Image courtesy of Twitter
I would like to say up front that I am not presenting this case because I think that the prosecutor’s decision not to prosecute is wrong or that either suspect is guilty of sexual assault but rather because it raises some questions about how the case was handled, particularly by UM and/or EMU officials. Were confidential communications with the AAPD leaked to Mr. Dumars because he was a basketball player? Did either University investigate the case to see if they needed to take action under Title IX to protect students?
The alleged victim was a 19 year old female EMU student. According to the complainant’s statement [1], [2], the complainant, a girlfriend and three other acquaintances, ran into Jordan Dumars, a UM basketball player and an EMU basketball player (suspect #2) at the Studio 4 Bar (now Dream Nite Club) in Ann Arbor at about 1:30 AM on January 15, 2011. The complainant knew Dumars and Sus#2 but did not know the other people in their group. She and two of the acquaintances agreed to meet up after the bar closed at Dumars’ apartment. She said that she was told that she could stay the night at the apartment. She was highly intoxicated and Sus#2 had to help her up the stairs to the second floor, where she was going to change clothes and go to sleep (t-shirt, shorts & socks). Her two female friends and the other men remained downstairs.
In the bedroom, Sus#2 pulled the top of her dress down and began kissing her breasts and Dumars was present. Another man then entered the room with more alcohol. She says that they pressured her into taking a shot of 1800 (tequila). She said that they offered her money for sex and she said no. She said that she was going into and out of consciousness. The other man left the room. She told them to stop but they told her to shut up. One of them held her hands above her head (see the police report for more details).
At this point, Sus#2 felt uncomfortable enough about the situation that he left the room. She has some difficulty with her recollection of the events because of her level of consciousness but she said that Dumars forced his penis into her mouth. She says that she passed out for about an hour and a half (this is not consistent with the timeline of when she arrived home). When she awoke, she went back downstairs and told Dumars and Susp#2 that she was going to call the police and took pictures with her phone. One of the men grabbed her phone and erased the pictures.
Dumars told her that she could not stay and someone gave her a ride to her friend’s house in Ypsilanti, near the EMU campus. She slept of and on most of the day and when she awoke she says that she felt like she had been drugged. She went to the St. Joe’s emergency room at about 8:40 PM. She had a rape examination and was interviewed by the Ann Arbor Police. Samples were collected for drug and alcohol testing. She told the police officer that she wanted the men prosecuted. Detective Tacey was called to the ER for further investigation.
During Det. Tacey’s interview with the complainant, she related a story about a previous incident that had occurred the previous summer (presumably that relates to Dumars and Susp#2).
· (Complainant’s girlfriend) stated “You know what kind of guys they are” referring to an incident that occurred over the summer. Upon questioning about that incident (the complainant) indicated that she was over at (blank) residence over the summer time. While there, a subject whom she knows by the name of (blank) poured codeine cough syrup into her drink, which already contained liquor. She stated they were doing this in an attempt to make her pass out. Eventually her friends (blank) and (blank) got her back to her residence and helped her out.
In the interview with Sus#2 [3], he confirmed that the complainant was very drunk but denied that anything non-consensual had occurred. Some examples of his statements about how drunk she was;
· At the bar: “She contacted him and was telling him how drunk she was”
· At the apartment: “(Sus#2) stated she was so drunk she needed help to get upstairs, and since Dumars was already upstairs, he decided to help her up the stairs in order to use the bathroom”
· “The reason (Sus#2) helped (the complainant) up the stairs was that she was drunk. She was fumbling around and falling down”
· (Sus#2) stated that she just kept on saying that she was too drunk and told him what she had to drink
Initially he denied that he had any sexual contact with the complainant but when the detectives told him that they had swabbed her breasts for DNA and asked him if there was any reason that his DNA would be on her breasts, he admitted to kissing her breasts and nipples for about a minute. He stated that he did not pull down her dress but that her dress was “falling off”. When she laid back and her dress fell down, exposing her breasts, that is when he began to kiss them. He denied grabbing her buttocks or having touched her vagina. He said that she never told him to stop but that he felt uncomfortable with the situation and left the room, leaving her alone with Dumars.
