s questions.

In February 2014, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights announced it would investigate the University for violations of Title IX legislation.

In response to the investigation, the University issued the following statement: “We’re very proud of our student sexual misconduct policy, our prevention efforts and our programs to support survivors of sexual misconduct … we believe that a review of our policy, programs and investigations will conclude that the University of Michigan is doing what it should in this important area.”

While the University claims it is doing “what it should” to support survivors of sexual misconduct, after reviewing documents and University policies, it is undeniable that the University’s sexual assault adjudication and education processes contain significant policy faults that cannot be ignored.

First, the University’s sexual misconduct investigations function in a manner that brings their equitability into question.

Second, there are discrepancies between the Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Center’s definition of consent and that of University policy it determines cases on, which raises concerns about the educational materials promoted by the University. In light of this specific case and the larger Title IX investigation, the University is left with one choice: It must change its sexual misconduct investigation policies and formulate better sexual education programs for its students. To persist with the current policies would only further discredit the University’s sincerity in combating sexual assault on campus.

In December 2013, LSA sophomore Emily Campbell alleged that she was involved in unwanted sexual contact with thenLSA-freshmen Aaron Reuben and Jonathan Barnet. Campbell reported the incident to SAPAC, which referred her to a University hospital sexual assault nurse examiner, or SANE. A University Police Department investigation was automatically initiated. Information from this investigation was brought to the Office of Institutional Equity, where an adjudication process See EDITORIAL, Page 4

ocuments reviewed by The Michigan Daily — detailing a 2013 sexual assault complaint filed by a University student — raise potential questions about the school’s internal process for investigating allegations of sexual misconduct.

Editor’s note: Emily Campbell, one of the subjects of this piece, is a copy editor at The Michigan Daily. Campbell was not involved in the editing process of this story. For further information regarding the reporting process of this story, see this Editor’s Blog online.

Documents reviewed by The Michigan Daily, detailing a 2013 sexual assault complaint filed by a University student, raise questions about the University’s process for investigating allegations of sexual misconduct.

In February 2014, the U.S. Department of Education launched a formal investigation into the University’s handling of sexual misconduct cases. In the months since federal officials commenced their investigation, the University was subject to another Title IX complaint. Title IX is a component of federal education law that prevents discrimination based on gender in any education programs that receive federal funding.

In December 2013, then-LSA-freshman Emily Campbell reported to the University that she had been sexually assaulted on campus by Jonathan Barnet and Aaron Reuben, who were LSA freshmen at the time.

The University’s judicial process determined the two were not responsible for sexual misconduct — a decision Campbell unsuccessfully appealed — but were sanctioned for disseminating photos of the incident without Campbell’s knowledge or consent. Barnet and Reuben were ultimately suspended, effective in January 2015, on that charge — a decision they unsuccessfully appealed. They will remain suspended until January 2016.

Campbell’s mother, Maria Mortellaro, filed a Title IX complaint with the U.S. Department of Education on Campbell’s behalf. The complaint argues the University mishandled her daughter’s sexual misconduct case. The Department of Education has taken on the complaint and added it to its ongoing investigation of the University.

This complaint details several steps of the University’s process that Mortellaro says were handled unfairly and alleges the University failed to provide a prompt and equitable response to Campbell’s report.

The complaint centers around Campbell and Mortellaro’s view that a discrepancy persists between the standards of consent

December 11 2013: Campbell meets with OIE investigator Elizabeth Seney, beginning the University’s formal investigation.

taught by the University’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Center and those used during the University’s judicial process.

The complaint also alleges that the University does not employ adequate protocols for determining what types of evidence and witnesses are permitted in proceedings.

Another key part of the complaint is Campbell’s claim that the University advised her that hiring a lawyer was unnecessary.

However, without a lawyer advising her throughout the University’s appeals process, Campbell said attorneys for the respondents

blocked several documents from being considered in the appeals deliberations.

These documents included a letter from the University Police detective who investigated her case, in which he called the panel’s decision to find the respondents not responsible for sexual assault “unfathomable.”

The Daily reviewed the documents pertaining to the University’s investigation, including the Office of Institutional Equity’s investigation report, appeals documents filed by both Campbell and the students who she alleges assaulted her — referred to as “respondents” in the University’s documents — and the final findings of an appeals board.

Attorneys for the respondents chose to speak on behalf of their clients and did not comply with the Daily’s requests to interview the respondents directly on Tuesday.

The Daily filed a Freedom of Information Act request in January 2015 regarding documents considered in the U.S. Department of Education’s March 2014 investigation of the University. The Daily has not received these requested documents.

University spokesman Rick Fitzgerald could not provide more information regarding any questions raised by the documents related to this case and declined to comment regarding the University’s general processes at large. It could not be confirmed whether the documents reviewed by the Daily for this case encompassed all of those generated by the investigation and judicial proceedings.

HI: 71 LO: 43

GOT A NEWS TIP? Call 734-418-4115 or e-mail news@michigandaily.com and let us know.

The incident occurred after Campbell, according to OIE investigation documents, attended a date party as a Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority pledge. Both Reuben and Barnet attended the same party. Campbell alleges she was coerced into participating in unwanted sexual acts with both Reuben, a Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity pledge, and his roommate Barnet, a Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity pledge, at approximately 2 a.m. on Dec. 6, 2013 in their Mary Markley Residence Hall dorm room.

Campbell reported the alleged assault to SAPAC later in the day on Dec. 6, where she was advised to go the University Hospital. At the hospital, a sexual assault nurse examiner, also known as a SANE, administered a rape kit.

At the hospital, University Police Detective Ryan Cavanaugh was the first to ask her questions about the previous night’s events — the initial step in a yearlong series of hearings, interviews and discussions regarding the incident.

After Cavanaugh’s interview with Campbell, the Office of Student Conflict Resolution and Anthony Walesby, the University’s Title IX coordinator, reviewed the case and transferred it to the Office of Institutional Equity, which See POLICIES, Page 3 launched

January 9 2014: Attorney David Nacht states on behalf of Jonny Barnet, “His contention is that anything that happened that night was consensual.”

December 6 2013 2:00 a.m. : Campbell and Reuben return to Reuben’s room in Markley 2:26 a.m. and in the hours immediately following the alleged assault: Photos are sent to 20 people via a GroupMe depicting the alleged assault Evening: Campbell goes to SAPAC and later to the University of Michigan Emergency Room

WEATHER TOMORROW

michigandaily.com

NEW ON MICHIGANDAILY.COM Nursing School joins climate change effort MICHIGANDAILY.COM/BLOGS

March 17 2014: Barnet requests an extension to provide feedback to the University following the University's initial draft report, which is later granted.

INDEX

Vol. CXXIV, No. 98 ©2015 The Michigan Daily michigandaily.com

NEWS...........................2 OPINION.......................4 ARTS............................. 5

SPORTS........................7 SUDOKU.......................2 CL ASSIFIEDS.................6

News

2 — Wednesday, April 8, 2015

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

CAMPUS LIFE

UMix won’t screen film in wake of complaints AMANDA ALLEN/Daily

Ari Weinzweig, Zingerman’s co-owner and founding partner, speaks about the creation of Zingerman’s Deli at an event hosted by Alpha Kappa Psi fraternity at the Michigan Union’s Rogel Ballroom on Tuesday.

Zingerman’s co-founder talks successful business practices Weinzweig to jointly deliver commencement address

By EMILY MIILLER Daily Staff Reporter

Ari Weinzweig, Zingerman’s co-owner and founding partner, could be found on campus Tuesday before his commencement speech next month for students who knew where to look.

During a “Man Behind the Sandwich” event Tuesday in the Michigan Union, Weinzweig spent an hour answering student questions from students about the operation of Zingerman’s and his business philosophy. The event was hosted by Alpha Kappa Psi, a business fraternity on campus, and sponsored by the Cen-

tral Student Government and the Ross School of Business.

Weinzweig and his partner Paul Saginaw opened Zingerman’s Deli on March 15, 1982.

After 33 years Zingerman’s operations are still expanding, though it continues to operates solely out of Ann Arbor. Weinzweig said even though the deli originally faced difficulties, hard work eventually validated their business model.

“Five to six years after opening, we were geniuses,” Weinzweig said.

He drew many of his remarks from the Twelve Natural Laws of Business, a series of ideas about business created by both Zingerman’s founders. The laws include philosophies such as valuing staff, making the workplace engaging, and always looking for ways to improve.

Weinzweig told students he considers the set of laws to be

universal principles that all successful businesses adhere to, consciously or unconsciously.

At Zingerman’s, he said these principles were integrated in several ways, leading to a structure that’s different from traditional businesses.

“Our business is like an old school family farm,” Weinzweig said. “It looks messy from a corporate standpoint, but within itself it is organized, like the family farm (it) has a harmony and a rhythm to it.”

He also referred to these principles to dispel what he called common misconceptions about business. Weinzweig said people often consider success to be the end of logistical and financial challenges, such as not having enough money to operate. However, he said he believes success can be defined as simply having more influence over the types of challenges a business has.

“Success means you get better problems,” he said. “It’s getting the problems you want.”

According to Weinzweig, a “better problem” is Zingerman’s policy of using higher quality products that are more expensive, meaning they have to spend more money to uphold quality.

Another is finding the time to launch the many new ideas he has to improve the company, given how much he’s investing in Zingerman’s due to its relative success.

Weinzweig also highlighted the importance of employees, describing Zingerman’s process for engaging employees in the company and fostering a sense of individual purpose.

“I realized we were teaching our employees about business in a systemic way,” he said.

Read more on MICHIGANDAILY.COM

Roughly 200 sign letter calling for cancellation of ‘American Sniper’

By LARA MOEHLMAN Daily Staff Reporter

The Center for Campus Involvement announced Tuesday afternoon they would cancel a planned showing of “American Sniper” at UMix following a student petition over the depiction of certain communities in the film.

In a statement posted on by Facebook CCI, which runs UMix, the organization said the choice was made in response to concerns raised by students about the film in the petition.

“Student reactions have clearly articulated that this is neither the venue nor the time to show this movie,” the statement read. “We deeply regret causing harm to members of our community, and appreciate the thoughtful feedback provided to us by students.”

LSA sophomore Lamees Mekkaoui started the petition Tuesday morning after discovering that UMix, a University program dedicated to providing students with alcohol-free events on Friday nights, would be showing the 2014 war drama “American Sniper” this Friday.

Mekkaoui, who is a a member of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality and the Middle Eastern and

Arab Network on campus, said she found the choice of film disconcerting because of its depictions of the Iraq War and residents of the Middle Eastern and North African region.

