By Zachary Gorchow
Executive Editor and Publisher
Posted: January 18, 2018 1:13 PM

It was probably too late for Michigan State University President Lou Anna Simon to change the prevailing narrative about MSU’s handling of Larry Nassar, the former physician who sexually assaulted at least 125 women and girls under his care, when she showed up at the sentencing hearing Wednesday to hear Mr. Nassar’s victims tell their stories.

That narrative is this: That many of these women informed several employees at MSU, some mid-level and some lower-level, that Mr. Nassar assaulted them and those employees either discouraged them from coming forward, sided with Mr. Nassar or failed to initiate a legitimate, unbiased investigation of him. And further that senior MSU officials, like Ms. Simon and the Board of Trustees, rather than showing horror, empathy and transparency as soon as the Nassar revelations hit in 2016 and immediately moving to ascertain the scope of the problem, cleaning house and quickly assisting the women coming forward, instead circled the wagons in a strategy designed to minimize the university’s legal exposure.

MSU has insisted no university official believed Mr. Nassar committed crimes until the first news report in the fall of 2016. Mr. Nassar’s victims have scoffed at that position.

Despite some calls for Ms. Simon to resign, she has refused and maintained the resolute backing of the Board of Trustees.

The events of the past week though show the Nassar scandal turning into a full-on conflagration raging across the banks of the Red Cedar.

Last Friday, the university – under siege from something like 150 victims who have sued it in federal court, filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss the case because the university has “absolute immunity from liability” for Mr. Nassar’s conduct. The Lansing State Journal reported that attorneys for MSU asserted the statute of limitations expired, the plaintiffs lacked standing and that MSU employees are immune from liability.

This was filed on a Friday evening of a holiday weekend, a classic tactic to minimize media attention.

Now, whether these legal arguments have merit is for a judge to decide. From a political and public relations standpoint, the motion is a disaster. Trying to escape liability in this situation based on a technicality like the statute of limitations, claiming the victims lack standing and asserting immunity? That looks … bad.

Today, The Detroit News reported that 14 different MSU employees were warned of Mr. Nassar’s abuse. One of those notified was Ms. Simon herself, who was told in 2014 a Title IX complaint and police report had been filed against an unnamed physician. Ms. Simon said she never received a copy of the university’s Title IX investigative report, which cleared him. MSU police forwarded a report on the complaint to the Ingham County Prosecutor’s Office, but that office did not bring charges.

The revelations in the News story have prompted a fresh wave of fury at Ms. Simon today. Sen. Margaret O’Brien (R-Portage) called for her resignation, as did The State News, MSU’s independent, student-run newspaper.

On Tuesday, the first of some 100 of Mr. Nassar’s survivors began delivering their victim impact statements in court. Ms. Simon had considered attending, but opted against doing so because of the distraction it would create. She was excoriated by several victims and denounced for staying away in a Detroit Free Press column.

So Wednesday, she showed up, and it did not go well.

When Ms. Simon stepped before the cameras, she quickly found herself engaged with one of Mr. Nassar’s victims, who peppered her with questions and criticism. Ms. Simon voiced horror at Mr. Nassar’s conduct and emphasized the focus of the day should be on the victims and their stories, not on MSU.

And yet, as these victims continue to speak, they are directing a huge portion of their focus on MSU and Ms. Simon.