- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
It now appears the UVA rape story was all a big lie
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:07 pm
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:07 pm
Rolling Stone is now backtracking on the story. Jackie's identity needs to be made public. She and that magazine have defamed the Phi Psis. I really hope they can sue the crap out of someone.
LINK
quote::
The managing editor of Rolling Stone said Friday that he now believes the magazine "misplaced" its trust in Jackie, the subject of a blockbuster article on an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia, due to discrepancies in her account of the incident.
Sabrina Rubin Erdely's report on Jackie's alleged, horrific gang rape in 2012 at a UVA fraternity and the university's subsequent slow response to her case had been met with heavy criticism in the past week. Media critics began to wonder why Erdely did not include a sentence in the story addressing whether and how she attempted to contact Jackie's alleged rapists.
In subsequent interviews about her reporting, Erdely declined to say whether she ever knew the identities of the alleged rapists, telling the Washington Post that "this was a topic that made Jackie extremely uncomfortable."
Erdely and her editor, Sean Woods, stood by the piece amid the onslaught of criticism. But on Friday, Rolling Stone managing editor Will Dana essentially pulled the magazine's support for Jackie's story.
"In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced," Dana wrote in an editor's note. "We were trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault and now regret the decision to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account."
The editor's note came as the UVA fraternity where Jackie alleged the gang rape took place, Phi Kappa Psi, said that the organization would issue a statement rebutting the Rolling Stone article.
The Washington Post reported Friday that Phi Kappa Psi was prepared to say it did not host a party on the date Jackie alleged she was gang raped, nor did any member of the organization match the description of the student Jackie said brought her to the party [Ed note: See the fraternity's full statement here].
Here's how some of the details in Jackie's story unraveled, according to the Post's report:
Earlier this week, Jackie revealed to friends for the first time the full name of her alleged attacker, a name she had never disclosed to anyone. But after looking into that person’s background, the group that had been among her closest supporters quickly began to raise suspicions about her account. The friends determined that the student that Jackie had named was not a member of Phi Kappa Psi and that other details about his background did not match up with information Jackie had disclosed earlier about her perpetrator.
The Post determined that the student Jackie named is not a member of Phi Kappa Psi and had never met her in person. [Ed note: The Washington Post later struck this claim from its story; see update below.]
In an interview with the newspaper this week, Jackie described feeling manipulated by Erdely and "out of control" of her own account of the alleged rape (the Post also reported that at some point Jackie had asked Erdely to be taken out of her article, a request Erdely refused).
In another interview Thursday, Jackie told the Post that some details in Rolling Stone's story may not be accurate and admitted to not knowing whether her main attacker was indeed a member of Phi Kappa Psi, though she maintained that the alleged rape happened at that fraternity house.
Read Rolling Stone's full statement on the story below
LINK
This post was edited on 12/6/14 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:10 pm to Toddy
Didn't they shut down the fraternity's at UVA too over this? I'd be livid.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:13 pm to BayouBandit24
quote:
Didn't they shut down the fraternity's at UVA too over this? I'd be livid.
Typical overreaction to appease people who make a lot of noise.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:13 pm to BayouBandit24
Yes they did.
No one learned anything from the Duke Lacrosse travesty evidently.
No one learned anything from the Duke Lacrosse travesty evidently.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:14 pm to Toddy
I wouldn't at all be shocked if there is no "Jackie"
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:15 pm to TN Bhoy
quote:
We know
Terse but appropriate.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:19 pm to Toddy
I seem to recall some posters on here referring to those fraternities as rape factories. I wonder if those people will come forward to apologize. Perhaps latter today I will do some research and call those people out.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:21 pm to Radiojones
quote:
Perhaps latter today I will do some research and call those people out.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:22 pm to Toddy
It was a fictional story that got mislabeled.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:35 pm to Toddy
quote:I am not so sure it was entirely a lie. I am about 50/50 on it. When I read into the "fact checking" points that Phi Kappa Psi released they weren't as completely damning as I thought.
It now appears the UVA rape story was all a big lie
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:37 pm to Toddy
And the agenda driven lapdogs in the MSM bought into the article
story hook,line and sinker.ABC,CBS and NBC ALL had this as
their lead story.