The film, directed by Clint Eastwood and starring Bradley Cooper, is based on the autobiography of Chris Kyle, a U.S. Navy Seal who served in Iraq and has the most confirmed kills as a sniper in U.S. military history.

“As a student who identifies as an Arab and Middle Eastern student, I feel that ‘American Sniper’ condones a lot of anti-Middle Eastern and North African propaganda,” Mekkaoui said.

She added that she felt the film was released at a time when negative attitudes toward Middle Eastern and Northern African groups were at a peak.

“It was released at a time when these anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and anti-Middle Eastern (and) North African hate crimes were already skyrocketing and this movie only contributed to that,” he said.

In response to the CCI’s announcement on Facebook Tuesday morning that it would screen the film during UMix, Mekkaoui sent CCI a personal letter of concern at 11 a.m.

After posting the letter on her Facebook page and receiving positive feedback, Mekkaoui then drafted a second letter expressing similar concerns to her personal letter that was circulated to various communities on campus.

Read more on MICHIGANDAILY.COM

STUDENT GOVERNMENT

CSG hears resolution to audit ‘U’s endowment Legislation in response to last week’s divestment proposal is tabled

By TANAZ AHMED Daily Staff Reporter

Central Student Government tabled a proposal Tuesday evening requesting an audit of the University endowment for companies directly and uniquely responsible for ethical violations throughout the world during the final meeting of its 2014-2015 student assembly.

After a first motion to table the resolution failed, the legislative body voted on a second motion with 14 in favor of tabling the proposal, 13 opposed and one abstaining.

If passed, the resolution would have led CSG to ask the University Office of Investments to conduct periodic audits on companies the

University Endowment Fund invests in to assess whether or not these companies are deliberately, directly and uniquely responsible for ethical violations nationally as well as internationally.

Engineering senior Andy Modell, an Engineering representative for CSG, and Education senior Michael Chrzan, a School of Education representative, wrote the legislation. Modell said it was written in response to the divestment resolution, which CSG voted against during the assembly’s meeting last week.

Modell said he was inspired by the hundreds of members of the University community who attended last week’s meeting, which he said showed him how concerned many on campus are about the University’s investments.

He said he thought his resolution addressed many of the concerns raised during last week’s meeting.

“Hopefully this way the University will be more responsible in regards to the ethics of their investments and students will be overall happy,” he said.

Chrzan echoed Modell’s sentiments, adding that the resolution is meant to be a measure that keeps the University administration transparent.

“I think it’s a really good first step towards what students wanted last week,” Chrzan said. “I think it’s a great first step for the University holding itself accountable and not putting it on the students to do it.”

The rules were suspended to allow the resolution to be moved to second reading, after which the resolution can be voted on. This normally occurs in the week following the introduction of a proposal.

Michael Yee, a School of Medicine representative, first motioned to have the resolution tabled because he felt the resolution needed to be given more time and thought. That motion was debated and then failed to pass.

Following the initial motion to table, several amendments were made to the resolution. These included calling for an audit to be conducted every three years by the Investment Office as well as for a CSG representative to meet with an official from the Investment Office to learn about the audit and its implications.

As amendments were being made to the resolution, Business junior Maddy Walsh motioned to table the resolution. The second motion was voted on and led to its ultimate tabling.

While those who voted for the tabling of the proposal said they felt similar to Yee, others such as Business sophomore Adam Weiss, a representative for the Business School, said they felt as though this was a subject that was important to representatives’ constituents and thus should have been addressed at the meeting.

Read more on MICHIGANDAILY.COM

WILLIAM LYNCH/Daily

Journalist and author Louisa Lim, a visiting professor, answers questions during her lecture titled “Writing ‘The People’s Republic of Amnesia’ Tiananmen Revisited” at the Michigan League on Tuesday.

Former NPR, BBC correspondent discusses Tiananmen Sq. massacre Reporter says Chinese government hid the infamous incident

By EMMA KINERY Daily Staff Reporter

Though it likely means she will not be allowed to return to China for years, Louisa Lim, a former NPR and BBC correspondent, told students Tuesday that exposing details about a shrouded massacre that occurred almost 30 years ago in the country made it worth it.

Lim was a correspondent for both media outlets and is a current Howard R. Marsh visiting professor of journalism. She lectured on her new book, “The People’s Republic of Amnesia: Tiananmen Revisited,” Tuesday evening in the Michigan League. Her book focuses on a culture of silence that exists in China concerning the Tiananmen Square massacre and the Chinese government’s ensuing cover-up.

She also touched on a series of similar protests at the same time in another Chinese city to which the government responded more openly.

In 1989, students held political demonstrations in Tiananmen

Square after the death of Hu Yaobang, the former general secretary of the Communist Party of China and a government reformist.

During their protests, the students asked for freedom of speech, freedom of the press and better opportunities for workers, including more control over industry practices. Groups had been protesting for seven weeks, inciting protests in more than 400 other cities. On June 4, the Chinese government intervened, instituting martial law and killing an unknown number of demonstrators.

In China, the massacre is referred to as the Tiananmen Square “incident” when spoken about. It is still not known how many people were killed on June 4, 1989.

Lim said that throughout the time she spent working on her book in China, she was terrified the Chinese government would detain her. She kept all of her notes on a laptop that had never been connected to the Internet, and locked the laptop in a safe at night.

She was even unable call her editor to say she had decided to focus on the topic for her book until she left the country months later.

“I was terrified,” Lim said. “I was convinced that I would be detained or arrested the whole time I was asking things on cam-

puses, wandering around with this picture of ‘tank man’ I had sweaty hands.”

Her lecture began by showing the infamous photo of a protester standing in front of a line of tanks. Though this photograph is recognized by most in the Western world, Lim said it is largely unknown in China. When she went to four of the top universities in Beijing and polled 100 students, just 15 percent could recognize the photograph as being taken during the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Lim said this results from the extreme media censorship the government practices.

“If you search Tiananmen on Google, you will immediately get pictures of ‘tank man’ and descriptions of what happened in 1989,” Lim said. “If you search on the Chinese equivalent you’ll get photos of Tiananmen Square and tourist information.”

Lim said the government went as far as to block the search of “2^6” because it equals 64 — shorthand for June 4 — the day of the massacre. The only time the 1989 event is taught in school is in college courses for history majors, and even then, Lim said that in a 500-page textbook, just four pages mentioned it.

Read more on MICHIGANDAILY.COM

News

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com the University’s OIEconducted investigation, which included review by an appeals board after the initial decision was made to find

is enforced by the University and Michigan State Law. According to the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy, consent is “Clear and unambiguous agreement, expressed in mutually understandable words or actions, to engage in a particular activity.

Consent can be withdrawn by either party at any point.”

The definition provided by SAPAC on its website goes further, saying body language or silence do not constitute consent; only words do.

Though Campbell testified she never verbally said “no,” she stated both in her testimony in the criminal preliminary examination and in a letter to the University’s

the respondents not responsible a criminal case filed in the 14A District Court an ongoing civil case filed in the Washtenaw County Circuit Court an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education.

a formal internal University investigation in accordance with the University’s publicly available process for handling reported sexual assaults.

The University’s Office of Public Affairs offered to schedule an interview with Wallesby on Tuesday, which they did, but it was ultimately canceled by Fitzgerald.

“Upon further consideration and hearing your several follow-up questions, I am afraid we will not be able to come to the Daily this afternoon to respond to your questions,” he wrote in an e-mail.

Campbell said she reported the incident to a confidential employee at SAPAC and also chose to have a rape kit administered at the University Hospital. Whereas confidential employees — such as SAPAC volunteers — are permitted to keep their conversations private if requested by the alleged victim, University employees are required to report any incidents of sexual assault when they become aware of them. As a result, hospital employees are mandated to report incidents of sexual assault to the University, as they did in Campbell’s case. The University was then obligated to pursue the issue and decide whether the case would be investigated.

The University’s Student Sexual Misconduct Policy was last updated August 19, 2013, four months before Campbell’s alleged

investigation must establish that sexual contact did occur the encounter must violate the University’s Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities the encounter must have been unwanted by someone involved the party responsible for the unwanted sexual acts must have been aware that those actions were unwanted: require that a verbal “no” was expressed by one of those involved assault took place. The process for Campbell’s case followed this updated policy.

Four criteria must be met for a respondent to be found responsible for some form of sexual misconduct through the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy, according to the final and appeals process reviewed by the Daily. First, the investigation must establish that sexual contact did occur. Second, the encounter must violate the University’s Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Third, the encounter must have been unwanted by someone involved. Lastly, the party responsible for the unwanted sexual acts must have been aware that those actions were unwanted — requiring a verbal dissent expressed by one of those involved.

According to the documents reviewed by the Daily, the first three criteria were met in Campbell’s case but not the fourth. During the investigation, neither Campbell nor the respondents testify that she said “no” or asked the respondents to stop at any time during the alleged assault.

However, Campbell maintains that the contact was not consensual.

There are four different avenues through which Campbell’s case has been investigated: the University’s OIE-conducted investigation, which included a review by an appeals board after the initial decision was made to find the respondents not responsible for the alleged assault; a criminal case filed in the 14A District Court; an ongoing civil case filed in the Washtenaw County Circuit Court; and an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education.

The University found Barnet and Reuben responsible for taking and disseminating compromising photographs on the night of the alleged assault without Campbell’s consent. The University did not find them responsible for sexual assault.

During the preliminary examination of the criminal case, in which Barnet and Reuben were charged with first-degree criminal sexual conduct, District Court Judge Richard Conlin determined there was not enough evidence to go forward with a trial.

Campbell’s civil lawsuit against Barnet and Reuben alleges eight different counts, including assault and battery, criminal sexual contact and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

On April 1, the attorneys for both Barnet and Reuben filed motions for dismissal of the civil case. David Nacht, an attorney representing Barnet, argued in his brief: “The simple truth is that no matter how many times Ms. Campbell brings the same claims, Defendants cannot be responsible for sexual assault where her actions did not manifest any lack of consent.”

Judge Timothy Connors has not ruled on their motion.

Campbell’s case raises a central question: What is consent? Is a verbal dissent required to signal unwanted contact, as in the University’s policy, or, as taught by SAPAC, does a sexual action require an affirmative “yes” to satisfy consent?

The University’s final decision found the respondents not responsible for sexual assault, arguing that they were never made aware their actions were unwanted since Campbell never explicitly said “no.”

