Michigan State Chief Said Abuse Victim Would Get ‘Kickback’ for Stirring Up Survivors, Emails Show

In April, John M. Engler, the newly minted interim president of Michigan State University, was under attack. Publicly, he felt as if he couldn’t say anything about the victims of Larry Nassar, a former university sports doctor who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting girls and young women. But privately it was a different story.

According to previously unpublished emails obtained by The Chronicle through a public-records request, Engler and his top advisers attacked critics and cast doubt on the motives of a victim and her lawyer.

The correspondence came on the heels of an explosive charge from Kaylee Lorincz, a gymnast who had been abused by Nassar. During a board meeting, Lorincz accused Engler, a former governor, of trying to pay her off during a private meeting without her lawyer present. He did little to rebut the story, even as he conferred in confidence with a colleague who disputed Lorincz’s account.

The emails show that, in the days after Lorincz made her allegations, Engler asserted that Rachael J. Denhollander, the first woman to publicly accuse the doctor, was likely to get a “kickback” from her lawyer, John C. Manly, for her role in the “manipulation” of survivors.

Michigan State redacted Engler’s email address from the correspondence, which the university has done in the past, citing security concerns. But a spokeswoman later confirmed that the message had come from Engler.

The email, signed “John,” was a reply to a series of missives from Carol M. Viventi, vice president and special counsel to the president, who was working behind the scenes to assure university trustees that Lorincz’s claims were false. “Thank you for your strong defense,” Engler wrote on April 15 at 9:23 a.m.

“It is deeply appreciated,” the text of the email reads. “At least we know what really happened. The survivors now are being manipulated by trial lawyers who in the end will each get millions of dollars more than any of [sic] individual survivors with the exception of Denhollander who is likely to get [sic] kickback from Manley [sic] for her role in the trial lawyer manipulation.

“It is too bad we can’t have a debate about who is really trying to help those who were harmed by Nassar,” Engler continued. “At least, all of the positive changes are beginning to get some modest attention. It will be years before the use and abuse by trial lawyers point is understood. Have a good Sunday. See you Tuesday morning. John.”

Denhollander, who has emerged as a vocal survivors’ advocate, was aghast but not surprised. Engler has consistently focused on money, she said. “It is out of his comprehension that someone would do something for anything other than money and power. I am not getting kickbacks, ever.” She continued: “It shows all the more deeply his own mind-set toward sexual-assault survivors. The idea that he is going to be able to solve the problems of the school when this is what he says about sexual-assault survivors is absolutely ridiculous. Engler needs to go.”

Michigan State did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday from Engler or Viventi.

‘We Can’t Defend Ourselves in the Press’

One of Viventi’s emails from this period was first published by the Detroit Free Press, which obtained the document from a source within the administration.

In that email Viventi tells trustees that “Kaylee’s statements to the Board contained many false and inaccurate statements, which we did not publicly contradict out of an abundance of concern for the survivors who are quick to claim ‘revictimization’ or ‘shaming’ of survivors whenever they are falsely accusing members of the MSU community,” she wrote.

The documents obtained by The Chronicle provide greater detail about Viventi’s dialogue with board members, to whom she complained that it was futile to publicly contradict Lorincz, who had made her allegations during the public-comment period of a board meeting.

Engler, Viventi wrote, “could not get into an argument about her wholly inaccurate portrayal of what was said 1, he’s not supposed to respond during the comment period and 2, refuting her statement plays into their narrative that he’s bullying and revictimizing a survivor. And in that room, with that audience there was no point in saying anything.”

Continuing, she said, “Victims can say anything and we have to dance around their ‘misperceptions’. The plaintiff’s attorneys are very adept at getting their narrative out there … if we respond, we just give them more opportunity to argue back or say we’re denying responsibility., etc. Unfortunately, we’re stuck trying to get real improvement (7 pages worth!) things [sic] done and getting to mediation. We can’t defend ourselves in the press, but I wanted you all to know we were nowhere near being in the same room and discussion with her.”