· (Sus#2) stated he was the one who stopped himself because he didn’t want to get into a bad situation, and he eventually left the room.[4]
He said that he spoke with Dumars the next day and that Dumars said that she had given him consensual oral sex.
A friend of the complainant who had been with her at the bar and who had not gone to Dumars apartment (FOC#1) said that she was dropped off at her home around 5:00 – 5:30 AM. She went to sleep and when she woke up she thought that something had happened to her but she didn’t remember everything, just bits and pieces [5]. She took the complainant to the St. Joe’s ER.
Another friend of the complainant and roommate of FOC#1 also was with the complainant at the bar but left with her roommate and did not go to Dumars apartment (FOC#2) [6]. She also related the story about the party the previous summer when the complainant had been given alcohol with Nyquil and became very intoxicated. She related a similar story to FOC#1 about the complainant arriving at their home at about 5:00 AM and sleeping until about 11:00 AM and then telling her about how Sus#2 was kissing on her chest and someone holding her hands, putting her hands crossed above her head. She also told about someone giving her a shot of 1800 tequila. She said that she still “feel like I’m high”.
FOC#3 went with the complainant to Dumars apartment [7]. She said that the complainant drove her car and that another female who had been the complainant’s resident advisor the previous year was with them as well. She said that when they left the bar that they had not planned to go to Dumars apartment but stopped to get gas and ran into some of the men from the bar. The complainant then asked if they could stop at Dumars apartment. FOC#3 and FOC#4 went into the apartment and sat on the couch in the living room. The complainant went upstairs. Two of the men asked them if they wanted to go outside and smoke marijuana, they declined. Another two men were drinking in the living room. A few minutes later she decided that she wanted to leave and she went upstairs to get the complainant. She said the bedroom door was closed but she heard what she thought was some talk about consensual sex and some laughing. She knocked on the door and the complainant opened the door. She tried to get the complainant to leave with them but the complainant wanted to stay. The complainant asked where her phone was and they went downstairs to find her phone. When they had her phone FOC#3 tried again to ask her to leave but she wanted to stay. FOC#3 & FOC#4 left. She said that she was the type of person who, if she thought something bad was happening, would have dragged her out. She was angry with the complainant because she thought the complainant had brought them over to have sex and they were not that sort of girls.
The complainant’s other friend (FOC#4) had been her resident advisor the year before [8]. She admitted to being intoxicated from what she had to drink while at the bar and that had affected her memory of the events at the apartment. She said that after 15 minutes of sitting downstairs with FOC#3, they became worried about why the complainant was still upstairs. FOC#3 went upstairs and knocked on the door but got no answer. She said that she heard some conversation in the room and thought she was having consensual sex. She did hear some conversation that she thought was about money for sex. She stated that she and FOC#3 spoke about what was happening upstairs and said that “I can’t believe she brought us all the way over here and had a train ran on her” meaning that multiple men were having sex with her. She did remember seeing the bottle of 1800 tequila. She said the complainant had a reputation for being a “ho” and that the previous year she had sex with multiple members of the football team. She agreed that the complainant was drunk to the point of stumbling but she didn’t fall down and she had difficulty driving. After being at the apartment for about 40 minutes, she and FOC#3 left the apartment, leaving the complainant there.
There were four male witnesses, who gave fairly consistent stories. There was consensus that the complainant was quite drunk when they met her at the bar and when she was at Jordan Dumars apartment.
· MW#1 – “she was drunk and on further discussion of how drunk she was, he stated she was super drunk” [9]
· MW#2 – “described her as drunk” [10]
· MW#3 – “saw her in the club with her head lying on the table. (MW#3) stated that she was under the influence and that it was obvious” [11]
They variably described how drunk she was but generally said she was stumbling or falling down, however, she did drive the car from the bar to the gas station and then to Dumars apartment.
