AP: Investigation of leak could cost University of Minnesota

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,567
Reaction score
15,642
Points
113
per the AP:

The investigation into a leak of confidential information about allegations of sexual harassment by a University of Minnesota athletic department employee could become costly to the school.

Documents released to The Associated Press this week as part of a public records request show Stroz Friedberg LLC has been hired to investigate last month's leak of information to KSTP-TV. One document shows the company's staffers charge varying rates starting at $110 an hour, with two managing directors who will likely be involved charging $860 an hour.

Another document shows that the firm of Don Lewis, an outside attorney retained to represent the university, will be paid at its usual rates with a 10 percent discount on fees, not to exceed $475 an hour.

Stroz Friedberg said in its agreement dated May 22 that it anticipates its work would be conducted by two people who charge $385 an hour, one person who charges $630 an hour, and two managing directors who charge $860 an hour. The document says the rates will apply generally and to travel.

http://www.startribune.com/investig...177943/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it

Go Gophers!!
 


The U has always been Elite at one thing. Wasting money.
 

I guess they could choose not to investigate and have it cost them other ways...

They gotta get in on that hidden dots document security thing ;)
 

Wouldn't it be cheaper to hire Ace Ventura?
 


lawyers gotta feed their families too. or maybe we should stop having sexual harassment issues and we wouldn't have to worry about this.
 


I'd say spend that money internally in the athletics department to mitigate things like this from happening instead of expensive lawyers who'd conclude, "Yep you are right, there is a leak on your boat. Now you need to pays us more money for the repairs".
 

per the AP:

The investigation into a leak of confidential information about allegations of sexual harassment by a University of Minnesota athletic department employee could become costly to the school.

Documents released to The Associated Press this week as part of a public records request show Stroz Friedberg LLC has been hired to investigate last month's leak of information to KSTP-TV. One document shows the company's staffers charge varying rates starting at $110 an hour, with two managing directors who will likely be involved charging $860 an hour.

Another document shows that the firm of Don Lewis, an outside attorney retained to represent the university, will be paid at its usual rates with a 10 percent discount on fees, not to exceed $475 an hour.

Stroz Friedberg said in its agreement dated May 22 that it anticipates its work would be conducted by two people who charge $385 an hour, one person who charges $630 an hour, and two managing directors who charge $860 an hour. The document says the rates will apply generally and to travel.

http://www.startribune.com/investig...177943/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it

Go Gophers!!

It is my understanding that the lawsuit is directed at the Board of Regents where a member leaked the name of the defendant. If this correct, I for one, hope he wins.
 



Finding a Board of Regents member who can't keep their promise of confidentiality is worth it. No organization can succeed when people involved in high level discussions are free to use confidential information as a weapon. This is not someone fighting for truth and justice, it is someone with an agenda who did not get their way.
 

If they're not certain who leaked...why were attorneys hired and not professional investigators? People with expertise in forensics, etc.

Seems like step 1 is trace the leak/ find the leaker. Step 2 is bring in the lawyers. Just me? Consider another university investigation you may have heard about - the head of the EOAA was an attorney. I'm not suggesting the investigation was incompetent simply because she has no training or expertise in investigations. I'm stating it was incompetent.
 

If they're not certain who leaked...why were attorneys hired and not professional investigators? People with expertise in forensics, etc.

Seems like step 1 is trace the leak/ find the leaker. Step 2 is bring in the lawyers. Just me? Consider another university investigation you may have heard about - the head of the EOAA was an attorney. I'm not suggesting the investigation was incompetent simply because she has no training or expertise in investigations. I'm stating it was incompetent.

Lawyers are involved in every investigation to determine who did what and how can they be stopped from doing it again.

Who are the lawyers helping Robert Mueller in the Russia investigation?

ANDREW WEISSMANN: The veteran Justice Department prosecutor brings years of experience in complex financial fraud cases, corporate misconduct and organized crime.

MICHAEL DREEBEN: A criminal law scholar, the deputy solicitor general has argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court in his decades of practice.

AARON ZEBLEY: Zebley’s had a long bond with Mueller, serving as his chief of staff at the FBI and then working alongside him at WilmerHale.

Zebley was an FBI special agent who worked counterterrorism investigations but also served as a national security prosecutor with cases including Chinese espionage.

JAMES QUARLES: As a young lawyer, Quarles served as an assistant special prosecutor in the Watergate scandal involving President Richard Nixon.

JEANNIE RHEE: Another WilmerHale partner, Rhee focused in private practice on representing people in government investigations, including white-collar criminal probes and criminal and civil fraud matters. Before that, she served in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which provides advice to government agencies on questions including national security, executive privilege and constitutional matters.

ELIZABETH PRELOGAR: This lawyer with experience in the solicitor general’s office and at the Hogan Lovells law firm is also a former Fulbright Scholar who studied in Russia.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/lawyers-helping-robert-mueller-russia-investigation/
 

This involves a leaked document or conversations between privileged individuals that will leave a digital trail. This doesn't involve international finance, national security law, money laundering, or organized crime. Sometimes a peashooter is sufficient, instead of a howitzer.

Next.
 



This involves a leaked document or conversations between privileged individuals that will leave a digital trail. This doesn't involve international finance, national security law, money laundering, or organized crime. Sometimes a peashooter is sufficient, instead of a howitzer.

Next.

Are you assuming that those handful of people are going to do all the work and not bring anyone in?

You seem to be way out of your element here man.
 