As has been previously reported, some trustees pushed back on Viventi, questioning the wisdom of Engler’s meeting at all in private with a survivor, given the continuing litigation. In another email, which has not been previously reported, Viventi told trustees that Engler had been essentially ambushed by Lorincz and her mother, who “saw him as he crossed the hall to the bathroom and insisted they weren’t leaving without meeting him.”

“I’m just sorry we didn’t record the conversation,” Viventi wrote on April 15 at 3:35 p.m. “Given what’s happened, it isn’t likely that he will meet with Mom or a survivor again.”

The university was in damage-control mode, Viventi continued, trying to counteract Manly, Lorincz’s lawyer, who had criticized the meeting. Robert P. Young Jr., whom Engler had hired as lead counsel to handle Nassar-related investigations and lawsuits, was working behind the scenes to ensure the episode did not disrupt the legal mediation process. (In May, Michigan State agreed to pay a total of $500 million to more than 300 women and girls who say Nassar abused them.)

“Bob is working very hard to tell our side to the mediator given the press release sabatoge [sic] by Manly,” Viventi wrote. “We are meeting tomorrow to talk about how we talk without appearing to be attacking or defensive.”

Protecting the University

The Free Press’s report about one of Viventi’s emails sent shock waves through the university, contributing to the narrative that Engler and his team saw survivors as adversaries. Viventi would later apologize for her comments, but she immediately realized that Engler was vulnerable for having praised her for making them in the first place.

On April 18 at 1:04 p.m., Emily Gerkin Guerrant, vice president and university spokeswoman, said in an email that “the letter Carol wrote over the weekend has been picked up by the media.” Guerrant proposed a statement from Engler, which was redacted in the email provided to The Chronicle. Ten minutes later, Viventi warned: “Just know that if Je’s email is ever out (foia’d or subpoenaed), he sent me an email Sunday thanking me for my strong defense,” she wrote to Guerrant and John Truscott, a crisis-communications consultant.

As Lorincz’s story drew attention, pressure mounted on university trustees to weigh in. Brian Mosallam, a former Spartan football player and current board member, told an ESPN reporter that “if Kaylee Lorincz’s story is correct, I am beyond disturbed. I’m disgusted.”

This did not sit well with Viventi. In an email that appears to be to Engler, Viventi suggested Mosallam had been disloyal. After praising Engler as “a very good coach/leader!,” she said, “I figured out that Mosallum [sic] didn’t learn how to be a team player.

“Instead of saying I’ll have to get the other side, or learn more, he says if it’s true, it’s disgusting,” Viventi wrote on April 15. “His quarterback is under attack and the instinct is not to defend, but to go along. There’s an assumption that he believes it might be true, rather than an assumption that it couldn’t be true and therefore he’ll make a temporizing statement. So now that I figured out what’s bothering me, I can go back to thinking about all the other problems we have.”

The Chronicle shared the text of Viventi’s email with Mosallam, who objected to the premise that his job is to defend Engler.

“As a university trustee I have duties of loyalty and care to the institution,” Mosallam wrote in an email to The Chronicle. “To carry out these duties, I have oversight responsibilities of how the administration manages the institution. My job is to protect MSU, NOT the university president. And in a case like this one, where the university president’s judgment, tone and conduct undermine the institution and its reputation, I have an obligation to protect MSU even if it is at the expense of the university president.”

Asked about Engler’s email regarding the motives of victims, Mosallam said it raises questions about whether the interim president can continue to lead the university.

“Engler needs to think long and hard whether he is the right person for this job,” Mosallam said. “Hopefully, the settlement will be finalized shortly. The focus now must be on institutional reform which requires our leadership to set a tone that reestablishes confidence and trust in our university. Our courageous survivors suffered immensely from sexual abuse. Rachael Denhollander is an inspiration for her courage and bravery to speak up, and the example of leadership that Engler should follow rather than criticize out of jealousy and spite. The idea that any human being, let alone the university’s interim president, would question their motives or intentions, lacks empathy, but more startlingly, dignity. I have serious concerns about MSU’s ability to turn the page while Engler remains the university’s interim president, and strong reservations about whether he should continue in that role.”

Jack Stripling covers college leadership, particularly presidents and governing boards. Follow him on Twitter @jackstripling, or email him at jack.stripling@chronicle.com.