Two of the witnesses said that they had seen or heard the complainant engaged in “normal” conversation with Dumars and Sus#2 in the guest bedroom [12]. Some said that she had a “bad reputation”, referring to having sex with many men. They also described her as not being upset when she came downstairs and some said she was vying for Dumars attention. Some said that someone described her as a groupie, which upset her and that she wanted to stay overnight but Dumars said no. They were all surprised to hear later that the complainant was claiming that she had been raped.
Dumars delayed having an interview for about two weeks, during which time he hired a lawyer and took two polygraph examinations under the direction of his lawyer [13]. His lawyer had also met with MW#4. Detective Tacey asked Dumars how he knew that he was under police investigation. Dumars said;
· “On Monday he was contacted by someone he does not want to reveal, who is associated with the University of Michigan. That person revealed to him that an investigation of a sexual assault involving him was ongoing” [14]
He had also heard something from an EMU assistant basketball coach that the complainant was saying she was raped.
Dumars pretty much told a story that was consistent with that told by Sus#2 and the other witnesses. Contrary to the complainant’s statement, Dumars claimed to have had sex with her one time in the past. He described the complainant as “tipsy” and said that she was aggressively asking for sex from Dumars. Dumars said that he was not that interested but that Sus#2 wanted to have sex with the complainant so he was going along with discussion of a threesome. He said that it was the complainant who exposed her breasts and that after Sus#2 was kissing her breasts for a short while; he felt uncomfortable because that complainant did not seem very interested in having sex with him and he left the room on his own. The complainant then gave Dumars consensual oral sex.
Given that a prosecutor must have a good faith belief that they can prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt before charging a person, it is not surprising that the prosecutor did not authorize charges in this case. With the witnesses all stating that they thought whatever was going on in the bedroom was consensual the prosecutor would have had to rely upon proving that she was too intoxicated to give consent. That would probably have been very difficult but it does not mean that the suspects did not take advantage of a very drunk young woman. Jordan’s father, Joe Dumars sent a personal thank you to AA Police Chief Barnett after the prosecutors denied the charges [15].
The detectives from the AAPD did a thorough investigation, taking extensive statements from all witnesses. The one thing that I might fault them for is that the drug testing was still pending when the prosecutor told them that he would not authorize charges so the detectives called the laboratory and cancelled the testing. If the testing had shown evidence of intoxicating drugs, it might have swayed the prosecutor. Even if that was not sufficient to sway the prosecutor, it would still be important evidence if the suspects were found to be involved in a similar pattern of future behavior. That might be a legitimate concern considering the consistent story of the prior summer barbeque when one of more of the suspects was allegedly involved in supplying the complainant with alcohol mixed with Nyquil.
The two girls who refused to accompany the complainant to Dumars apartment were worried about “what kind of guys these were”. One or both of the suspects had been involved in the incident the previous summer, where she was supplied with alcohol mixed with Nyquil in an apparent attempt to get her to pass out so that several men could have sex with her. Her friends dragged her out of the party. Under Title IX, universities must investigate in order to protect women from predatory behavior like what is being alleged. Did either UM or EMU investigate to see if there was a pattern of such behavior and whether or not something needed to be done to protect all students. The University’s responsibilities go beyond determining if a crime was committed.
In addition, UM should have investigated who tipped off Jordan Dumars that he was the subject of a criminal investigation. Did the information come from contacts between the AAPD and campus police? Was someone from the AAPD leaking confidential information that could have interfered with their investigation? Was he receiving special consideration because he was a basketball player?
This case occurred three months before the University received the “dear colleague” letter from the Dept. of Education office of civil rights that said that universities were not handling sexual assault cases in accordance with Title IX. It was seven months before the University adopted its new interim policies on sexual assault. The University obviously knew about this case since it was a university official who tipped off Jordan Dumars. They should have reviewed this case to see if there was an as yet unresolved threat to women on campus.
