You are on page 1of 47
Final investigative Report Kroll Associates, Inc. 19; October 12, 2018 5 Mato of an Ec: Case No. 00130-2018 ‘Background (COIE") at tchigan Stale University (University) stating that she had been informed thet two ian (Respondent), an MSU employee, anc that Respondent had made two] fee! uncomiotabis as wel. Krol was assigned this case on February 21, 2018, Based upon these allegations, Kroll Associates, In. (*KroiP]" commenced an investigation pursuant lo the Universty Polly on Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct (Policy) On January 25, 2018, ‘report from] felt uncomforta Throughout the course of is investigation, Kroll identified the folowing Ciaimants: (Claimant (*Claimant} (Claimant (Claimant (Claimant (Ctaimant (Claimant Issuels) |. Whether Respondent engaged in conduct that subjecled Claimants sexu harassment in violation of the 2011 and 2012 University Poley on Sexual Harasement, 1 van Resort apd noc a id Cr III ‘onl harscment holon of he 1850 ard 2084 User coum Haraosmert : IM. wotnar Respondent engaged in conduc! tha sujectod Clann IB to bowel hresemert vlan fhe 2016 on 2018 Cera a faresument IV. Whether Respondant engage in conduct tal subjetes Calman fife sexi heragament n vain of Seaton XA) of tre Poly V. Whiter Ragone oped cnt at hed Cra coun taarenh ton Secon ae tay A * ol global vestigations and iskranogernet contin rs hoadauaréed in thy Yor, WY. in Foun 2018, MSU read ‘lo abst OF inrtatons of aloes velar ofthe Unversy's RVSH pay, b Vi. Whether Respondent engaged in conduct that subjected Claimant IIo ‘sexual harassment in violation of Section X(A) of tha Policy, Vil, Whether Respondent engaged in conduct that subjoctod Claimant EI sexual harassment in violation of the 1999 University Policy on Sexual Harassment. sucedietion ‘The Policy applies to all relationship violence, stalking and sexual meconcuct, including, without fmitation, sexual harassment, commitied by or against a member of the University community when the vonduct ! ccure on campus, in the context of a University program or activi, or wien there are continuing adverse | effects on campus or In 8 University program oF activity aia I Claman | incient Claman Giaiman and Clana when the aleged Peldents cccured, Respondent Meee cyee a eee alleged incidents occurred, Re: semains emgi university. At alegations occurred on MSU's campus in the context For these reasons, Krol determines ithas jurisdiction to investigate the allegations, Investigation grag 2 een MI I i ocean by ret re (geet ee athvised ofthe process en protocol purevant oti Policy inluingnvexigatrreutaly, the tts | Escapes mtn ere al of a | Feviewed and signed the Claimant loformation Form, Below is @ eummary of Claman: ements. a es 4 I uconfom Ma percents eee 17, Claimant MMM tated that this “set off a ved auso ofthe eanen ste Ned Mosnng her onn espatenees wih Respeadee we below. In January 2078 Claimant decided to fe a report wh the Os of elena Cent anes Claman esi she lerned bout two more ith simlarexperences a Febesery 2018 \her asked sbout har one eeerercas wth Responda any, Cra lied at Respondent hos made neproprite commons end oes wth sexual connaltane ume a ted promod ho cep Chimanflo reponod al op o aut 2013 0 2014, she atone tte beginning of he semester. She met (Claire IRIN at that ra tended ine conor Claman rocaes sng a tale, hep Une when Recperdert enon ther breasts and, direct, EE Respondent made this comment in font othe, Ceiralilns otter tones Sates ke she fett uncomfortable with this comment and felt It was inappropriate. She explained, "as with mony comments, ifs a combination ofthe tone, the environment an the selected wording inthis casa ® In addivon to her own experiences, Claimant sisted tel she had witnessed Respondent's inappropriete behavior towards women. Claimant aid she wilassed Respondent inappropriately staring and exemining women’s bodies on multiple occasions. Additonal ard inleraction” botween Respondent and in which Respondent was discussing with Celmari imant(MMEciaried that this was the only par of the conversat noted that whatever the entire conversation was, tcaused| omember that distnely.* id she recalled thet Respondent once mi fortable comment about Claimant Jord remembsted thinking “oh boy.” Jaw. 100% a those nice deltcics” and noted that te comment vas irrelevant to the hen the comment was joted hat Respondent was She added that Respondent is atenured professor and eee disegreed with Respondent about a grant but dint went o argue with Respondent because he didn” want to "make anyone upset,” Claimant sid that Claman a shares with her severhacemaies of apocopiate behavior from Responder and sald that she was concemed abot! Clima lil Cisrar less a ER cieimant twas about EE very hard. !can't believe he would put her in a ‘sualion lke the That was very hard for her. My conversations with her make te feo! concerned, He has made If Clear he has a lot af money anc takes about having tee uth the rig = Claimant Ic provide furtner detail about the information Clainang ad shared with hr, Fay, Caiman IIB sod tat tite Mfr that Respondent had yacdonedsexwins, condome and gona aed about sax expenenes ring several envon stor lil ‘Craimont IIR espondonl alemppecito igure out who had made the allegations ang kept asking hero provide names but Claimant ras gs. Reapancen erste that she od him about, Clara less AM soca “wandieing’ with his eyes, expining thal Respondent tends (0 sla at wornen's OGeS ANG spscteetne sens Vestn ia aka ho. Cainan ad hs wocs conven ehones Rae as esse aes Ten conseteaion wii lias oe -_ OnMarch 13,2018, Kotnteniowed (cor Lassusteen Wace of erul haraucmert 6) Oe oto oe 9 Win os sirsec ct pace ana rotor purcuan Whe Pay rceang ieee {he lnvestigation process and timelino, the prohibtion against etalion, and ine avaiabllty of inlerig sii che also reviewed anc! signed the Claimant information Fom, @elow isa summary of Claimant tement.