Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
UVA Rape Story Collapses; Duke Lacrosse Redux
Topic Started: Dec 5 2014, 01:45 PM (60,474 Views)
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/atticus-finch-american-literatures-most-celebrated-rape-apologist/article/2557457

Atticus Finch: American literature's most celebrated rape apologist
December 16, 2014

Atticus Finch is a monster. Sure, he’s one of history’s most beloved literary characters (he was even played by Gregory Peck in a film adaptation) but he’s also, to use the parlance of our time, history’s greatest rape apologist.

Glenn Reynolds, a law professor at the University of Tennessee and pundit, first observed Finch’s new standing in the world on Twitter in early December:

With the increasing focus on sexual assault, if “To Kill A Mockingbird” were taught in women’s studies classes today, Finch would have to be labeled the villain of the book for not accepting at face value an accuser’s tale of rape and for posing difficult, painful questions to her on the witness stand.

Finch was the defense attorney for Tom Robinson, a black man accused of raping a white woman, Mayella Ewell. Ewell and her father both claimed that Robinson beat and raped her, but Finch dared question the account.

He was hostile toward Heck Tate, a witness for the prosecution who was the first person the Ewells called to the scene. Never mind that Tate didn’t actually witness the alleged rape — he was testifying on behalf of an alleged rape victim, and thus should have been treated with more compassion.

Instead, Finch insisted and demanded to know why neither Tate nor the Ewells called a doctor following the reported incident.

“It wasn’t necessary,” Tate told Finch. “She was mighty banged up. Something sho’ happened, it was obvious.”

Rape kits were not available in the early 1930s, when Ewell’s alleged rape occurred. But if we were to look at this as a modern tale of victim-blaming, questioning an alleged victim (or her witnesses) about why she didn't immediately go to a doctor would be heresy.

Then Finch began trying to poke holes in Tate’s description of the night the alleged rape occurred. Finch asked Tate to describe Ewell’s injuries — he even asked which of her eyes was bruised. Tate first said it was Ewell’s left eye, but Finch, practically badgering him at this point, made him rethink his answer, which he changed.

Next on the stand was Ewell’s father, Bob. The Ewells had been described as low-class degenerates. “No truant officers could keep their numerous offspring in school; no public health officer could free them from congenital defects, various worms, and the diseases indigenous to filthy surroundings,” the description read. Feminists would question whether that made them less deserving of justice.

Even the judge was hostile, putting Bob in his place right out of the gate after he made a subtle joke about his deceased wife. When Bob described the screams his daughter made on the night of the alleged rape as sounding “like a stuck hog inside the house,” the judge gave him a stern look of disapproval. How was Bob supposed to feel comfortable and sufficiently supported to testify about the horrifying rape of his daughter, today's activists might ask. It was as if the entire judicial system was rigged against him and his daughter from the beginning.

Bob explained that he heard his daughter scream and rushed to her, only to find Robinson sexually assaulting her. Bob said the room looked like there had been a fight and his daughter was lying on the floor. He said Robinson ran as soon as he was seen, but Bob knew it was him.

Then Finch began questioning Bob, with the same hostility he had provided Tate. Finch tried to poke holes in Bob’s description as well, asking why the father of an alleged rape victim didn't immediately call for a doctor since his daughter was injured.

Bob said he had never called a doctor before and mentioned that it would have cost him $5. Bob also said he stood by Tate’s description of his daughter’s injuries.

Then, in a stunning display of condescension, Finch actually asked Bob whether he could read and write. Finch even asked Bob to prove it by writing his name.

“You’re left-handed, Mr. Ewell,” the judge said, yet again doing Finch’s job for him and badgering a witness. How dare Finch and the judge embarrass the father of an alleged rape victim in front of his peers, today's activists would surely grumble.

Finally, Mayella Ewell took the stand and began crying. The judge, finally doing his job, tried to calm her down and asked her why she was afraid. Ewell pointed to Finch.

“Don’t want him doin' me like he done Papa, tryin’ to make him out lefthanded,” Ewell said through tears.

The judge tried to be reassuring, but he just came off as a patriarchal victim-blamer again, telling Ewell that she was “a big girl” and to “just sit up straight” and tell the court what happened.