The alleged victim was a 19 year old female EMU student. According to the complainant’s statement [1], [2], the complainant, a girlfriend and three other acquaintances, ran into Jordan Dumars, a UM basketball player and an EMU basketball player (suspect #2) at the Studio 4 Bar (now Dream Nite Club) in Ann Arbor at about 1:30 AM on January 15, 2011. The complainant knew Dumars and Sus#2 but did not know the other people in their group. She and two of the acquaintances agreed to meet up after the bar closed at Dumars’ apartment. She said that she was told that she could stay the night at the apartment. She was highly intoxicated and Sus#2 had to help her up the stairs to the second floor, where she was going to change clothes and go to sleep (t-shirt, shorts & socks). Her two female friends and the other men remained downstairs.
In the bedroom, Sus#2 pulled the top of her dress down and began kissing her breasts and Dumars was present. Another man then entered the room with more alcohol. She says that they pressured her into taking a shot of 1800 (tequila). She said that they offered her money for sex and she said no. She said that she was going into and out of consciousness. The other man left the room. She told them to stop but they told her to shut up. One of them held her hands above her head (see the police report for more details).
At this point, Sus#2 felt uncomfortable enough about the situation that he left the room. She has some difficulty with her recollection of the events because of her level of consciousness but she said that Dumars forced his penis into her mouth. She says that she passed out for about an hour and a half (this is not consistent with the timeline of when she arrived home). When she awoke, she went back downstairs and told Dumars and Susp#2 that she was going to call the police and took pictures with her phone. One of the men grabbed her phone and erased the pictures.
Dumars told her that she could not stay and someone gave her a ride to her friend’s house in Ypsilanti, near the EMU campus. She slept of and on most of the day and when she awoke she says that she felt like she had been drugged. She went to the St. Joe’s emergency room at about 8:40 PM. She had a rape examination and was interviewed by the Ann Arbor Police. Samples were collected for drug and alcohol testing. She told the police officer that she wanted the men prosecuted. Detective Tacey was called to the ER for further investigation.
During Det. Tacey’s interview with the complainant, she related a story about a previous incident that had occurred the previous summer (presumably that relates to Dumars and Susp#2).
· (Complainant’s girlfriend) stated “You know what kind of guys they are” referring to an incident that occurred over the summer. Upon questioning about that incident (the complainant) indicated that she was over at (blank) residence over the summer time. While there, a subject whom she knows by the name of (blank) poured codeine cough syrup into her drink, which already contained liquor. She stated they were doing this in an attempt to make her pass out. Eventually her friends (blank) and (blank) got her back to her residence and helped her out.
In the interview with Sus#2 [3], he confirmed that the complainant was very drunk but denied that anything non-consensual had occurred. Some examples of his statements about how drunk she was;
· At the bar: “She contacted him and was telling him how drunk she was”
· At the apartment: “(Sus#2) stated she was so drunk she needed help to get upstairs, and since Dumars was already upstairs, he decided to help her up the stairs in order to use the bathroom”
· “The reason (Sus#2) helped (the complainant) up the stairs was that she was drunk. She was fumbling around and falling down”
· (Sus#2) stated that she just kept on saying that she was too drunk and told him what she had to drink
Initially he denied that he had any sexual contact with the complainant but when the detectives told him that they had swabbed her breasts for DNA and asked him if there was any reason that his DNA would be on her breasts, he admitted to kissing her breasts and nipples for about a minute. He stated that he did not pull down her dress but that her dress was “falling off”. When she laid back and her dress fell down, exposing her breasts, that is when he began to kiss them. He denied grabbing her buttocks or having touched her vagina. He said that she never told him to stop but that he felt uncomfortable with the situation and left the room, leaving her alone with Dumars.
· (Sus#2) stated he was the one who stopped himself because he didn’t want to get into a bad situation, and he eventually left the room.[4]
He said that he spoke with Dumars the next day and that Dumars said that she had given him consensual oral sex.
A friend of the complainant who had been with her at the bar and who had not gone to Dumars apartment (FOC#1) said that she was dropped off at her home around 5:00 – 5:30 AM. She went to sleep and when she woke up she thought that something had happened to her but she didn’t remember everything, just bits and pieces [5]. She took the complainant to the St. Joe’s ER.
