Academia, Criminal law, Media, Society, Torts

Washington Post Publishes Details On Journalistic Lapses By Rolling Stone In Alleged Rape Story

220px-Rolling_Stone_February_1_2012_coverScreen Shot 2014-12-11 at 7.52.39 AMThe Rolling Stone Magazine and it writer, Sabrina Rubin Erdely (right), are facing yet another story detailing the astonishing lapses in journalistic ethics and practices related to its article about a rape on the University of Virginia campus. Among the most starting is a statement by Erdely that a key student would not speak with her about the rape out of loyalty to his fraternity. That student says that Erdely never contacted him and that he would have been more than willing to speak to her. As for the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity, it confirmed that it did not host any registered social event the weekend of Sept. 28, 2012.

The story of a gang rape at the fraternity captivated the nation but soon began to fall apart as students came forward challenging the account of Erdely and the alleged victims called only “Jackie.” The Post has been in the lead on the story uncovering the shoddy journalistic practices, including an agreement with Jackie not to interview her alleged rapist.

The Post appears to have done all of the field interviews that Erdely did not and reinterviewed others. These include the three students — “Randall,” “Andy” and “Cindy” — who Jackie called to her side after the alleged rape. They all three say that the Rolling Stone’s account differed from their own accounts, even though this meeting was key to the article. The students say that Jackie had no visible blood or injuries. They encouraged her to call the police but she refused. The students were painted in the story as indifferent and uncaring to Jackie’s account, even though they say that they not only encouraged her to go to police but stayed with her during the night.

They, however, noted a myriad of discrepancies in her story and said that they were suspicious that night that the rape never occurred. They said the name she provided as that of her date did not match anyone at the university. Indeed University of Virginia officials confirmed to The Post that no one by that name has attended the school.

Even more curious were the photographs that were texted to one of Jackie’s friends showing her date that night. The pictures were actually of one of Jackie’s high school classmates in Northern Virginia. The Post located that man who is now a junior at a university in another state and he confirmed that the photographs were of him and said “he barely knew Jackie and hasn’t been to Charlottesville for at least six years.”

Here is the amazing thing. “The friends said they were never contacted or interviewed by the pop culture magazine’s reporters or editors.”

Moreover, the article states that “information Jackie gave the three friends about one of her attackers, called ‘Drew’ in the magazine’s article, differ significantly from details she later told The Post, Rolling Stone and friends from sexual assault awareness groups on campus.”

According to Erdely, “Randall” refused to speak with her “citing his loyalty to his own frat.” However, Randall not only spoke to the Post but insisted “that he was never contacted by Rolling Stone and would have agreed to an interview.”

Jackie spoke of Drew, but he could not be located by her friends on campus and the picture was of a high school friend. The school investigated the name and identity and found no one who matched the description at the school. Randall showed the Post the emails forwarded to him from Jackie’s date and the Post showed them to the actual man in the picture. The Post confirmed that “his name does not match the one Jackie gave friends in 2012 and that this former high school student “never really spoke to her,” was never a University of Virginia student and has not even been in Charlottesville for over six years.

The Post also interviewed some of Jackie’s new friends who said that Jackie revealed a name of her main alleged attacker to them more recently. “That name was different from the name she gave Andy, Cindy and Randall that first night. All three said that they had never heard the second name before learning it from a reporter.”

So the Post investigated the second named man and found someone with a similar name. He was a lifeguard at the time of the attacks. However, he insisted that he had never met her in person and never taken her out on a date. He also said that he was not a member of Phi Kappa Psi.

The silence of Erdely amidst this storm is surprising for a journalist. She was interviewed before the controversy and said that she has a “finely tuned B.S. detector” that helps her get a story right.

The contrast however in the level of detail and confirmation between the Rolling Stone and the Washington Post articles could not be more striking.

There also remains potential for liability here for the magazine, for Erdely, and for “Jackie.” As shown by the Post, the article (and later new name offered by Jackie) led to the suspicion of at least two men. One was actually shown in photographs as the freshman who alleged led Jackie to a gang rape. That could constitute defamation as well as false light. As actionable claims, the magazine, author, and alleged victim could find themselves in discovery and forced to answer many of these questions. While these men are not public figures, they would still be able to show, in my view, “reckless disregard” on the part of the magazine and Erdely if the Post account is accurate, particularly in agreeing not to interview the alleged rapist and falsely reporting that key figures would not speak to the magazine.

Source: Washington Post

104 thoughts on “Washington Post Publishes Details On Journalistic Lapses By Rolling Stone In Alleged Rape Story”

  1. I agree. Just like liberals didn’t rush to judgment on George Zimmerman, Officer Wilson, the Duke Lacrosse team, and the UVA frat – the moderates/conservative need to do the same.

  3. Wait, you all want to wait until there is confirmation of this situation, but you sure jumped off the fence to attack Bush & Company when it came to the Intelligence Report that Liberals put out! But you want us to WAIT on this eh? lmao!