Ewell said she asked Robinson to help her chop up an old chiffarobe for kindling, and that she would pay him a nickel for his trouble. She said that when she went into the house for the nickel, Robinson grabbed her by the neck and hit her before raping her.

Now it was the prosecution’s turn to indulge in victim-blaming. Horace Gilmer, the prosecuting attorney, actually asked Ewell whether she screamed and whether she fought back. What kind of question is that? Gilmer must have been trying to show the victim-blamers in the jury that Ewell fought back against her accused rapist, but even asking the question puts the onus on the victim to prove she was actually raped. And if she didn’t fight back hard enough — and who is to say how hard one must fight to be considered “enough” — then the implication is that Ewell couldn’t have been raped, is it not?

Ewell, now having to prove she was raped (instead of the burden rightfully being placed on Robinson that he didn’t rape), said she “kicked and hollered loud” as she could.

That apparently wasn’t enough to satisfy Gilmer, who asked her whether she had fought as hard as she could. Ewell again said she had.

Gilmer then asked Ewell whether she was sure she had been raped. Seriously, today's activists would ask, how is he still allowed to practice law asking questions like that?

Then it was time for Finch to question Ewell. He stood up and at first didn’t even walk over to Ewell, instead going to the window. He paused before going to Ewell and asking her to repeat her age. He also told her he’d ask her questions she had already been asked. And when Ewell complained that she was being made fun of, the judge told her she was wrong. As today's gender studies professors might ask, when did it become a judge’s place to tell an alleged rape victim how to feel?

Then came Finch’s questions. He was clearly trying to show that Ewell had a terrible home life — the implication being that she somehow deserved to be raped or brought it on herself. Finch even asked whether Ewell had any friends!

Finch then asked Ewell whether her father ever hit her, as if that had any relevance. Tom Robinson was on trial, not Ewell and not her father.

Finch asked whether Ewell had ever invited Robinson onto the property to help her before. Again, this is more victim-blaming. Just because Ewell may have invited Robinson onto her property before does not give him the right to rape her.

Finch then continued trying to poke holes in the story by questioning every minute detail about the account, as if anything Ewell didn’t remember was somehow evidence she hadn’t been raped.

“You seem sure enough that he choked you,” Finch said. “All this time you were fighting back, remember? You ‘kicked and hollered as loud as you could.’ Do you remember him beating you about the face?”

Mayella Ewell had gone through a traumatic event in which she was punched in the face. Just because she didn’t remember that punch doesn’t mean she was lying, today's college women would be taught.

Finch asked her again when she didn’t answer. Ewell then said she didn’t remember whether Robinson hit her, but quickly changed her story to say he did hit her. Then she cried.

The brain reacts to trauma in unpredictable ways. Just because an accuser’s story changes doesn’t mean there’s evidence of a lie — activists never let us forget this fact. For all we know, Robinson could have held Ewell with his right hand and punched her with his left, which would have accounted for her right eye being bruised.

Finch then forced Ewell to look right at her alleged attacker, even asking Robinson to stand up. Robinson had a deformed left arm, and maybe he couldn’t have punched her on the right side of her face. But should a detail like this one take away from the anguish that rape victims suffer?

Finch again abused Ewell on the stand by asking her to consider the chain of events that night “calmly.” Should an alleged rape victim be required to recount her tale without tears, an activist might wonder. Wouldn’t she then be questioned about her lack of emotion?

Finch made Ewell run through her traumatic experience yet again and tried to trip her up by asking whether Robinson hit her left eye with his right fist. As if a rape victim was paying attention to such a detail. Finch is lucky she remembers anything at all.

Then Finch really got into victim-blaming mode. He pointed out that Ewell was “a strong girl” and asked whether she just stood there while Robinson raped her. He asked why she didn’t run (see, he didn’t think she fought back hard enough); why, if she had screamed, her brothers and sisters didn’t run to her aid; he asked whether she was screaming the whole time or just when she saw her father through the window and then dared to ask her whether it was her father who actually beat her up.

Ewell, fed up with practically being accused of asking to be raped, called the white men of the court “yellow stinkin’ cowards.”