John Shea, an attorney representing Reuben, cited a document written by Campbell to the Appeals Board that he says demonstrates a misunderstanding of how consent is defined for the purposes of the University’s sexual assault investigation process.

“She even cites the reader to SAPAC’s definition of consent, which is not the University’s definition or that adopted in state law,” Shea wrote in a statement to the Daily. “There may be a larger social problem in this country related to sexual assault, but you cannot from that draw any parallel to this case when there’s abundant proof that these boys in no way assaulted a fellow student.”

This discrepancy is seen in what is taught by SAPAC and what

June 26, 2014: University completes its internal review of the case, finding Barent and Reuben not responsible for sexual assault, but responsible for taking and disseminating photos without Campbell’s consent.

appeals board that she asked to leave the room before the alleged assault took place. The testimonies of both Barnet and Reuben corroborate Campbell’s statement, though all three disagree about the exact way in which she asked to leave and how they responded when she asked.

“After 10 minutes in the room, things felt scary and wrong,” Campbell wrote in a letter to the appeals board. “I asked to leave and was told ‘no’ by Mr. Reuben. After that, I froze. Did nothing to protect myself, just froze. There was no way to fight, no where to flee. I do not know how to explain that reaction. Something just takes over and you just want to live.”

Campbell argued Barnet and Reuben had malicious, premeditated plans to engage in sexual behaviors with her.

Barnet testified he offered to leave the room but was told he could stay, according to the OIE investigation documents.

According to Elizabeth Seney, an OIE investigator, in the OIE’s investigation report, Reuben said, “She could have left at any time” and testified that he did not remember the complainant asking to leave the room.

SAPAC’s website includes a list of five definitions of what does not qualify as consent. Among them is “Silence is never consent. If a person does not verbally say no, it does not mean that they mean yes.”

The literature also says, “It is never acceptable to assume that consent is given. Each one of us is responsible for making sure we have consent in every sexual situation. If you are unsure, it is important to clarify what your partner is feeling about the sexual situation. Consent can never simply be assumed.”

However, the investigation and the appeals board found that because Campbell did not provide verbal dissent at any

point, the incident could not be considered sexual assault because the men involved would have had no way of knowing their actions were unwanted.

In response to this argument, and to the appeals documents Campbell submitted, the appeals board wrote: “Complainant contends that the training and documentation about sexual misconduct provided

by SAPAC to all students, which encourages students engaging in sexual acts to solicit and receive affirmative verbal consent, constitutes the University’s policy on sexual misconduct. We

understand why Complainant is espousing the affirmative verbal consent standard, and we are sympathetic to her reasons.

However, the ‘Policy on Sexual Misconduct by Students’ that OIE and this Board are obligated to apply states otherwise.”

According to documents from the OIE investigation, a text message conversation between Barnet and Reuben from the night of Dec. 6 consists of a discussion about whether Barnet should leave the dorm room, and Reuben said he was already “hooking up” with Campbell on their way back to the dorm. The conversation continued, and Reuben and Barnet discussed how to set up the room to make a

“threesome” possible.

Once Campbell and Reuben returned, Reuben texted, “Should I make a move right now,” to which Barnet replied, “Let’s try this turn lamps on lights off. Trust me it is def doable,” and a minute later, “Ok now I will sit on couch and u sit on couch too. On opposite sides tell her to koi. Join.”

In a letter to the appeals board, Campbell said the text messages retrieved from Barnet’s and Reuben’s phones show that she was not aware of the plans they were making. She said this signifies they knew she was unwilling to participate in the activity they were discussing.

“If they thought I would consent, they would have been talking to me instead of secretly texting each other,” Campbell wrote.

In her appeals letter, Campbell also wrote, “The defendants are hoping you will not notice how they plotted for hours by text before trapping me in their dormitory room, nor do they want you to see the forensic and physical evidence and witness testimony, all of which corroborates my story.

Campbell said she froze and was silent at the time of the alleged assault — a reaction she said was considered a common response to sexual assault by University witnesses. Appeals documents from the respondents, however, show expert witnesses hired by Reuben and Barnet to testify during the University’s proceedings refuted these arguments.

In a letter submitted to the University for review by the appeals board, the lawyers representing the respondents argued that the central issue in this case is whether or not Campbell did or said anything that would have indicated she did not wish to engage in sexual activity.

“If Emily failed to do or say something to communicate lack of consent, the fact that after the fact she experienced some psychological reaction (such as, e.g.

PTSD) is of no relevance from the point of view of what the boys saw and heard or what consent Emily did or did not give at the time,” the statement read.

In the letter to the appeals board, Campbell expressed her frustration with the University’s decision to allow the respondents to use their own expert witnesses — an issue Mortellaro said is just one example of inequity during the investigation of her daughter’s complaint.

Expert witness Suzanne Rotolo, a certified forensic nurse and certified medical investigator, testified that none of the injuries Campbell sustained are definitive for sexual assault. Katherine Okla, a clinical psychologist, and Roger Pitman, a psychiatrist, were also among those that presented their opinions to the OIE during their investigation.

Mortellaro said she initially chose not to hire a lawyer for her daughter after being told by the University’s investigator Elizabeth

Dec. 22, 2014: A University’s appeals board again finds Reuben and Barnet not responsible for sexual assault.

September 29, 2014: Campbell files an appeal with the University.

January 2016: Reuben and Barent will be able to return to campus, pending the completion of University mandated responsibilities.

Wednesday, April 8, 2015 — 3 Seney that seeking outside counsel was unnecessary during the University’s investigation.

Seney referred an interview request to the

University’s Office of Public Affairs.

Mortellaro said the respondents used financial wealth to avoid taking responsibility for their actions. During an investigation of this nature, the University is responsible for finding witnesses to review evidence from the case. The University did in Campbell’s case, and in response, the respondents’ lawyers presented testimony from hired expert witnesses.

“The University should not rely on paid witnesses from either side, because it just inherently makes the playing field uneven,” Mortellaro said. “It makes the richest person have their vision of the truth presented to be considered as opposed to unpaid, unbiased opinions.”

These three expert witnesses were hired by the respondents “to assess the opinions of the University’s experts,” according to documents included in OIE’s investigation, submitted by the respondents’ lawyers.

People who are approved by

because the University has chosen to introduce ‘expert’ testimony to support Emily’s claim that she was sexually assaulted, the defense has retained three experts in the field of SANE

examinations, memory formation, and PTSD to assess the opinions of the University’s experts,” the respondents’ lawyers wrote.

The SANE nurse documented physical evidence, particularly a certain laceration, which the nurse described as a key indicator of sexual assault. Despite these injuries, one of the witnesses used by the respondents said, “This injury is no longer considered a ‘hallmark of sexual assault,’ ” and the document continues to say their witnesses said the injuries Campbell sustained could have been the result of many possibilities, including consensual or nonconsensual intercourse or trauma induced by the examiner.

J. Samuel Holtz, Washtenaw County assistant prosecutor, prosecuted the case in district court. In an interview with the Daily, Holtz said the SANE report was not something that would have been used in the criminal case’s preliminary exam. In the district court procedures, SANE reports are only used to show that sexual contact occurred, he said.

“What a SANE report cannot show, except in the most extreme circumstances where there’s significant injuries or that type of thing, is a a judge as expert witnesses — SANE report cannot show whether typically based on their education or not something was consensual or or specialized knowledge — are whether it was forced,” Holtz said. often hired to provide testimony Another piece of contested in court evidence included a letter written during the appeals process

by Cavanaugh, which was not admitted for consideration by the appeals board.

In this letter, which was written after the original University investigation was completed, proceedings.

It is Cavanaugh summarized his unclear how the University findings for the use of the appeals governs expert witnesses during board as they considered revising disciplinary proceedings. the University’s original decision The respondents said the to find Reuben and Barnet not nurse examiner mishandled the responsible for sexual assault. physical evidence. They alleged “On the night of the incident, Lt. that the University’s psychological Neumann (now University Police expert was “incorrect in her Chief Robert Neumann) with over understanding of how memories 20 years of police experience and I are formed and retrieved, and the thought there was enough probable effect trauma may have on memory cause to believe a criminal sexual formation and recall.” assault occurred,” Cavanaugh “The opinions of experts the wrote. “The investigation by University has chosen to employ Elizabeth Seney was very thorough simply do not address any question and filled with details. But finding that is at issue in this case. However, See POLICIES, Page 5

Opinion

4 — Wednesday, April 8, 2015

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

EDITORIAL From Page 1 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com JENNIFER CALFAS EDITOR IN CHIEF

AARICA MARSH and DEREK WOLFE EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LEV FACHER MANAGING EDITOR

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s editorial board.

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

A

Keep the Diag clean

nother April is upon us, which means another Hash Bash is behind us. As the cleanup crews get to work trying to get the Diag ready for another week of classes, the entire student body needs a gentle reminder to help keep this area pristine for all of us.

However, it’s not the trash I’m talking about (though the outof-towners bring a lot, damn dirty hippies), but the noise ERIC pollution.

KUKIELKA Yes, it’s just about that time for the campus hate-mongers to make an appearance. If this isn’t your first semester, then you know exactly who I’m talking about: the angry man with his sandwich board, spewing hate and vitriol to anyone who will listen; the guy who argues with him while hocking his own book and performing a few weird magic tricks; or just about any imaginable kind of gospel-preachin’, soul-savin’ outdoor evangelist.

Regardless, when you break all of them down into their constituent parts, they’re here spreading a message of hate, intolerance and/or exclusivity, and that is the polar opposite of what campus should be. Anyone carrying around a sign that says “Repent or die,” “Ask me why you’re going to be cast into a lake of fire” or “Obey Jesus” isn’t coming at you with an attitude of love or respect (again, except Magic Guy, and he’s just here for your cash — though at least he’s honest about it).

Don’t get me wrong; I love a good campus preacher. One of the first groups I associated with, the campus Atheists, Agnostics & Humanists at Western Michigan University — presently the Center for Inquiry — originally congregated around a campus preacher.

Then again, what they had at WMU we lack here at the University; mainly, a strongwilled, intelligent group that could factually, and loudly, counter anything that gets tossed around — and do it in a way that isn’t overly insulting or condescending.

And that is a problem here on the Diag. Sure, we have plenty of people who will yell at the guy, but all they’re doing is playing into his hands. This preacher isn’t doing anything special, per se, but a lot of this goes back to the facts that we just don’t have many older students here, and campus religious diversity always seems to revolve around some sort of god (as I have noted before).