  4. Inga, I have serious doubts that the story told to Rolling Stone is true. And if it is proven a hoax, which seems increasingly likely, the woman and the writer should be made to sit in stocks in the UVa quad for a month.
    But that said, I also want to believe the process will discover the truth. Doxxing the young woman is counterproductive to those like me that want justice when a crime is committed. Rape, especially as described in this case, is a horrific crime. But so is inventing a crime of this magnitude.
    Wait for the police to investigate. Then publicly humiliate and prosecute the people responsible, whoever they may be.

    1. Bailers – since Jackie reportly did not tell this particular story to the UVa authorities there is nothing to punish her for. And she did not report it to police so there is no crime there. Any punishment will be civil. The fraternities and sororities of UVa have been suspended. They have been humiliated. A just punishment requires she suffer the same. Doxxing her is the least that should happen.

  5. Exactly Bailers. Why can’t people wait for the investigation to be completed? And I did hear one is underway by law enforcement.

    1. Inga – if you were the young men in question would you want to be waiting for a criminal investigation, which could take months, to finally clear you? Look what happened at Duke.

  6. Everyone, we need to stop with the Jackie pictures and videos. Until/Unless we have confirmation publicly, posting pictures and guesses makes these comments no better than Rolling Stone’s story.

  8. Daniel Frankovitch – “It is a lot more fun than dealing with the fact that the American government and its agents tortured people and tried to cover it up.”

    It looks like you want to deflect so you can rejoin your own liberal circle jerk known as a liberal senate report.

  9. The people that said the photo from 2011 is Jackie have now issued a retraction because their ‘evidence’ was based on guessing and a lot of speculation. And unlike Rolling Stone, these people actually care if they get the story right or not.

    But please don’t let a silly think like facts interrupt your ‘this is the liberal media’s fault’ circle jerk.

    It is a lot more fun than dealing with the fact that the American government and its agents tortured people and tried to cover it up.

  12. We’ve been shown the “true Jackie” picture and it sorta looks like the “slutwalk” person, but not quite.

    1. rcocean – we do not know if we have the ‘true’ Jackie picture yet. However there is a nice troll who has offered to dox her by tomorrow if she does not come clean.

  14. This just in: jackie’s rapist is actually named “Barry” and plays Lacrosse at Duke. Details at the break.

  15. BTW, Rod Dreher is now, once again, bemoaning his failure to be skeptical of a liberal outrage story. This must be about the 10th time Rod has rushed to join the mob of outraged Liberals and been fooled, like Charlie brown with the Football.

  16. You’d think that if 1/5 Coeds have been raped and there is a “rape cultural” on almost every college campus, “Jackie’s” with real rape stories could be reported on. Instead, like the mythical Black Gentle giants murdered by Racist white cops, they seem rather hard to find.

  17. As I mentioned in the other thread, how is it that Jackie is protesting in this Slutwalk in 2011 with a rape claim, if she wasn’t raped until 2012.

    I don’t think it’s been established that Jackie was the woman holding the sign in the pic. All that’s certain is that the woman reported to be Jackie tweeted that photo, which could very well be of someone else.

  20. “She’d (Jackie) congratulated herself on her choice of a tasteful red dress with a high neckline.”

    1st. How can you see blood on a red dress? Read below. . .

    “It was after 3 a.m. She painfully rose from the floor and ran shoeless from the room. She emerged to discover the Phi Psi party still surreally under way, but if anyone noticed the barefoot, disheveled girl hurrying down a side staircase, face beaten, dress spattered with blood, they said nothing. Disoriented, Jackie burst out a side door, realized she was lost, and dialed a friend, screaming, “Something bad happened. I need you to come and find me!” Minutes later, her three best friends on campus – two boys and a girl (whose names are changed) – arrived to find Jackie on a nearby street corner, shaking.”

    2nd. How can you magically find your cell phone if you are disoriented, raped, beat up, bloodied and with one shoe? Suddenly her friends magically appeared minutes later after 3 am in the morning? Is “surreally” a word?

    “There are no red-tape-wearing protests like at Harvard, no “sex-positive” clubs promoting the female orgasm like at Yale, no mattress-hauling performance artists like at Columbia, and certainly no SlutWalks. UVA isn’t an edgy or progressive campus by any stretch”

    http://youtu.be/95ZZ4hTM9Bs

    3rd. Here is a protest called “Slutwalk DC 2011”. Jackie (identified by other sites) is supposedly in this video holding a sign about stating that her rapist doesn’t know he’s a rapist. As I mentioned in the other thread, how is it that Jackie is protesting in this Slutwalk in 2011 with a rape claim, if she wasn’t raped until 2012.

    1. Msjettexas – there is some reason to believe that the sign that Jackie is carrying in 2011 belongs to someone else. She was a temporary place-holder.

Comments are closed.