Conversely, Finch was completely cordial to Robinson — an alleged rapist, mind you. Finch asked Robinson politely what his age was and about his past criminal record (Robinson had been in jail previously).

But then Finch allowed Robinson to tell his side of the story with little prodding or interruption, in direct contrast to how he treated Ewell. Robinson claimed he had broken the chiffarobe in the spring, not in November like Ewell said. Robinson said that had been the first time he helped Ewell and that she kept asking him for help after that.

Robinson said Ewell invited him onto her property the night he allegedly raped her. He didn’t see any manual labor that needed to be done like there usually was, and that Ewell told him a door was broken inside the house. He said he checked the door but it was fine, but Ewell closed the it in his face.

Normally the Ewell house would be loud, Robinson said, because there were so many children, but that night there were none. Robinson said Ewell told him she had sent the children into town.

Robinson claimed he tried to leave since there was no work for him, but Ewell asked him to get a box down from a chiffarobe (not the same one he had broken). Robinson said when he was standing on the chair reaching for the box that Ewell grabbed him around his legs. He jumped off the chair, knocking it over.

After some gentle coaxing from Finch and the judge, Robinson said Ewell hugged his waist and kissed the side of his face, telling him she had never kissed a man before — well, except her father. Ewell allegedly told Robinson to kiss him back and prevented him from leaving by blocking the door.

Robinson claimed he pushed Ewell and told her to let him pass, but then Bob showed up and called Ewell a “whore.” Robinson said he ran out the door.

Asked point-blank, Robinson said he did not rape or harm Ewell, but that he resisted her advances. That's as clear a case of victim-blaming as you'll ever find.

So what if Robinson couldn’t have hit Ewell’s right eye with his deformed left fist? The facts of the case don’t matter as much as the narrative, which is that Robinson raped Ewell and there is a rape epidemic.

The jury saw through Finch's patriarchal rationalizations and found Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the sort of verdict that today's advocates want to see more often.

As for Finch, he is a villain. He might as well have raped Ewell himself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://inthecapital.streetwise.co/2014/12/17/sororities-say-uva-greek-system-ban-is-violation-of-student-rights/


Sororities Say UVa Greek System Ban is a Violation of Student Rights
Molly Greenberg - Senior Writer, Higher Ed Beat
12/17/14 @10:52am in Education


National organizations representing fraternities and sororities across the country have been actively responding to the Rolling Stone controversy that has wreaked havoc at University of Virginia where Greek system activities have been suspended until January 9. First the FratPAC insisted that UVa lift its suspension of fraternity and sorority activities after Rolling Stone admitted to mistakes in its reporting of an alleged gang rape on Grounds, and now the National Panhellenic Conference has come out swinging, too.

In a statement to The Washington Post, the NPC claimed that the freeze is a violation of student rights.

"The sanctions imposed on the sorority and fraternity system, particularly at U-Va., have punished all members with no cited wrongdoing and their rights have been violated," said the NPC. "We must take a stand. Our voice must also be heard, and the time is now."

The ban has had little to no impact on the student body as it was enacted directly before Thanksgiving break and will last through winter break until the semester begins again on January 12, but still the NPC remains concerned about the UVa Greek system and has thus vocalized its feelings on the matter at hand.

Read the full-statement from the NPC to The Washington Post below:

Hear our voices. Hear us when we say we are not tone deaf to sexual assault. The National Panhellenic Conference is composed of 26 women’s sororities with more than 300,000 active undergraduate women members, and 2,500 of whom are students at the University of Virginia. We care about the safety of all sorority and non-sorority women very deeply.



A recent article that appeared in a magazine alleging a fraternity gang rape at the University of Virginia has escalated the national conversation about sexual assault. Whatever the merits of a portion of the article may have been, we believe it does not serve the goal of changing campus culture and eliminating sexual assault to shut down the business activity of our fraternity and sorority chapters. Our message on this matter has already been shared in our joint statement with our interfraternal partners.