Another friend of the complainant and roommate of FOC#1 also was with the complainant at the bar but left with her roommate and did not go to Dumars apartment (FOC#2) [6]. She also related the story about the party the previous summer when the complainant had been given alcohol with Nyquil and became very intoxicated. She related a similar story to FOC#1 about the complainant arriving at their home at about 5:00 AM and sleeping until about 11:00 AM and then telling her about how Sus#2 was kissing on her chest and someone holding her hands, putting her hands crossed above her head. She also told about someone giving her a shot of 1800 tequila. She said that she still “feel like I’m high”.
FOC#3 went with the complainant to Dumars apartment [7]. She said that the complainant drove her car and that another female who had been the complainant’s resident advisor the previous year was with them as well. She said that when they left the bar that they had not planned to go to Dumars apartment but stopped to get gas and ran into some of the men from the bar. The complainant then asked if they could stop at Dumars apartment. FOC#3 and FOC#4 went into the apartment and sat on the couch in the living room. The complainant went upstairs. Two of the men asked them if they wanted to go outside and smoke marijuana, they declined. Another two men were drinking in the living room. A few minutes later she decided that she wanted to leave and she went upstairs to get the complainant. She said the bedroom door was closed but she heard what she thought was some talk about consensual sex and some laughing. She knocked on the door and the complainant opened the door. She tried to get the complainant to leave with them but the complainant wanted to stay. The complainant asked where her phone was and they went downstairs to find her phone. When they had her phone FOC#3 tried again to ask her to leave but she wanted to stay. FOC#3 & FOC#4 left. She said that she was the type of person who, if she thought something bad was happening, would have dragged her out. She was angry with the complainant because she thought the complainant had brought them over to have sex and they were not that sort of girls.
The complainant’s other friend (FOC#4) had been her resident advisor the year before [8]. She admitted to being intoxicated from what she had to drink while at the bar and that had affected her memory of the events at the apartment. She said that after 15 minutes of sitting downstairs with FOC#3, they became worried about why the complainant was still upstairs. FOC#3 went upstairs and knocked on the door but got no answer. She said that she heard some conversation in the room and thought she was having consensual sex. She did hear some conversation that she thought was about money for sex. She stated that she and FOC#3 spoke about what was happening upstairs and said that “I can’t believe she brought us all the way over here and had a train ran on her” meaning that multiple men were having sex with her. She did remember seeing the bottle of 1800 tequila. She said the complainant had a reputation for being a “ho” and that the previous year she had sex with multiple members of the football team. She agreed that the complainant was drunk to the point of stumbling but she didn’t fall down and she had difficulty driving. After being at the apartment for about 40 minutes, she and FOC#3 left the apartment, leaving the complainant there.
There were four male witnesses, who gave fairly consistent stories. There was consensus that the complainant was quite drunk when they met her at the bar and when she was at Jordan Dumars apartment.
· MW#1 – “she was drunk and on further discussion of how drunk she was, he stated she was super drunk” [9]
· MW#2 – “described her as drunk” [10]
· MW#3 – “saw her in the club with her head lying on the table. (MW#3) stated that she was under the influence and that it was obvious” [11]
They variably described how drunk she was but generally said she was stumbling or falling down, however, she did drive the car from the bar to the gas station and then to Dumars apartment.
Two of the witnesses said that they had seen or heard the complainant engaged in “normal” conversation with Dumars and Sus#2 in the guest bedroom [12]. Some said that she had a “bad reputation”, referring to having sex with many men. They also described her as not being upset when she came downstairs and some said she was vying for Dumars attention. Some said that someone described her as a groupie, which upset her and that she wanted to stay overnight but Dumars said no. They were all surprised to hear later that the complainant was claiming that she had been raped.