Unfortunately, the Diag is technically considered a public space, so they are well

within their rights to preach their message of hate — or magic and books, depending on the source. But there are a few things we can do to combat this nuisance. One tried-andtrue response is for a well read, free thinker to stand out there, to heckle him back while winning over the crowd, until the preacher gets irritated and goes away. However, lacking a 350-pound man with a booming voice, quick wit and a powder blue t-shirt that reads “Friendly Neighborhood Atheist” — and we are lacking that on campus, trust me — the best thing we can do is ignore him.

I know, much easier to ignore such a spectacle. Students naturally congregate around these people. Honestly, we’ve all done it. In fact, I stopped and watched one about this time last year. I probably should have spoken up, but I was underprepared, and that’s the last thing you want to be when dealing with these loons. “Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience,” as the saying goes.

Then again, as much as I say we should ignore them, I also have some weird fantasies about these people getting their comeuppance.

I mean, wouldn’t it be fantastic if the circle of people around one of them just spontaneously turned around and started talking to the people behind them, alienating the preacher in the midst of a large group of people? Or if a couple of them started some sort of preacher rap battle, and we were on hand to judge it, complete with scorecards?

I’d love to see sandwich board guy try to spit a rhyme — I bet it would be hysterical.

Anyhow, remember they are not there to be nice or make friends, no matter what they say. They are here for self-serving ends, to get attention and money, whether it be American dollars or spiritual spending power for the afterlife. Be vigilant around these con men, and stay out of their money trap.

Finally, whatever you do when you see these guys, make sure you don’t get violent or make threats. All of these things play into their hands, and the last thing we want is to give them more self-righteous fury. Instead, smile and walk away. If they have no crowd, they have no currency, and they will quickly move along to the next group of “suckers.” Let them say what they came to say, and then let them leave. The sooner they get the message that we don’t care, the sooner they’ll go away and the sooner we’ll go back to having a nicer, cleaner Diag.

The sooner they get the message that we don’t care, the sooner they’ll go away.

— Eric Kukielka can be reached at ekuk@umich.edu.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Ben Keller, Payton Luokkala, Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Michael Paul, Anna Polumbo-Levy, Allison Raeck, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Matthew Seligman, Mary Kate Winn, Jenny Wang, Derek Wolfe RACHEL DAWSON

commenced. OIE found Reuben and Barnet in violation of University policy for disseminating electronic images of Campbell during the event without her knowledge, but did not find them responsible for unwanted sexual contact. Reuben and Barnet were suspended from the University for one year and will be allowed to return to campus in January 2016, pending the fulfillment of probationary stipulations.

Part One: Equitability of the process The University has a right to conduct its misconduct investigations independently. However, OIE investigative proceedings must be altered to include safeguards that increase the equitability of the process and allow individuals a more just opportunity to file, pursue and defend any claims made by or against them.

A system that provides guaranteed representation must be created.

The Student Sexual Misconduct Policy explicitly states that both respondents and complainants “may bring a support person or adviser with them to any meetings with the Investigator” handling the OIE investigation. However, there is no specific policy in existence governing whether complainants are advised to seek legal counsel, and Fitzgerald declined to elaborate further as to what standard procedure entails. Both Reuben and Barnet retained high-quality legal representation at the onset of the process, while Campbell did not retain attorney services until she decided to press civil charges 11 months later.

Leaving the decision to retain counsel up to students who are involved with a stressful and likely emotionally damaging investigation could lead to a situation where ill-equipped individuals are pitted against experienced attorneys using experts to discredit and counter their claims. A system that provides guaranteed representation for all individuals involved with an OIE investigation must be created to ensure equitability.

In addition to the retention of legal representation, paid expert testimony and analysis is allowed in the OIE investigation process.

The OIE investigator in charge of the case consulted various experts for the investigation, including the SANE who examined Campbell and a University psychologist with post-traumatic stress disorder expertise. In response to these University-obtained testimonies, Reuben’s attorneys paid and consulted experts regarding the SANE examination, memory formation and PTSD to directly contradict the informed opinions of University employees. The allowance of this testimony is concerning. To maintain a standard of review, it is crucial that the opinions considered do not harbor a vested interest in the outcome of any contended issue, as is the case with paid expert opinions.

OIE investigations include an appeals process that allows new, “appropriate and probative” material to be introduced after an appeal has been filed. This is entirely con-

tradictory to the purpose of an appeal. An appeal is a review of an original decision to determine whether a “harmful legal error has occurred”; it is not intended to “give a litigant a second opportunity to reargue the facts of his or her case.” Complainants and respondents are allowed to submit objections to materials during the appeals process, which are considered and ruled upon by OIE staff. Permitting additional documents to be submitted during an appeal only muddles the factual findings of the University’s investigation and unnecessarily complicates and elongates the process.

Furthermore, the policies governing students and their actions bear few definitive thresholds for punishment. The University only provides a list of potential sanctions, meaning very few violations of policy result directly in a specifically defined punishment being levied against violator(s). Alarmingly, academic standing policy is more concrete in its language and punishments than sexual assault policies. Leaving punishments undefined limits the ability of University policy to inhibit unwanted behavior.

Punishments aren’t just undefined. They are, as in Campbell’s case, mercurial. E. Royster Harper, vice president of student life, after reviewing the materials from the OIE investigation and suggested sanctioning from the appeals process, wrote in a Dec. 17, 2014 memo addressed to Stacey Vander Velde, associate director of the Office of Student Conflict Resolution, that she had “chosen to modify the sanctioning recommendations” by extending the suspension period levied against Reuben; he will not be allowed to return to the University until January 2016. This was done without explanation or rationalization by Harper or her office, which further raises questions about the transparency of the process.

Reworking the OIE investigation system is essential because it will benefit both the University and students, leading to a more equitable process and definitive outcome.

Part Two: Consent definition and sexual education According to its website, SAPAC, the main campus provider of sexual education, defines consent as “when someone verbally agrees, gives permission, or says ‘yes’ to sexual activity with someone else.”

However, the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy defines consent with less detailed description. It states that consent is “clear and unambiguous agreement, expressed in mutually understandable words or actions, to engage in a particular activity,” with the key issue being “whether the Respondent knew, or should have known, that the activity in question was not consensual.”

Because of the University’s official policy, Reuben and Barnet were found not guilty of unwanted sexual contact during the encounter with Campbell. While we understand that SAPAC’s definition of consent is educational and not a standard used to hold individuals accountable to University policy, the large discrepancy between the two is troubling; “mutually understandable words or actions” is too ambiguous. The current policy sets a dangerously low threshold for consent that can be misconstrued and misunderstood.

To remedy these ambiguities, the policy should clearly state that silence and inaction are not accept-

able and do not, under any circumstances, constitute consent. In an interview with The Michigan Daily, Barbara Niess-May, executive director of SafeHouse Center, further elaborated on the topic of consent. “It’s active, not passive,” Niess-May said. “Cooperation does not equal consent.”

According to the American Psychological Association, immediate reactions to sexual assault include shock, disbelief and fear. While the lack of a response, as a result of these reactions, can cause confusion for involved parties, misunderstanding is not a viable excuse for sexual misconduct. The University’s policy must take into account the very real, biological reactions individuals may experience during a traumatic event.

Beyond the pitfalls in the policy itself, sexual education on campus is minimal, at best. Currently, the University administers sexual education to incoming students indirectly through AlcoholEdu and directly through Relationship Remix. However, completion of these programs is fail>not strictly enforced, and neither of the programs detail the University’s sexual misconduct policy nor the investigative process. These programs are not rigorous enough educational tools because, even if enforced, such brief sessions can’t cover all of the material necessary for an adequate understanding of sexual misconduct.

Therefore, the University must provide SAPAC with more resources to expand its educational programs for students. For students, a more thorough and prolonged curriculum should be taught to provide a comprehensive and continual education. A mini-course should be mandated for freshmen during their first semester aimed at clarifying all policies and punishments regarding sexual misconduct. In addition, online refreshers should be mandated before class registration each academic year to provide updated information regarding sexual misconduct resources and policy.

SAPAC needs more resources to expand sexual education for students.

That said, it would be unfair to claim the University is completely uncommitted to changing campus culture and policies. University President Mark Schlissel has announced a student survey on sexual assault to gather information, UMPD has formed a sexual assault special victims unit focused on sexual misconduct and SAPAC is currently hosting round tables to provide feedback on the sexual misconduct policy. While these steps will improve awareness, gather information and better train UMPD officers — all critical to tackling sexual misconduct — they do not adequately address the issues that currently exist within the system, the policy and how information is disseminated on campus.

The University must own up to its faults and make integral changes to its OIE investigation process, sexual misconduct policy and education programs. Further inaction in this regard cannot be tolerated.

E-MAIL RACHEL AT RDAWSON@UMICH.

“ CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and viewpoints.

Letters should be fewer than 300 words while viewpoints should be 550-850 words.

Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to tothedaily@michigandaily.com.

NOTABLE QUOTABLE

Today I announce with God’s help, with the help of liberty lovers everywhere, that I’m putting myself forward as a candidate for president of the United States of America.”

— U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said during a rally Wednesday afternoon in Louisville, Kentucky.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

Arts

Wednesday, April 8 2015 — 5

TV REVIEW

‘Dead’ end opens onto new world

FILM NOTEBOOK

Rick Grimes goes all the way in season five closer

By MATT BARNAUSKAS Daily Arts Writer

Early in season five of “The Walking Dead,” Abraham (Michael Cudlitz, “Band of Brothers”) wrote, “The Anew world’s gonna need The Rick Grimes.”

But, can Rick Walking (Andrew Lin- Dead coln, “Strike Back”) survive Season Five in the new Finale world? That’s AMC the question that drove the second half of AMC’s hit series as it found its group of survivors struggling to adjust to the settlement of Alexandria, a place mostly untouched by the horrors outside.

If any quote encapsulates Rick’s philosophy in the apocalypse, it would come from fellow AMC series “Breaking Bad” ’s Mike Ehrmantraut (Jonathan Banks), who said, “I chose a half measure, when I should have gone all the way. I’ll never make that mistake again.” Rick has learned this lesson more than once. He lost his wife (Sarah Wayne Callies,”Prison Break”) when he left an enemy’s fate to chance and then his mentor (Scott Wilson, “In Cold Blood”) when he let the Governor (David Morissey, “Extant”) get away at the end of season three. This message continues to resonate as the threat of Terminus returns to attack an already weakened group in the first three episodes of season five. All this leads to a pragmatic leader, unafraid to take the brutal steps needed to survive. However, within the sheltered community of Alexandria, Rick is a product of a completely different world.