Hear us when we say the Greek community all agrees that one rape is one too many. Sexual assault awareness has certainly gained more momentum in the past six to nine months, and the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC) has actively participated in the national conversations and taken deliberate steps to confront sexual assault. We attended listening sessions conducted by the White House and Department of Education last winter, and we have talked about this topic in our monthly messages, blogs, and social media channels. We most recently have established a Student Safety and Sexual Assault Task Force that is charged with researching resources and brainstorming avenues for training and prevention. We have held conversations with other agencies and national organizations about where our teams can overlap our resources in unified efforts to reach and protect more women. And we have engaged in dialogue on sexual assault with our friends in the other umbrella fraternal organizations. It is absolutely a priority of the sorority community to ensure our campuses are safe for women.



These efforts are just the beginning of more to come. For anyone to assert that we are tone deaf to the issue of sexual assault is a false and simply unfair statement.



No matter all the facts and truth to the recent Rolling Stone article, we remain gravely concerned that the turn of events regarding the article may prevent women from stepping forward to report sexual assaults because of the impact to others in the university and Greek community. Women should not be victims twice because of the sexual assaults and then again because of potential concerns with reporting and causing strife among student groups. This is an all-student safety issue, not just Greek community issue, which will continue to be addressed on local and national levels.



No doubt, cultural change is necessary and critical. We seek to work with university partners and campus colleagues as we collaborate on next steps moving forward to heal from such events and accusations, and assist in education to help prevent sexual assault and protect women. While we are not experts on preventing sexual assault, we know the impact it can have on our sister victims and we look to those who can help guide and assist us in providing resources to our member organizations and all women.



NPC encourages our sorority women to support and care for one another. We will not turn our heads on this important issue, but rather speak up so our voices will be heard and our actions will be noticed.



The sanctions imposed on the sorority and fraternity system, particularly at U-Va., have punished all members with no cited wrongdoing and their rights have been violated.



We must take a stand. Our voice must also be heard, and the time is now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/20537/

Rolling Stone’s ‘Jackie’ used cellphone numbers from spoofing Internet services

by Greg Piper - Assistant Editor on December 17, 2014

The Washington Post‘s thorough reporting has already cleaned up much of the mess that Rolling Stone made in its botched expose of an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia.

But crosstown rival Washington Times adds a few new details on how friends of “Jackie” got conned into thinking she was dating someone right before her alleged rape.

Regarding that cellphone number that Jackie gave her friends to text the man she claimed to be seeing:

Eventually, the friends ended up with three numbers for the man. All are registered to Internet services that enable people to text without cellphone numbers but also can be used to redirect calls to different numbers or engage in spoofing, according to multiple research databases checked by The Washington Times.

“That definitely raises some red flags,” Alex Stock, a University of Virginia junior and friend of Jackie, told The Times. “I think as more details come out I definitely feel a little more skeptical. This is all new territory for me. I’m not too technologically savvy.”

Another friend, Kathryn Hendley, said “It’s news to me” when told Jackie’s numbers were traced to spoofing services:

“I think as the story has moved along it has raised some new doubts. I honestly wish I could just talk to her sometimes and ask her myself or at least tell her that I hope she’s all right,” she said.

Another friend verifies that Jackie panicked and tried to back out when writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely indicated she wanted to write a broad story with UVa at the center of a national crisis of rape.

Read the Times story.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/12/17/taibbi-rolling-stone-devastated-by-u-va-disaster/

Taibbi: Rolling Stone ‘devastated’ by U-Va. disaster
By Erik Wemple December 17 at 1:19 PM

In an appearance on “Imus in the Morning” on Fox Business Network, Rolling Stone journalist Matt Taibbi said that the magazine’s staff is “devastated” over the collapse of the Nov. 19 story about rape on the campus of the University of Virginia. The story narrated the alleged September 2012 gang rape of a freshman named Jackie at a University of Virginia fraternity house — and its particulars have withered under subsequent reporting done by the Washington Post Metro staff.

Rolling Stone staffers “feel terrible” about these events, says Taibbi, who noted that he had no specific knowledge about just how the piece went awry. Taibbi was a longtime Rolling Stone contributor who left for a job at First Look Media launching a digital magazine titled “The Racket,” but that gig didn’t work out. He has since returned to the magazine.