Dumars delayed having an interview for about two weeks, during which time he hired a lawyer and took two polygraph examinations under the direction of his lawyer [13]. His lawyer had also met with MW#4. Detective Tacey asked Dumars how he knew that he was under police investigation. Dumars said;
· “On Monday he was contacted by someone he does not want to reveal, who is associated with the University of Michigan. That person revealed to him that an investigation of a sexual assault involving him was ongoing” [14]
He had also heard something from an EMU assistant basketball coach that the complainant was saying she was raped.
Dumars pretty much told a story that was consistent with that told by Sus#2 and the other witnesses. Contrary to the complainant’s statement, Dumars claimed to have had sex with her one time in the past. He described the complainant as “tipsy” and said that she was aggressively asking for sex from Dumars. Dumars said that he was not that interested but that Sus#2 wanted to have sex with the complainant so he was going along with discussion of a threesome. He said that it was the complainant who exposed her breasts and that after Sus#2 was kissing her breasts for a short while; he felt uncomfortable because that complainant did not seem very interested in having sex with him and he left the room on his own. The complainant then gave Dumars consensual oral sex.
Given that a prosecutor must have a good faith belief that they can prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt before charging a person, it is not surprising that the prosecutor did not authorize charges in this case. With the witnesses all stating that they thought whatever was going on in the bedroom was consensual the prosecutor would have had to rely upon proving that she was too intoxicated to give consent. That would probably have been very difficult but it does not mean that the suspects did not take advantage of a very drunk young woman. Jordan’s father, Joe Dumars sent a personal thank you to AA Police Chief Barnett after the prosecutors denied the charges [15].
The detectives from the AAPD did a thorough investigation, taking extensive statements from all witnesses. The one thing that I might fault them for is that the drug testing was still pending when the prosecutor told them that he would not authorize charges so the detectives called the laboratory and cancelled the testing. If the testing had shown evidence of intoxicating drugs, it might have swayed the prosecutor. Even if that was not sufficient to sway the prosecutor, it would still be important evidence if the suspects were found to be involved in a similar pattern of future behavior. That might be a legitimate concern considering the consistent story of the prior summer barbeque when one of more of the suspects was allegedly involved in supplying the complainant with alcohol mixed with Nyquil.
The two girls who refused to accompany the complainant to Dumars apartment were worried about “what kind of guys these were”. One or both of the suspects had been involved in the incident the previous summer, where she was supplied with alcohol mixed with Nyquil in an apparent attempt to get her to pass out so that several men could have sex with her. Her friends dragged her out of the party. Under Title IX, universities must investigate in order to protect women from predatory behavior like what is being alleged. Did either UM or EMU investigate to see if there was a pattern of such behavior and whether or not something needed to be done to protect all students. The University’s responsibilities go beyond determining if a crime was committed.
In addition, UM should have investigated who tipped off Jordan Dumars that he was the subject of a criminal investigation. Did the information come from contacts between the AAPD and campus police? Was someone from the AAPD leaking confidential information that could have interfered with their investigation? Was he receiving special consideration because he was a basketball player?
This case occurred three months before the University received the “dear colleague” letter from the Dept. of Education office of civil rights that said that universities were not handling sexual assault cases in accordance with Title IX. It was seven months before the University adopted its new interim policies on sexual assault. The University obviously knew about this case since it was a university official who tipped off Jordan Dumars. They should have reviewed this case to see if there was an as yet unresolved threat to women on campus.
| 01_interview_with_the_victim_01.pdf |
| 02_interview_with_the_victim_02.pdf |
| 03_interview_with_sus2_01.pdf |
| 04_interview_with_sus2_transcript.pdf |
| 05_interview_with_foc1.pdf |
| 06_interview_with_foc2.pdf |
| 07_interview_with_foc3.pdf |
| 08_interview_with_foc4.pdf |
| 09_interview_with_mw1.pdf |
| 10_interview_with_mw2.pdf |
| 11_interview_with_mw3.pdf |
| 12_interview_with_mw4.pdf |
| 13_interview_with_jordan_dumars.pdf |
| 14_interview_with_jordan_dumars_transcript.pdf |
| 15_thank_you_email_from_joe_dumars_to_chief_barnett.pdf |
RSS Feed