If only there were were a device....a way to use a simple electronic device to record fact-finding depositions....oh I don't know maybe something like simple voice recordings or videos of the depositions of the players, "Cruze". My iPhone can hold many gigabytes of digital voice recordings, or even videos if I really want to get crafty. I didn't even need to hire a managing director at 860/hr to tell me that! And, it would remove any concerns about a biased, incompetent investigation! I wouldn't even need to hire a professional videographer crew as firms are wont to do...
 

Are you assuming that those handful of people are going to do all the work and not bring anyone in?

You seem to be way out of your element here man.

Simply saying horse and cart. And you're correct, not claiming to be an expert. Simply saying seems like a lot of firepower for what should be a relatively simple problem. There are obviously potentially explosive legal issues at play that require attorneys particularly if the perp is someone in a position of power but has that been established?
 

Only lawyers have the training and experience to run investigations that might result in legal consequences. It would be gross incompetence not to hire lawyers for such investigations. If lawyers need forensic experts to help with their investigations they hire them. I learned that watching Perry Mason.
 

Only lawyers have the training and experience to run investigations that might result in legal consequences.

Is that why all police detectives must be lawyers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Is that why all police detectives must be lawyers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Might be why their work ends up in the hands of lawyers who make the final decisions and will even provide assistance and instructions for them.
 

Might be why their work ends up in the hands of lawyers who make the final decisions and will even provide assistance and instructions for them.

Is that why you have to be a lawyer to be on a jury?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

If only there were were a device....a way to use a simple electronic device to record fact-finding depositions....oh I don't know maybe something like simple voice recordings or videos of the depositions of the players, "Cruze". My iPhone can hold many gigabytes of digital voice recordings, or even videos if I really want to get crafty. I didn't even need to hire a managing director at 860/hr to tell me that! And, it would remove any concerns about a biased, incompetent investigation! I wouldn't even need to hire a professional videographer crew as firms are wont to do...

I do know that ultraviolet light is useful in detecting semen stains.
 

It occurred to me there are probably competing interests here thus all the outside heavyweights. The university is facing a likely lawsuit from Handel. The legislature is performing an audit. Certain regents probably don't get along. Maybe these firms are being hired not to find the truth...but to bury the truth...Eddie Barzoom and the Weaver Commission-style Let's go jogging!
 



Only lawyers have the training and experience to run investigations that might result in legal consequences. It would be gross incompetence not to hire lawyers for such investigations. If lawyers need forensic experts to help with their investigations they hire them. I learned that watching Perry Mason.

What law was broken here? Or is it a code of conduct violation? I checked with Perry and he shrugged his shoulders.
 


I would wager, and this could be Completely pulled from my posterior orifice, that employees of public institutions are not as protected from FOIA laws as students are. So, was the leak a crime? Lawyers? Perry? "Cruze"?
 

Bump.

Let's consider what we know. Published reports indicate that a regent emailed information regarding the EOAA findings to a reporter. The victim was not identified. Do we need the combined resources of the NSA, CIA, FBI, INTERPOL, and the League of Justice to determine which university employee's computer emailed a news organization on or around the date of the release?

Public sector employees do not enjoy the same privacy laws students do. Per MN statute disposition of disciplinary proceedings is public record. Perhaps procedure was not followed (notification, paperwork) but I'm waiting for one of our high-powered attorneys to comment on what law was broken.

The university surely has internal counsel, and they've brought in two outside firms to investigate the leak. Or supervise the people doing the investigation.



The relevant statute:

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=13.43

13.43 PERSONNEL DATA.
Subdivision 1.Definition. As used in this section, "personnel data" means government data on individuals maintained because the individual is or was an employee of or an applicant for employment by, performs services on a voluntary basis for, or acts as an independent contractor with a government entity.
§Subd. 2.Public data. (a) Except for employees described in subdivision 5 and subject to the limitations described in subdivision 5a, the following personnel data on current and former employees, volunteers, and independent contractors of a government entity is public:
(1) name; employee identification number, which must not be the employee's Social Security number; actual gross salary; salary range; terms and conditions of employment relationship; contract fees; actual gross pension; the value and nature of employer paid fringe benefits; and the basis for and the amount of any added remuneration, including expense reimbursement, in addition to salary;
(2) job title and bargaining unit; job description; education and training background; and previous work experience;
(3) date of first and last employment;
(4) the existence and status of any complaints or charges against the employee, regardless of whether the complaint or charge resulted in a disciplinary action;
(5) the final disposition of any disciplinary action together with the specific reasons for the action and data documenting the basis of the action, excluding data that would identify confidential sources who are employees of the public body;
(6) the complete terms of any agreement settling any dispute arising out of an employment relationship, including a buyout agreement as defined in section 123B.143, subdivision 2, paragraph (a); except that the agreement must include specific reasons for the agreement if it involves the payment of more than $10,000 of public money;
(7) work location; a work telephone number; badge number; work-related continuing education; and honors and awards received; and
(8) payroll time sheets or other comparable data that are only used to account for employee's work time for payroll purposes, except to the extent that release of time sheet data would reveal the employee's reasons for the use of sick or other medical leave or other not public data.
(b) For purposes of this subdivision, a final disposition occurs when the government entity makes its final decision about the disciplinary action, regardless of the possibility of any later proceedings or court proceedings. Final disposition includes a resignation by an individual when the resignation occurs after the final decision of the government entity, or arbitrator. In the case of arbitration proceedings arising under collective bargaining agreements, a final disposition occurs at the conclusion of the arbitration proceedings, or upon the failure of the employee to elect arbitration within the time provided by the collective bargaining agreement. A disciplinary action does not become public data if an arbitrator sustains a grievance and reverses all aspects of any disciplinary action.
 





Top Bottom