“For people like me and for a lot of the other reporters who’ve worked there over the years, this was a real shock to us because, speaking personally — people laughed at me when I said this on Twitter — what I go through normally in the fact-checking process at that magazine has always been a really difficult, long, thorough, painful process,” said Taibbi. “And that was actually one of the things that always attracted me to working there, which is that I feel safe when I publish things because I feel like it’s been double-checked and, you know, that was always a good feeling. And clearly I think in this particular situation, the controls got broken down somewhere and they’re looking into that. I’m sure they’re coming up with some answers.”

After the Erik Wemple Blog asked about some aspects of the story this week, Rolling Stone spokeswoman Melissa Bruno responded: “Rolling Stone is conducting a thorough internal review of the reporting, editing, and fact-checking of Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s ‘A Rape on Campus.’ Once we have concluded this process, we will have comment on these and other questions.”

After host Don Imus opined that the article may have been driven by an “agenda,” Taibbi said that on his first read, he skipped right to the “more important part” of the story — how the University of Virginia responded to the alleged seven-man gang rape of September 2012. “Obviously individual attacks happen, or maybe in this case they don’t happen, I don’t know, but I don’t think that’s necessarily relevant to the larger issue of how often this takes place and how society is set up to deal with it.”

That response aligns with what Sabrina Rubin Erdely, writer of “A Rape on Campus,” told the Washington Post when her story started to come under scrutiny: “[T]he gang-rape scene that leads the story is the alarming account that Jackie — a person whom I found to be credible — told to me, told her friends, and importantly, what she told the UVA administration, which chose not to act on her allegations in any way — i.e., the overarching point of the article. THAT is the story: the culture that greeted her and so many other UVA women I interviewed, who came forward with allegations, only to be met with indifference.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Payback
Member Avatar

abb
Dec 17 2014, 05:04 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/12/17/taibbi-rolling-stone-devastated-by-u-va-disaster/

Taibbi: Rolling Stone ‘devastated’ by U-Va. disaster
By Erik Wemple December 17 at 1:19 PM


That response aligns with what Sabrina Rubin Erdely, writer of “A Rape on Campus,” told the Washington Post when her story started to come under scrutiny: “[T]he gang-rape scene that leads the story is the alarming account that Jackie — a person whom I found to be credible — told to me, told her friends, and importantly, what she told the UVA administration, which chose not to act on her allegations in any way — i.e., the overarching point of the article. THAT is the story: the culture that greeted her and so many other UVA women I interviewed, who came forward with allegations, only to be met with indifference.”
And here I thought False Accusation was the Story.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

abb
Dec 17 2014, 05:03 PM
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/20537/

Rolling Stone’s ‘Jackie’ used cellphone numbers from spoofing Internet services

by Greg Piper - Assistant Editor on December 17, 2014

The Washington Post‘s thorough reporting has already cleaned up much of the mess that Rolling Stone made in its botched expose of an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia.

But crosstown rival Washington Times adds a few new details on how friends of “Jackie” got conned into thinking she was dating someone right before her alleged rape.

Regarding that cellphone number that Jackie gave her friends to text the man she claimed to be seeing:

Eventually, the friends ended up with three numbers for the man. All are registered to Internet services that enable people to text without cellphone numbers but also can be used to redirect calls to different numbers or engage in spoofing, according to multiple research databases checked by The Washington Times.

“That definitely raises some red flags,” Alex Stock, a University of Virginia junior and friend of Jackie, told The Times. “I think as more details come out I definitely feel a little more skeptical. This is all new territory for me. I’m not too technologically savvy.”

Another friend, Kathryn Hendley, said “It’s news to me” when told Jackie’s numbers were traced to spoofing services:

“I think as the story has moved along it has raised some new doubts. I honestly wish I could just talk to her sometimes and ask her myself or at least tell her that I hope she’s all right,” she said.

Another friend verifies that Jackie panicked and tried to back out when writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely indicated she wanted to write a broad story with UVa at the center of a national crisis of rape.

Read the Times story.
Jackie is a pathological liar.

Are there documented cases of a sexual assault turning a person into a pathological liar?
I don't think so.

Trauma does not turn someone into a cunning pathological liar who uses what
are essentially fake cell phone numbers to further a hoax.

The idea that something happened to Jackie is "crock."