Set in the aftermath of Rick’s violent confrontation with the abusive Pete (Corey Brill, “The Normal Heart”) and his subsequent gun-waving rant, the season five finale, “Conquer,” questions Rick’s place in a civilized community. Glenn (Steve Yeun, “The Legend of Korra”) openly questions Rick’s resolve to violently take Alexandria if he is voted out, comparing

POLICIES From Page 3 Barnet and Reuben not responsible for the criminal sexual assault of Emily Campbell is unfathomable.

I could not respectfully disagree more with the final findings of the OIE investigation.”

When contacted by the Daily, Cavanaugh said he wanted to discuss the case for this article, but his supervisor and Diane Brown, the Division of Public Safety and Security spokeswoman, prevented him from doing so. Brown said University Police Chief Robert Neumann was unavailable to answer questions Tuesday afternoon regarding the role of UMPD in these types of investigations or whether detectives are used as expert witnesses in University proceedings of this nature.

Timothy Lynch, University vice president and general counsel, wrote a letter to Campbell — which was reviewed by the Daily — in December 2014, stating that the OGC, OIE and OSCR had reviewed all the documents submitted by both the complainant and respondents “in light of continuing objections” raised by both parties.

“Detective Cavanaugh’s personal opinions on the findings of OIE, the credibility of the parties or the ultimate issue before the Appeals Board are neither relevant nor appropriate,” Lynch wrote. He elaborated to say Cavanaugh acted outside of University policies as an impartial investigator by sending his letter, and that his letter “cannot be characterized as new information.”

RADIUS-TWC

‘The Hunting Ground’ explores the facts and fictions of campus sexual assault.

AMC

Brought to you by Band-Aid ®.

his plan of butchery displayed by the residents of Terminus.

However, “The Walking Dead” could have looked even farther back into its history to find the strongest comparison – season two’s Shane (Jon Bernthal, “The Wolf of Wall Street”), Rick’s former friend turned rival. Shane displays many of the traits that Rick currently possesses: Aharah survival instinct, the need to strike first and a problematic relationship with another man’s wife. The show paints Rick in a light compared to the eventual condemnation Shane faces, which demonstrates how far characters have been pushed.

In particular, “Conquer” pushes not only Rick, but Glenn and Sasha (Sonequa MartinGreen, “Once Upon a Time”) to points they could never turn away from. Glenn faces death at the hands of the cowardly Nicholas (Michael Traynor, “Rectify”) while Sasha, who struggles to come to grips with the deaths of her brother and boyfriend (Chad L. Coleman and Lawrence Gilliard Jr., “The Wire”), is confronted by the hypocritical Father Gabriel (Seth Gilliam, “The Wire”).

Both confrontations conclude with Glenn and Sasha pointing guns at their attackers, and both times, the show walks them away from the ledge. It’s a mixed-bag in term of dramatic results; while it’s enjoyable to see the usually nihilistic series give hope to its characters, there’s a sense of anticlimax,

In the letter, Lynch briefly explained what types of evidence are and aren’t used in University investigations.

“The University of Michigan’s sexual misconduct policy and procedures are not designed to mimic the criminal justice system or civil litigation; they are student disciplinary proceedings,” he wrote.

Lynch’s letter continued that while “formal rules of evidence do not apply,” the University attempts to keep the investigation fair to all parties, which might mean “disallowing proffered information from being considered.”

Other documents presented by the respondents in advance of the appeals process were also blocked from consideration.

Jane Briggs-Bunting, an attorney and former director of the Michigan State University School of Journalism, said University disciplinary proceedings are often less formal than a criminal case, and standard rules of evidence do not generally apply. However, she said if the University is allowing one party to bring in extra witnesses, the other party should be notified.

Lynch could not be reached for comment on Tuesday, and the University’s Office of Public Affairs declined to make him available for an interview.

During the appeals process, Mortellaro said the respondents’ lawyers were meeting with various University officials and staff members to discuss this case.

The Daily attempted to confirm these meetings with Lynch, but he was unavailable for comment. The respondents’ lawyers also declined

much like the downbeat midseason finale, “Coda.”

On a lighter note, it’s awesome to see the return of Morgan (Lennie James, “Low Winter Sun”) and his newfound Zen warrior philosophy and fighting style. Back on Rick’s side, there is sometimes a little too much justification on its protagonist side. The show has seen Rick walk the line between sanity and insanity multiple times, as Lincoln gives the character an undercurrent of dark madness that always risks coming forth.

However, the show’s writers seem to be more cautious in embracing that darker side.

Several characters defend Rick, like Abraham eloquently says to the Alexandrians, “There’s a vast ocean of shit that you people don’t know shit about.”

But, the show might go a little too far in its defense of Jessie (Alexandra Breckenbridge, “American Horror Story”), the woman Rick is at times disturbingly attached to, which only solidifies his importance.

However, when Rick comes forth with the body of a walker who sneaks in, the show states that the new world needs Rick Grimes, because in the words of “True Detective” ’s Rust Cohle, “The world needs bad men. We keep the other bad men from the door.”

That’s why Rick kills Pete after he kills Reg (Steve Coulter, “The Conjuring”). In “The Walking Dead,” survival can’t be compromised.

This is a lesson Rick knows, and Alexandria needs to learn.

to comment on this matter.

“I think it’s highly unusual for generals counsel to be involved in student disciplinary proceedings and talking to attorneys on one side and excluding the party on the other side,” Briggs-Bunting said.

Following a meeting with Stacy Vander Velde, associate director of OSCR, Mortellaro said she left with more questions than answers.

“I had a long conversation with (Vander Velde) and I just asked her what policy and procedure they were using to make these determinations and she said she had no idea, that it was all coming from the general counsel’s office, and later we found out that the respondents’ attorneys were having undue influence over the counsel. We were never made privy to that or allowed to respond in any way.”

The University’s Office of General Counsel is not mentioned in the University’s Policy on Student Sexual Misconduct, which lists offices such as OIE and OSCR that are traditionally involved in the proceedings.

An OSCR staff member said Vander Velde was unavailable for comment on Tuesday, and the Office of Public Affairs declined to make a representative from OSCR available for comment.

Fitzgerald declined to discuss policy used to determine admissible evidence or testimony, referring the Daily to the University’s Student Sexual Misconduct Policy. He also declined to discuss standard language used for advising students on hiring an attorney during the process, citing the Student Sexual Misconduct Policy’s provision that students

Confronting sexism in Greek life cinema

By REBECCA LERNER

Human beings categorize each other for convenience; it’s a way to make a complex world easier to understand. When we stereotype, we don’t take into account individual differences. But how about when the subjects of our daunting world put themselves into uncomplicated boxes for us?

Greek life in college does just this. It allows people to have the ability to describe 50 to 70 people using a few derogatory words. “The Hunting Ground,” a documentary about the severity of sexual assault on college campuses, devotes a portion of its run time to illustrate the problem of rape in American fraternities. Sitting in the theater, listening to statistics and personal accounts of Greek life, the characters created realistic identities for people whom I didn’t even know.

The classic sorority girl stereotypes are often prevalent in movies, but few are so overwhelming as “Legally Blonde,” a film about Elle Woods, (Reese Witherspoon, “Wild”), president of her sorority’s chapter, who follows her boyfriend to Harvard Law School.

Elle eventually realizes that she is more than her sorority’s letters, but her friends continue to be portrayed as well-dressed, manicured morons.

More recently, “The House Bunny” and “Sydney White” create an obvious binary between the mean and exclusive sorority girls who are portrayed as the “bitchy” and “slutty” villains juxtaposed

with the sweet “I’m not like others” girls who are allowed to care about other things, but who are often valued for their non-sexual innocence.

The female characters in these movies encourage the sexism of the system of Greek life. These stereotypes let people say that they’re all the same; they’re dumb; they’re “basic.” Sometimes even women who don’t participate in Greek life fall into this trap; they don’t want to be identified with what the “sorority girl” has come to represent, so they join the ranks of people who look down on them.

Ask anyone on campus, even someone not affiliated with Greek life in any way, to give you one to two words describing a certain sorority and they can do it without hesitation. But we can’t describe “other” people in one to two words as easily. And these stereotypes perpetuate the idea that we can take multi-faceted humans and turn them into “basic” things that don’t deserve respect. By taking away the humanity of these women, we take away incentive for others to treat them like real people. This depreciation of sorority sisters contributes to hazy understandings of consent – if someone isn’t seen as deserving of a voice, they are not seen as deserving of control over their own body.

Men also become victims of misogyny in the cinematic portrayal of Greek life. In films like “Neighbors,” fraternity brothers are depicted as beer-guzzling “basic bros” whose main objective in life is to sleep with as many women as possible. However, their

stereotypes are fundamentally different from those of sorority girls, because when they adhere to their social norms, they are celebrated – laughed with and not at. The main frat boys are never characterized as villainous or dangerous. The issue of sexual assault is rarely touched upon in the web of Greek life interpretations. The most prevalent example is in the satirical film “Animal House”, when, after much internal debate, a fraternity character does not rape a passed out girl and he is lionized as a hero.

Greek life itself may or may not be inherently sexist, but its portrayal in films almost always is. One of the statistics in “The Hunting Ground” points out that the population of rapists is small in comparison with the number of people who experience sexual assault, because the majority of men who do rape will be repeat offenders. However, because of the stereotypes that films perpetuate about sorority sisters as being hypersexualized and vapid, it makes it easier to not take them seriously and guiltlessly commit crimes against them.

The gorgeous houses in the inevitable montages of films about Greek life are built brick by misogynist brick. The worst part is that we take those constructions at face value and we use them to judge people in our actual lives. But with films like “The Hunting Ground” that tell the stories of individual girls and frankly discuss facts about the correlation between Greek life and rape culture, we can see the structure of sexism slowly crumbling.

may have a “Support Person” participate in the process. The policy does not stipulate whether the University is required to notify the other party when a complainant or respondent involves a support person, such as an attorney.

“It’s just about equity, and that’s why we filed with the federal government,” Campbell said.

“Their rule is that the University can decide either way as long as it is equal, but it wasn’t. You can’t pick and choose what evidence is seen.”

Part Four: Communication concerns Campbell did not hire her own lawyer until November 2014, 11 months after the alleged assault, when she decided to file a civil suit against Barnet and Reuben.

The decision not to hire a lawyer, Mortellaro said, was made based on trust in the University’s process — trust she and Campbell said they feel the University abused. Because they were advised that they did not need a lawyer, Campbell and Mortellaro said, the investigation and appeals process was filled with miscommunication and confusion.

