There are two separate controversies this week over rape stories that have been challenged by critics. Both stories involve leading U.S. universities. Unlike the Duke Lacrosse controversy, neither school is accused of wrongdoing. Rolling Stone magazine has apologized for shocking failures in reporting a sensational rape story where a woman named Jackie alleged that she was gang raped at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house, but the Washington Post reported on discrepancies in the account, including the fact that no party was held at the fraternity on the day in question. In the meantime, Lena Dunham’s story of being raped in college has been challenged as containing discrepancies and the man who has faced the most accusations is now considering a libel lawsuit against the author and director.
The Rolling Stone Controversy
Rolling Stone magazine ran the story containing detailed accounts of the rape of Jackie, but it agreed to a demand by the alleged victim not to interview with accused man. It was an astonishing lapse of journalistic principles and the magazine also failed to fully investigate the details of the alleged rape. Notably, however, the magazine issued an apology but then removed this line: “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.” That line was replaced with this line “These mistakes are on Rolling Stone, not on Jackie.”
The story “A Rape on Campus” by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, discussed how Jackie was a freshman in 2012 when she was forced to perform oral sex by seven men at the prestigious Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house. Various people raised questions over the reporting, including the fact that some of Jackie’s closest friends questioned her account despite Erdely’s insistence that her friends’ accounts were “consistent” with her story. These inconsistencies include Jackie’s initial claim, according to friends and the Washington Post, that she had been raped by 5 men and then later claiming it was 7. Other friends said that there was an absence of any physical injury despite the claim of the magazine that she emerged bloodied and battered. The fraternity also said that there was no party on the day identified by Jackie and that her identification of “Drew” did not match anyone at the house and that in conflict with her claims, no one at the house worked as lifeguards at the pool. One of the named attackers was from a different house and no one by his name is a member at the Phi Kappa Psi. The man named said that he never met Jackie.
The fact that the magazine agreed not to interview the accused was widely condemned. The magazine stated that “[b]ecause of the sensitive nature of Jackie’s story, we decided to honor her request not to contact the man who she claimed orchestrated the attack on her nor any of the men who she claimed participated in the attack for fear of retaliation against her.” A Rolling Stone editor claimed that it could not reach some of the men, though others including the Post were able to do so.
The Post details clearly identified individuals who were never contacted by the magazine. The Post reported that the person identified in the Rolling Stone story as “Cindy” told it that Erdely’s version of events was “completely false.”
The story of the brutal rape is still available on the Internet with the addition of the apology.
The Lena Dunham Controversy
A man named “Barry” is reportedly considering a libel lawsuit against Lena Dunham for her account of being raped at Oberlin College. She supplied details of the rape by a “mustachioed campus Republican” named Barry. Dunham’s widely acclaimed memoir, Not That Kind of Girl, included an identification of Barry as the rapist and describes him as a 19-year-old student who was known as a “poor loser” at poker with a flamboyant mustache who worked at the campus library and hosted a radio talk show. She also stated that Barry was the “campus’s resident conservative.”
The seemed to reduce the suspects to one man named Barry who was on the campus at the time and named Barry who claims that he has been hounded by the allegation that he is a rapist and that Dunham has refused to speak with him or clear his name.
Dunham’s high visibility has made the rape allegation international news and that has magnified the alleged injury to Barry. She received a $3.7 million advance for the memoir and is a leading producer, writer, and director, including her celebrated work on on the HBO series Girls.
Dunham not only claims that Barry raped her but gives highly graphic details of the encounter. She also quotes a friend who said that after she “once her friend Julia woke up the morning after sex with Barry, and the wall was spattered with blood. Spattered, she said, “like a crime scene.” But he was nice and took her for the morning-after pill and named the baby they weren’t having.”
The conservative website Breitbart has investigated the claims and identified what it says are clear discrepancies. The Washington Post blog has said that those discrepancies offer a solid basis for a libel action.
It is difficult to judge the merits of the claim. However, a libel lawsuit could force a response from Dunham and discovery into her account. Such an action could be based on not just libel but false light. The latter tort is defined
in Restatement (Second) of Torts, Sec. 652E as:
(1) the portrayal must be found to be “highly offensive to a reasonable person” and
(2) the actor had knowledge of or acted in reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the other would be placed.
The risk for Dunham is that there may be enough details — and alleged discrepancies — to get such a case to discovery and possibly trial. Discovery could result in depositions of an array of acquaintances and Dunham herself under oath. “Barry” has reportedly set up a donation site to pay for “costs and related fees associated with defending Barry’s reputation including, but not limited to, potentially pursuing Lena Dunham and Penguin Random House for harm caused to Barry’s reputation from the publication and sale of Ms. Dunham’s memoir.”
@Msjettexas ~ You might want to fact check yourself. You claim Lisa Dunham profited off her -as you see it- false rape claim and got a tv show.