With the slightest bit of research and fact checking this strong
should have been shelved but the story fit the narrative of the
"rape culture" on campus.
The author had been shopping the narrative to different
campuses til she hit pay dirt with young lady at UVA.
story hook,line and sinker.ABC,CBS and NBC ALL had this as
their lead story.
With the slightest bit of research and fact checking this strong
should have been shelved but the story fit the narrative of the
"rape culture" on campus.
The author had been shopping the narrative to different
campuses til she hit pay dirt with young lady at UVA.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:39 pm to Toddy
The frat should sue the shite out of Rolling Stone.
While they were "lied" to....Seems Rolling Stone was negligent by not fact checking any part of the story.
While they were "lied" to....Seems Rolling Stone was negligent by not fact checking any part of the story.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:44 pm to Toddy
Sometimes facts and the truth get in the way of an agenda. The reality is that the writer and Rolling Stone really don't care that the story may not be "completely true" (if at all). Hence why they never chose to do a full investigation in the first placeThe story was to push an agenda that rich, white, fraternity boys at an elite school were getting away with rape of "helpless" women due to their societal status, and that this was going on en masse all over the country. Mission accomplished.
I never used to look as society as Right v. Left, but the left and its "progressives" have gone completely off the reservation. There is a social agenda that they want to push and they simply don't care about making sure the atrocities they use as examples are in fact true. They simply just ignore any and all facts that may not fit their narrative. This and the Michael Brown BS are just the two latest examples, but there will be more with every bozo with a laptop thinking he or she is a "journalist"
I never used to look as society as Right v. Left, but the left and its "progressives" have gone completely off the reservation. There is a social agenda that they want to push and they simply don't care about making sure the atrocities they use as examples are in fact true. They simply just ignore any and all facts that may not fit their narrative. This and the Michael Brown BS are just the two latest examples, but there will be more with every bozo with a laptop thinking he or she is a "journalist"
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:48 pm to Toddy
Friday NYT has a big feature on escalating abuse of women including this story. Not sure if the NYT will retract it today.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 12:53 pm to theenemy
quote:
While they were "lied" to....Seems Rolling Stone was negligent by not fact checking any part of the story
We both know Rolling Stone wasn't lied to. This writer went out to find a "story" that she could turn into a narrative to fit her agenda. Rolling Stone nor the writer cared whether some, all, or any part of the story was accurate. That was never the point
quote:
Magazine writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely knew she wanted to write about sexual assaults at an elite university. What she didn’t know was which university.
So, for six weeks starting in June, Erdely interviewed students from across the country. She talked to people at Harvard, Yale, Princeton and her alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania.
LINK
Posted on 12/6/14 at 1:24 pm to Toddy
quote:Why?
Rolling Stone is now backtracking on the story. Jackie's identity needs to be made public.
Did she file criminal charges? Did she file a false police report?
Hell, our current culture even disallows actions against women who file proven false testimony. The US is a racist, homophobic, rapist culture. Lying in behalf of the narrative is allowed. In fact, lying in behalf of the narrative is encouraged. Why go after this girl? Should we go after her because the RS decided to publish her story?
IMV, the RS reporter's interview recordings do need to be made public. I suspect you'd hear leading question, after leading question followed by an article stretching each answer further. Just my suspicion, but RS has that kind of rep. It would shed needed light on what passes for journalism nowadays.
As stated earlier though, blaming the girl, or RS, or the murder of Hannah Graham, or anything other than UVa's stupidity is a distraction from the real issue. A proper response from UVa in this episode would have established an entirely different tenor.
The story here is in the response, not in an individual's lie. As with Duke in '06, it is the response which will jeopardize UVa's rep. At least in Duke's case they were following the DA's lead. UVa was responding to a piece written by a bimbo for a third-rate news rag.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 1:35 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Why?
Because she committed slander against the Frat and the Frat should be allowed to know who she is to file suit against her.
Posted on 12/6/14 at 2:33 pm to Toddy
Good morning! And welcome to yesterday
Posted on 12/6/14 at 4:52 pm to Toddy
I doubt it will happen BUT people at that fish-wrapper need to be held criminally liable.
People lives could have been ruined, folks could have went to prison.
People lives could have been ruined, folks could have went to prison.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News