“They told us it was completely unnecessary to have a lawyer to work through the University process,” Mortellaro said.

Nacht, the attorney representing Barnet, said he regularly represents women and men in the University’s sexual assault process.

“It is normal for a student or for that matter a university faculty member or staff member going through the process to want the assistance of counsel,” he told the Daily in a statement. “The fact that women and men continue to contact our firm indicates that the

need is there.”

Mortellaro said the status of Campbell’s case was always unclear during the appeals process.

“All of the sudden, this had gone up the chain of command, and no one could tell us why or who was making decisions, or what they were basing those decisions on,” Mortellaro added.

Prior to submitting Campbell’s request for appeal, however, the University was clear about its policy. As is publicly stated, the process did move in a predictable way, Campbell said. When the incident was originally reported, Campbell was offered a resolution

by OSCR, which would have been to have the respondents complete an essay or come to some other informal agreement to solve the conflict, which Campbell rejected.

Once the University found the respondents not responsible for sexual assault, and after Campbell requested an appeal, both she and the respondents were able to submit any new, relevant information for the appeals board to review. After this, Mortellaro said everything seemed to come to a stop.

“There came a point in the appeals process where we went off of that flow chart and no one could answer why, and that’s when we discovered that the respondents’ attorneys were having private meetings and e-mails and conference calls with the general counsel’s office with the University,” Mortellaro said.

The University’s Student Sexual Misconduct Policy states, “Upon receipt of a report, the University will strive to complete its review within sixty (60) calendar days.”

Campbell reported the alleged assault on Dec. 6, 2013, and the review was completed on June 26, 2014. The final report from the appeals board was issued on Dec. 22, 2014 — more than a year after the alleged assault. The suggested timeline for completing the appellate process is within 15 days of the appeals board’s receipt of the appeal, and Campbell submitted her request for appeal on Sept. 29, 2014, and received a final decision on Dec. 22, 2014.

“I think the respondents have great legal representation and that they played the system beautifully,” Mortellaro said.

Mortellaro said she made numerous phone calls during the three-month period of the appeals board deliberations, including e-mailing and calling the office of University President Mark Schlissel multiple times asking to reflect on Campbell’s experience with the University’s process. The Daily could not confirm this, and Fitzgerald declined to comment.

While motions to dismiss the civil case are pending, Barnet and Reuben are able to return to campus as soon as January 2016.

Their return to campus is pending their submission of a 2,000-word essay — which is to be based on a series of required readings provided by the University — and their attendance at multiple mandatory, individual meetings before and after their return to campus. They will be on disciplinary probation and are prohibited from having contact with Campbell for the remainder of her enrollment at the University.

Daily Arts Writer

Arts

6 — Wednesday, April 8, 2015

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

ALBUM REVIEW

TV REVIEW

Toro y Moi bores Grace Helbig moves on latest release to the small screen

By KAREN HUA

New direction on ‘What For?’ is a wrong turn

Daily TV/New Media Editor

By YARDAIN AMRON Daily Arts Writer

Before his third album Anything in Return garnered the critical praise it did, before it even dropped B Chaz Bundick, Toro y Moi, What For? said — with Toro y Moi the certainty of one David Carpark Foster Wallace on taking a cruise — that writing the album was fun, but he would never do it again.

“I’ve seen artists turn into characters, and I don’t want to become the ‘pop music guy,’ ” Bundick once said in an interview with Pitchfork. “Pop music is awesome, but I like to keep changing it up … I’m not worried about repeating myself — I’m more worried that I’d just get bored.”

Sagacious words from the then-26-year-old. Boredom is a universal human fear no doubt.

But unlike us common folk who cope with boredom’s chains via Facebook and Caribbean cruises, Bundick seems to have figured out how to evade the affliction altogether, at least musically … well, at least until now.

A brief tour: Listening to Bundick’s four records chronologically is a testament to an artist who detests pigeons and dreads holes, and refuses to play in the neat genre boxes us critics create. The dreamy slink of his 2010 debut Causers of This — considered foundational to the rise of chillwave — was followed starkly a year later by the velvety funk of Underneath the Pines, which proved Bundick could compose

CARPARK

Not pictured: Moi.

for more than a laptop. Then, in 2013, he released the weirdly danceable and unclassifiable Anything in Return, which Ian Cohen described on Pitchfork as a composite of everywhere Bundick had taken Toro y Moi to date.

“So there’s silky R&B, roller-rink pop, bubblegum funk, tasteful chillout music, all unified by a voice that’s grown more confident with time,” Cohen wrote.

What For? is Bundick’s sharpest departure from everything Toro y Moi has been, and his disappointing attempt at a throwback ’70s pop radio record. The album opens to the zoom of racecars on a track, speeds through ten songs in barely 36 minutes, and never really slows down to catch its breath. When the music stopped after my first listen-through, I kept waiting for it to start again, hoping Bundick had included a hidden track or something. It’s hard to believe this is the same guy who’s credited as a founder of chillwave.

My main bone with the album is its lack of a defin-

ing moment. Even the singles, “Buffalo” and “Empty Nesters,” which have Bundick’s new band at its best, aren’t really memorable. And for all the time Bundick spent trying to write catchy melodies, there’s no song on the album truly tempting to return to, no refrain to stick in our heads, no groove that makes us want to dance, no real surprises. The album naturally fades to the background and doesn’t demand my attention.

In a word, What For? is boring.

Call it hipsterness or what you like, but the Bundick aesthetic is appealing — he once told Rookie Magazine he likes White Vans, hiking, mid-century Danish furniture, Weezer, The Blue Album by Weezer and rock documentaries, in that order. And while the beachy guitars and traditional fills on What For? fit the ’70s aesthetic Bundick is aiming for, the album is missing the weirdness and awkwardness that made Toro y Moi so great in the past.

Bundick may have been so concerned with escaping his own boredom, that he actually ended up writing a boring album.

Classifieds RELEASE DATE– Wednesday, April 8, 2015

Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle

Call: #734-418-4115 Email: dailydisplay@gmail.com

PARKING

Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Nichols Lewis

ACROSS 1 Victorian 5 Like much 67Down 10 Bay of Bengal setting 14 Extinct pigeon relative 15 First name in puppetry 16 __ jar: lab glass 17 Hold banned in amateur wrestling 19 Take one’s leave 20 Make sure of 21 Stretched to the max 23 Reggae cousin 24 Premier League athlete 28 Apply gently 31 CBS-owned cable sta.

32 Pond gunk 33 Prefix with footprint 34 Pulls down 37 Winter pick-meup?

40 Innocents 44 Mite-sized 45 “Tut-tut!”

46 Actress Tyler 47 Important stretches 50 Beef cut 51 Maple syrup source 52 Influential teams 57 Louisville Slugger wood 58 Comfy footwear 59 Jewish scholar 63 Swindle 65 April golf tournament, four of whose winners appear in 17-, 24-, 40- and 52Across 68 Movie plantation 69 Sea-born jewelry material 70 “Right now!”

71 Song and dance 72 Urgency 73 Snoopy DOWN 1 Sharable digital docs 2 Libertine

3 Onetime Palin collaborator 4 Feathers one’s nest, in a way 5 Full of: Suff.

6 Gp. with Sharks and Penguins 7 Decorator’s asset 8 Cheering like crazy 9 Hangers in lockers?

10 Justice Fortas 11 Figures in 9Down 12 “Very nice!”

13 A proposal may ultimately lead to one 18 Lasso loops 22 Dr. Mom’s forte 25 Spiced tea brewed in milk 26 Toe woes 27 Mustang, for one 28 Chapter 11 factor 29 Berry in faddish supplements 30 Star of a classic sitcom set at a Vermont inn 35 Imprecise degree 36 Like provolone piccante

38 1998 Sarah McLachlan ballad 39 Initial request for an answer?

41 Brontë heroine 42 German actor Jannings 43 Some outdoor grills 48 Slot machine part 49 __ tape 52 Macaroni Grill selection

53 Acting honor 54 Golfer Lorena 55 AOLers, e.g.

56 “Paradise Lost” figure 60 Spanish smooch 61 Lingerie catalog buys 62 Car trip game 64 Some advanced degs.

66 Floor pad 67 Part of IPA

ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:

PARKING 2015‑16 at “Prime” locations 734‑761‑8000 primesh.com

SUMMER EMPLOYMENT

04/08/15

SERVICES

FOR RENT

THESIS EDITING. LANGUAGE, organization, format. All Disciplines.

734/996‑0566 or writeon@iserv.net

2 & 3 BDRM APTS IN A HOUSE South Campus Fall 2015‑16 1015 Packard ‑ $1370‑$1930 + Utilities Call 734‑996‑1991 to sched a viewing

ARBOR PROPERTIES Award‑Winning Rentals in Kerrytown, Central Campus, Old West Side, Burns Park. Now Renting for 2015.

734‑649‑8637. www.arborprops.com EFF, 1 & 2 Bedrooms Avail Fall 2015‑16 $750 ‑ $1420. Most include Heat and Water. Parking where avail: $50‑80/mo.

Coin Laundry access on site/nearby. www.cappomanagement.com Call 734‑996‑1991

04/08/15

NOW AVAIL. FOR FALL 2015!

Spacious fully furnished 1 & 2 bdrm apts‑ heat, water, and parking included. A/C and laundry avail. Contact 734‑904‑6735.

STUDENT SUMMER STORAGE Specials ‑ Closest to campus ‑ Indoor Clean ‑ Safe ‑ Reserve online now annarborstorage.com call 734‑663‑0690

2 BED. AVAIL. April 1st‑August 21st Furnished, Heat & Water & Free Internet 734‑761‑8000 primesh.com

By D. Scott Nichols and C.C. Burnikel ©2015 Tribune Content Agency, LLC

4 BEDROOM HOUSE Fall 2015‑16 North Campus: Off Fuller by UM Hospital 2 Baths, Wshr./Dryer, 3 Prkg spaces, Pet & Smoke free. $2300 + utilities 1010 Cedar Bend Dr. 734‑996‑1991

WORK ON MACKINAC Island This Summer – Make lifelong friends. The Is‑ land House Hotel and Ryba’s Fudge Shops are looking for help in all areas be‑ ginning in early May: Front Desk, Bell Staff, Wait Staff, Sales Clerks, Kitchen, Baristas. Housing, bonus, and discounted meals. (906) 847‑7196. www.theisland‑ house.com

! NORTH CAMPUS 1‑2 Bdrm. ! ! Riverfront/Heat/Water/Parking. ! ! www.HRPAA.com ! xwordeditor@aol.com

From “What’s up, fuckers?” to “I don’t know,” Grace Helbig has become the queen of multi-media since her earliest YouTube Adays eight years ago. Now, she is The Grace the New York Helbig Times bestselling writer of Show a self-help book Series for millennials, Premiere “Grace’s Guide: Fridays at The Art of Pretending to Be a 10:30 p.m.