Her book was published in 2014. Her show went to air in 2012. So, according to your logic, Lisa Dunham’s unpublished book was somehow able to get her a tv show. I need to figure out how to manipulate book I have no written yet into television shows now.
I have no idea if her claim is false, but I do know, that you are ignorant of easily verifiable information. To not know is fine, but to present a lie as ‘proof’ of your point is either just you being lazy, or you not caring what the truth is.
The real tragedy is that real rape claims must fight to survive in a culture where people are completely willing to ignore all rape claims because they can cite a few false claims. People are more than willing to excuse a rapist based on the victim not following some nonsensical rules to prevent rape, and ignore the fact that the only reason women, and men, are ever raped is because someone chose to rape them.
So please, keep arguing over the unknown details of these two accounts of possibly rape. Keep the real victims silent. Make sure that you make such a huge issue over these two claims that no genuine victim will ever come out and report the crime in fear of what the goon squad will do to their character.
Keep protecting rapists. That is all this faux outrage over Rolling Stone and Lena Dunham will ever accomplish. You make the dangers of reporting rape so severe than no one will ever want to come forward.
Just as long as you can hate on Rolling Stone, Lisa Dunham, and the ‘Media’, that is what really matters.
Inga:
“Karen, as far as male rape victims go, feel free to mischaracterize anything else you desire. You simple cannot stop doing this, why?”
OK. Shall I copy and paste our earlier conversation on this blog where you claimed there can be no rape if the boy ejaculated?
I do not mischaracterize, but you appear to regret your words and try to pretend they didn’t happen.
Oh, there’s plenty of annoying to go around.
Inga:
“Karen, again, you quote directly then you go on to double down on the mischraracterization. Seriously you need to work on this.”
Do you deny scolding me for not remarking on victims of police brutality on this thread? Did you not mean what you said?
I copied and pasted your entire comment. There was no “just kidding” at the end that I omitted.
It’s the Notification feature. And it’s orange on my iPad an when 99.9 percent of the notifications are from Paul’s comments to me, it’s annoying.
Inga – blame Steve Jobs, not me. It is not orange on mine and I work through my email. This is a great time to buy an Android tablet.
Inga, old girl, you brought it up.
For the more legally inclined among Professor Turley’s readers, here is a “Database of Lawsuits Against Colleges and Universities Alleging Due Process and Other Violations in Adjudicating Sexual Assault” cited at cotwa.info:
http://www.avoiceformalestudents.com/list-of-lawsuits-against-colleges-and-universities-alleging-due-process-violations-in-adjudicating-sexual-assault/
I suggest this website on the subject:
Community of the Wrongly Accused
http://www.cotwa.info/
What is this little orange box that you people are referring to?
Haz old boy, in the grand scheme of things, the little orange comments box overuse by our friend Paul, isn’t a real problem, relax. It’s annoying but not earth shattering, lol.
Little orange comment boxes. That’s now the problem. Little orange comment boxes.
Uh huh.
On a related note, I hope Lena Dunham goes to jail.
Both for a false rape claim, and for molesting her little sister.
Pogo – since Lena is a fabulist, I am not sure she even has a sister. 🙂
Paul, why is it that every single day the little orange comment box at the top right hand side of the page is from comments from you? At least five to ten a day. That is annoying. Paul, as far as RS goes, I have said upstream what I thought of their reporting. Do try to keep up.
Inga – I work at my own pace in my own style. I refuse to be dictated to by you. Are you jealous that you are not the one in the little orange boxes? BTW, you could answer some of the questions I asked of you.
Karen, as far as male rape victims go, feel free to mischaracterize anything else you desire. You simple cannot stop doing this, why?
Karen, again, you quote directly then you go on to double down on the mischraracterization. Seriously you need to work on this.
Sorry, I am math challenged today, that should be 7500 rapes a year at ASU
@ Karen
This is one of the positive aspects of WordPress. The inability of posters to go back and erase compromising or embarrassing comments.
Inga:
Since you appear to have the moral high ground on rape, shall we revisit your comments about how male rape victims are not really victimized if their rapist managed to arouse them?
Inga:
“Karen @ 10:46, speaking of gross mischaracterizations of comments….You need to work on that.”
“Karen how about the big black man who was choked to death? You didn’t mention him. Or the 12 year old playing with a toy gun in the park. Or the guy at the Walmart carrying the BB gun he was going to buy?”
Darren and I both commented on a statement where you clearly scolded me, personally, for not mentioning alleged victims of police brutality on this thread.
I have many flaws, but lying is not one of them.
When I went to college, the only non-fraternity members allowed at a frat house party were girls. I never once, a single time, saw a man at a frat party that did not belong to the House. That’s why they rush, to get access to frat social events. Otherwise, you could just show up and crash.
The possibility of not only encountering one, but being gang raped by 5-7 non-members at a frat house party seems remote. But maybe not all campuses have the same rules.
Karen – I thought the gang rape was supposedly done as part of pledging? Did I get that wrong?
DBQ – there is no little orange box. Inga’s eyes are going.