Grown-up;” she E! has a top-rated audio-video podcast, “Not too Deep;” she is the one-woman production team for It’s Grace, her YouTube channel with over 2 million subscribers. She has experimented with new media, film, improvisational and stand-up comedy, screenwriting – and now, television.

“The Internet’s awkward older sister” took her quirky sense of humor to the small screen, where she has her own talk show on the E! network, where she is now the only woman on late-night television since Chelsea Handler stepped down. Helbig describes it as a “curious introvert’s nighttime talk show #notsexual.”

She has always predicted that the Internet and television will eventually enter a happy marriage, while still retaining their independent identities – and her show now merges the two in “a beautiful sandwich.”

“The Grace Helbig Show” should be the epitome of everything Grace herself is – a preservation, yet magnification of her idioticidiosyncratic personality.

The show is set in a Los Angeles home akin to Grace’s real residence where she shoots her web videos. Unlike all other late-night shows, her decision to not use a live audience reflects her Internet-introversion, or as she puts it, “TGI-Fuck going out, we’re staying in where we’re safe from

ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT now available close to Ross & Law School 1 year lease May 2015 ‑ April 2016 $875 utilities included.

Call: (734)834‑5021

I EDIT THESES & ACADEMIC papers. OntheMarkEditing.com or loismah@comcast.net. Modest rates

E!

“But who did naming Grace Hedwig?”

physical and emotional dangers.”

Though her lack of a live audience may seem to create greater distance between herself and her viewers, she uses social media instead as a virtual connection to her audience. What new media (and especially vlogging) is all about is creating a realistic, though virtual, sense of reality and acquaintanceship, which she emulates in her new TV show.

Grace chooses not to alienate herself as a “celebrity” with fans.

Rather, her show emits a homey vibe more like a Friday night hang-out among best friends.

With late-night shows like Seth Meyers or Jimmy Fallon, even at their live tapings, the audience feels more aloof than ever before.

Grace begins the show with a “Let’s Browse” segment where she covers the week’s pop culture news – attempting to talk sports and all things relatable in her typical frenetic fashion, where she does not try to hide her lack of true knowledge about the topics.

Even when interviewing celebrities, she strives to learn about the mundane quirks that draw them closer to us, instead of promoting their fame to isolate them even further from viewers.

Unlike other late-night talk shows that attempt to create seamlessness, trying to hide their teleprompters and crew members, “The Grace Helbig Show” is very conscious of itself. As Grace stated in an interview with USA Today, “There’s no trying to hide that there’s a crew involved. I (want) the fourth wall to be destroyed. I want the audience to feel like they’re on set; they know the director, they know the camera guy, they know the boom operator’s favorite type of deodorant.” On YouTube, Grace is a one-woman production team – directing, writing, starring and editing all of her own content with complete control. However, even though she now must work with a creative team, the show is still inherently so Grace. Grace typically improvises all of her content in her web videos – and though she may be following a slightly more structured script on her show, she still manages to seem like her freeform, spontaneous self. In her YouTube videos, much of her humor comes from her editing style, and the show follows suit with erratic jump cuts and purposely hyperdramatic sound effects.

On YouTube, Grace is famous for her hilarious “collabs” with other YouTubers – and her show is merely an extension of the natural chemistry and brilliant comedic timing she exudes. As her first guest, she brought Aisha Tyler, who is nowhere near any type of A-list, but still a talented, highlyrespected actress-comedienne.

Even though they spoke about Tyler’s podcast and work, their conversation was far more casual and personal, never falling into the sort of free advertisement most late-night shows often provide for guests. Grace later introduces another YouTube personality like herself, the German DJ, Flula, whom she enlists to create an eccentric theme song for her show.

During his segment, they even leave the usual set to shoot in his car – a refreshing change of scenery from the stagnant couch space usual talk shows stick to. It also is especially exciting to see a guest list of underrated celebrities in an amalgam with new media stars.

Unfortunately, though the show tries very hard to preserve Grace

just the way she is, because she is on television for a much wider audience, she is not able to fully be her awkward, unrestrained, uncensored self by dropping an “eat shit” at any random moment.

The semi-scripted nature of the show becomes more apparent when she interviews her real-life best friend and fellow YouTuber, Mamrie Hart, host of “You Deserve a Drink.” There is a subtle, yet slightly uncomfortable sense of tension as they work through clearly rehearsed segments of prepared information to laugh on cue. Especially during their segment “Deal,” when they watch YouTube videos together as they normally would on a live Friday night YouTube livestream, it’s hard to believe or imagine them preparing themselves to laugh at content they have already seen and prepared. For the small screen, Grace is forced to become, in part, someone poised and trained for the camera – a persona that highly contradicts her usual discombobulated personality.

On YouTube, we love Grace because she isn’t grace-ful; she wears the same groutfit for a week in a row without showering, yet she still produces hilarious content that makes us hurl in laughter. We feel comfortable curling up with her while we stay in on a Friday night in our pajamas because she is always on social media, tweeting that she is doing the same.

But now, because we have a look behind the scenes, we see that a three-woman team dolls her up in lavish garments and jewelry far more expensive than the items she vlogs about buying on sale at Forever 21. Her hair and makeup are too perfect for the Grace we know to care about. If the purpose of the show is to stay in with her on a Friday night like she says, viewers wouldn’t feel as “at home” in her “house” as they would with the Grace they do know. Who looks that good at home with their best friends?

Finally, Grace signs off her first episode with a compilation video of clips her viewers have created – just another way she incorporates the audience so well. While Grace’s foremost aims are to maintain her own creative style over all else, she still wishes to work with her viewers, from their suggestions for set décor to guest lists and even content ideas. As she told Entertainment Weekly in an interview, “That’s kind of what social media is for — it’s a two-way conversation. I would be doing myself a disservice if I didn’t continue that conversation with (the viewers).”

Television and new media are always looking to expand in unprecedented directions, and for the sake of being slightly more revolutionary, at least Grace is trying something new even if it’s not perfect. Just as Grace signs off all her YouTube videos with her tagline, “I don’t know,” she doesn’t know exactly what her show will become, but she aims to bring her audience along as lab assistants. Just as she has experimented with a variety of media in her rise to recognition in Hollywood, she has a beautiful freedom to just experiment with this cross-hybrid of mediums on her new show.

After all, her sole goal is just to “make something that doesn’t suck.” And for her high aspirations, that is exactly why we love Grace.

Sports

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

Wednesday, April 8, 2015 — 7

Wolverines rout EMU

By CHRIS CROWDER Daily Sports Writer

The Michigan and Eastern Michigan campuses are roughly 11 miles apart from each other.

But when the Wolverines played the E. MICHIGAN 1 Eagles on MICHIGAN 11 Tuesday, they proved that the two softball programs are many more miles apart in talent and performance.

With a day off on Monday, Michigan looked mentally prepared against its crosscounty opponent. It got the win by run-rule in five innings, 11-1.

“We usually have Mondays off so we can catch up on our studies and everything,” said sophomore left fielder Kelly Christner. “Then we can come out stronger like today. We have those Mondays to not worry about and kind of forget about softball and relax, and then we come back Tuesday refocused and ready to go.”

Added Michigan coach Carol Hutchins: “It’s a long season, and it’s cumulative. … As a coach, you worry about how it will affect them and whether they’ll be focused when you have a game the next day.”

The worry may have settled in early as Eastern Michigan drew blood in the first inning.

Senior pitcher Haylie Wagner went through the first two batters, earning a strikeout and a groundout. With Wagner needing one more strike to get out of the inning, sophomore Michelle Kriegshauser timed the 2-2 pitch perfectly, sending it over the left-field wall to give the Eagles a 1-0 lead.

But Wagner was perfect the rest of the way, not allowing a hit or walk through the next four innings. The offense backed her up, batting through

ROBERT DUNNE/Daily

Sophomore outfielder Kelly Christner went 2-for-4 with two RBI and two runs scored Tuesday against Eastern Michigan.

the lineup in a single inning on two separate occasions.

The Wolverines evened the score almost immediately.

Junior centerfielder Sierra Lawrence started the threerun first inning with a walk and stolen base to get into scoring position. Junior second baseman Sierra Romero then drove Lawrence in with a base hit back up the middle, advancing to second on the throw home. Christner hit a ball right to the shortstop, but Romero was able to reach home on an errant throw. Christner scored off of another single by junior right fielder Kelsey Susalla.

Later in the inning, Michigan loaded the bases but couldn’t get a runner home. Nonetheless, the Wolverines had batted through the whole lineup, giving Wagner ample time to prepare mentally for the next inning. She used the time well, coming out in the second inning to earn three

straight groundouts.

“They were ready to go and came out aggressive,” Hutchins said. “We love aggressive.”

The Wolverines started the second inning like they started the first, with Lawrence earning a walk and Romero hitting a single to knock the speedster in for a run. Two batters later, sophomore third baseman Lindsay Montemarano hit an RBI double to make the score 5-1.

Sophomore shortstop Abby Ramirez stepped up to the dish in the third inning with one runner on. Given Ramirez’s status as a slap hitter, the Eagles outfield was playing in. Ramirez made them pay, hitting a shot past the centerfielder, batting a run in to push the lead to five.

Two batters later, Christner hit a double to score two more.

The next batter, Susalla, hit a liner past a diving Eastern Michigan right fielder, driving in yet another run. After an

RBI sacrifice fly by freshman catcher Aidan Falk, Michigan had a commanding 10-1 lead to end the third.

Montemarano walked with the bases loaded in the fourth inning, scoring another run. But that was it for the Wolverines, as Wagner struck out to close the inning. With a 10-run lead, Wagner had the opportunity to redeem herself after her strikeout by pitching a shutdown inning to end the game on the run rule.

She did just that, picking up two more strikeouts to put her count at six on the day.

With Wagner’s stellar pitching and Michigan’s potent offense scoring at will, it was a nearperfect day for the team.

And with the Wolverines’ dominant performance, they continue to have bragging rights in Washtenaw County.

The schools are close, but with regard to their softball teams, there’s a much bigger gap.

Hill, Maezes continue road back Benedetti keeps hot streak going in blowout win over Eastern Michigan

By NATHANIEL CLARK Daily Sports Writer

The Michigan baseball team was already rounding into form in the last two weeks.

Now NOTEBOOK it has two key contributors returning to provide a boost.

Following a series win at defending Big Ten champion Indiana last weekend, Michigan returned home and steamrolled Eastern Michigan on Tuesday, 18-4, notching 20 hits in the process.

“It was great to see some offensive explosion and some fireworks out there today,” said Michigan coach Erik Bakich.

“They did a good job of taking advantage of pitches that they could drive for extra base hits.

We didn’t hit 20 singles.”

The contest featured two key contributors for the Wolverines who have been suffering from injuries: junior left-handed pitcher Evan Hill and junior infielder Travis Maezes.

Hill — who has been rehabilitating from a knee injury — made his first start of the season Tuesday. He pitched two innings and surrendered only one run on two hits while striking out two batters. Hill’s return adds even more depth to an already-stacked pitching staff.

“I definitely thought I had more in me, but the two-inning start was scheduled,” Hill said.

“Whatever (the coaching staff ) wants me to do going forward, I’ll be there ready to go.”

Maezes, who has been suffering from a strained oblique, was moved from his usual shortstop position to third base in order to allow him playing time without exacerbating the injury.

And it has paid off. Since

returning to the lineup April 1 against Central Michigan, Maezes is batting 10-for-21 with six runs scored and three doubles. Against the Eagles, he went 1-for-4 with a run scored.

BIG EARLY INNINGS PROPEL MICHIGAN: In Tuesday’s game, the Wolverines scored three runs each in the first and second innings.

Michigan’s offense has made a habit of storming out of the gate, such as in the first innings of games against Maryland on March 29 and Toledo on March 31. The Wolverines put up five in the first frame against the Terrapins and four against the Rockets.

With runners on first and second and none out in the first frame, Maezes hit a single and advanced to second on an error that also allowed a run to score.

Two batters later, junior left

fielder Cody Bruder smacked a double to left field that drove in two more runs.

“Our guys are focused on helping the team score the most runs,” Bakich said. “A lot of it is just that we’ve got good hitters.”

In the second, with Michigan ahead, 3-1, sophomore right fielder Johnny Slater added another run to the Wolverines’ total by rounding the bases in a highly unusual fashion. He drew a walk, advanced to second on a failed pickoff attempt, reached third on a balk and scored on a wild pitch. “(Slater) manufactured the run all by himself,” Bakich said.

“We’ll take it. It was a big run at the time.”

Later in the inning, sophomore first baseman Carmen Benedetti and Bruder contributed to the Wolverines’ cause in a more conventional

“It was great to see some offensive explosion today.”

matter. Both belted RBI base hits — Benedetti a double and Bruder a triple — to extend Michigan’s lead to 6-1.

“A lot of guys had quality at-bats,” Bakich said. “We made a lot of hard contact all over the field.”

BENEDETTI CONTINUES HOT STRETCH: It has been a banner year for Benedetti, who leads the Big Ten with 35 RBI. In addition, he posts a .353 batting average with 41 hits, three home runs and a teambest 12 doubles.

But he really made waves in last weekend’s series against the Hoosiers by going 7-for13 with a slugging percentage of 1.077. Benedetti carried his momentum into Tuesday’s game, nabbing three hits in four at-bats and scoring a run in the process.

Benedetti is hardly alone in his offensive success, though.

The Wolverines topped the Big Ten in batting average (.294) following the weekend series against Indiana.

“We’ve got a lot of confidence right now,” Benedetti said. “It’s an awesome feeling.”

RITA MORRIS/Daily

Senior left-hander Haylie Wagner pitched five innings of one-hit ball Tuesday.

Wagner earns birthday win Lefty settles down after first-inning home run, retires last 12

By KEVIN SANTO Daily Sports Writer

Haylie Wagner’s birthday was just another reason to celebrate.

Michigan softball’s senior left-hander has had some very happy birthdays throughout her tenure with the Wolverines.

With every passing year for Wagner, it seems that April 7 has brought her more luck in the circle.

And her 22nd birthday was no different.

Tuesday, her birthday fortune was in full effect at Alumni Field, though it didn’t look that way from the start. After recording two outs in the top of the first, Eastern Michigan right fielder Michelle Kriegshauser stepped to the plate. On a 2-2 delivery, Kriegshauser crushed the ball over the left-field fence to put the Eagles up 1-0.

But that was the worst of Wagner’s play, as she went on to earn a nice present — an 11-1 run-rule victory. Wagner pitched a perfect game after the solo shot off the bat of Kriegshauser. She mowed down 12 straight Eagles and recorded six strikeouts in five innings.

“It’s the same thing every game that I’ve been focusing on,” Wagner said.

“Just attacking the hitters and finishing my pitch. So after that (home run), I was just focusing on that and making the ball move. And it’s cool to get a win on your birthday. It’s fun.”

Though not quite as impressive as her Tuesday showing, Wagner’s other performances on April 7 stood out.

Wagner, just a freshman at the time, had a seven-inning battle against Ohio State in the circle in 2012, allowing just five hits, conceding four earned

runs and leading Michigan to a 6-5 victory.

And 365 days later, in 2013, the Wolverines’ ace picked up where she left off against the Buckeyes. Wagner produced a strong three-inning outing as Michigan cruised to a 17-5 runrule victory in which she didn’t allow a single earned run or walk.

Michigan didn’t get to play a game to mark Wagner’s 21st birthday in 2014, but she put together a shutout performance two days prior.

Michigan coach Carol Hutchins joked about the happenstance that Wagner has pitched on her birthday three times in her four-year career.

“It must be (a coincidence), because I’m not aware of that,” Hutchins said. “(And) last year didn’t fall on her birthday?

Then I didn’t start her on her birthday (all four years).”

But Wagner’s career can’t be chalked up to a few special performances on her birthday. She boasts a 2.08 earned-run average and a 15-2 record in the 2015 campaign, and her performance has especially excelled as of late.

After faltering late in a loss to Iowa on March 29, the veteran quickly recovered for a crucial Big Ten series against Minnesota. In five innings against the Golden Gophers, Wagner allowed just one earned run and recorded five strikeouts, leading Michigan to a 9-4 victory.

“The main thing with her is her confidence,” said sophomore left fielder Kelly Christner. “When she has that self confidence, like, ‘Yeah I can dominate this game,’ and whenever she has that presence on the mound is when she really shuts the batters down.”

Tuesday was the last time Wagner will ever have the opportunity to step into the circle donning the maize and blue on her birthday. Yet for the next 30 games, she’ll still be wishing for the best gift of all — a Women’s College World Series ring.

“It’s cool to get a win on your birthday. It’s fun.”

CONGRATULATIONS TO MICHIGAN DAILY BRACKET POOL CHAMPION KEVIN SANTO PAUL SHERMAN/Daily

Sophomore Carmen Benedetti leads the Big Ten with 35 RBI and is hitting .353 with three home runs and 12 doubles.

(EVEN IF HE IS A FRESHMAN)

8 — Wednesday, April 8, 2015

Sports

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

BASEBALL

Wolverines pound Eastern Michigan

By BEN FIDELMAN Daily Sports Writer

Coming into Tuesday’s matchup at Ray Fisher Stadium, the Michigan baseball team had lost its last seven E. MICHIGAN 4 games MICHIGAN 18 against nearby foe Eastern Michigan.

After slugging 13 extra-base hits and accumulating a season-high 42 total bases, the Wolverines broke that losing streak with an 18-4 victory.

“What stood out to me today was that we didn’t hit 20 singles,” said Michigan coach Erik Bakich. “We had a lot of extra-base hits, and our guys were really making hard contact even on some of our outs. It was great to see us not settle and keep the score at 8-4, but be able to put 11 runs up in the last three innings.”

Though it was the end of the game that contained the biggest fireworks, the Wolverines (4-5 Big Ten, 19-13 overall) jumped out to a quick start in the bottom of the first inning when they muscled three runs across the plate.

The first two hitters in the lineup reached base and moved around on a run-scoring single from junior third baseman Travis Maezes. That left two men on base with two outs for junior left fielder Cody Bruder, who would smack his first of four extra-base hits on the evening.

“It was really important to get out to a good start tonight,” said Michigan first baseman Carmen Benedetti. “Eastern has kind of had their way with us, and it was good to start off hot against

them, throw some punches and knock them down.”

The Eagles (4-5, 12-19) knocked in one run against junior left-handed pitcher Evan Hill, but Michigan responded in the bottom of the frame with three more scores. Seven Wolverines went to the plate, highlighted by back-to-back, line-drive hits by Benedetti and Bruder, falling for a double and triple, respectively, to put Michigan up 6-1 heading to the third.

Earlier in the week, Bakich said that Hill, who was making his first start of the season after rehabbing a knee injury sustained in the fall, was expected to throw just a few innings in order to rebuild his arm strength.

Hill gave two innings of work, allowing just two hits and one earned run while striking out a pair of hitters.

Freshman right-hander Jayce Vancena came in for the Wolverines after Hill had completed his scheduled two innings of work, putting together four solid innings on the mound.

Vancena allowed three runs to score, but there was little doubt concerning the outcome of the game. After Vancena entered from the bullpen, the closest the game became was 8-4 after Eastern Michigan tacked on two runs in the top of the fourth inning.

From that point on, Michigan would slug three home runs, two

triples and five doubles en route to its final tally of 18 runs.

Two Wolverines stood out in the run-producing department.

Bruder and sophomore right fielder Johnny Slater combined for 11 RBI on the night and accounted for much of the high level of the game’s slugging statistics.

Two of Michigan’s three home runs came from Slater, who launched balls over the right-field wall in both the sixth and seventh innings, and Bruder ended up being only a home run shy of hitting for the cycle.

No Wolverine has hit for the cycle since 2007, and Slater was the first Michigan player to hit two home runs in a game since Jacob Cronenworth did so against Illinois on April 12, 2014.

“Something we’ve talked about has been that we can put up a crooked number and then maybe not score for a few innings or just hold the lead after a three- or five-run inning,” Bakich said. “So for us to have five different innings where we score multiple runs was good to see our team do. It was great to see some offensive explosion and fireworks out here.”

Michigan has won seven of its last eight games and is sailing toward easier parts of its conference schedule. If it hopes to get into the national rankings again, the team will have to keep dominating even the midweek games.

“It was really important to get out to a good start tonight.”