I don't know how a sociopath, pathological liar is formed, but it's not the result of
something that happened to Jackie while a student at UVA.
Edited by MikeZPU, Dec 17 2014, 06:49 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/uva-finds-of-outside-review-of-sex-assaults-will-be-public-when-the-investigation-ends/2014/12/17/91bf58cc-8663-11e4-b9b7-b8632ae73d25_story.html

U-Va.: Outside review of sex assaults will be public when the investigation ends
December 17 at 10:33 PM

University of Virginia administrators said Wednesday that the findings of an outside review of sexual assaults on campus will be made public when the investigation is completed.

A statement issued Wednesday by board of visitors rector Keith Martin said that the Washington law firm of O’Melveny & Myers will serve as an independent counsel to review the university’s sexual assault policies and procedures. Martin said that when the investigation is completed, the findings of the independent counsel will be publicly available.

“As a public university, we serve the citizens of the commonwealth, and I am committed to sharing the independent counsel’s findings as a public record,” Martin said. “We stand ready to take decisive action based on what we learn, and to share that with our University community.”

University president Teresa A. Sullivan asked the Charlottesville police department and Virginia attorney general Mark Herring (D) to separately investigate allegations of a brutal sexual assault on campus detailed in a Rolling Stone magazine account.

The pop culture magazine published an explosive story alleging a brutal sexual assault at the U-Va. Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house on Sept. 28, 2012. In the magazine’s account, a student named Jackie said she was ambushed after a date party and was gang-raped by seven fraternity brothers.

A Rolling Stone article alleged a sexual assault at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house, but the story has been called into question as Jackie’s friends have identified inconsistencies in the article. (Steve Helber/AP)

Phi Kappa Psi announced this month that the fraternity did not host a date function that weekend and that no member of the house resembled the man Jackie described to Rolling Stone as her main attacker. The Rolling Stone story has further been called into question as Jackie’s friends have identified inconsistencies in the article.

In addition, information Jackie provided to friends about the date from the fraternity who allegedly attacked her that night led to a man who told The Post he has never met Jackie in person and to a second man who said he was a high school classmate of Jackie’s and who now attends college in a different state.

Martin said that the independent review will help the university move forward in the wake of the sexual assault allegations detailed in Rolling Stone.

“We need to have an objective, outside assessment of our policies and practices, and how we can strengthen student safety on Grounds,” Martin said. “The safety of our students is our first and foremost priority.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
University of Virginia administrators said Wednesday that the findings of an outside review of sexual assaults on campus will be made public when the investigation is completed.


When did Duke have an outside review of its handling of the lacrosse case (which probably cost it $100 million in legal defenses and settlements, and more in lost contributions from alumni)?

And is this review likely to cover how false accusations resulted in a mob attack on a frat house? And what the university to that
was? (likely not...)



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.anncoulter.com/

ONE IN FIVE PEOPLE WHO WRITE FOR ROLLING STONE ARE MORONS
December 17, 2014

In response to the total implosion of Rolling Stone's preposterous story about a fraternity gang-rape at the University of Virginia, the media have reverted to their Soviet-style reporting. They're not even saying: We're choosing not to talk about UVA because it's a side show. It's more like: UVA? That's a school?

Not only did the UVA gang rape turn out to be a hoax, but then President Obama's own Department of Justice completed a six-year study on college rape, and it turns out that instead of 1-in-5 college coeds being raped, the figure is 0.03-in-5.

Less than 1 percent of college students are the victim of a sexual assault -- 0.6 percent to be exact -- not to be confused with the 20 percent, or "one in five," claimed by feminists and President Obama.

But neither the DOJ report, nor the UVA rape hoax have dissuaded Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Claire McCaskill from pushing their idea that the nation is in the grip of a college rape epidemic.

This week, Gillibrand dismissed the UVA outrage, saying, "Clearly, we don't know the facts of what did or did not happen in this case."

Actually, we know quite well what happened in this case. A disturbed young woman invented a fake boyfriend and a fake gang-rape to get attention, and an incompetent journalist acted as her transcriber. It was a total hoax -- just like the Duke lacrosse case, the Jamie Leigh Jones case, the Tawana Brawley case, and every other claim of white men committing gang-rape.

Gillibrand and McCaskill: Perhaps the accusations against Dreyfus were overblown, but that doesn't mean there's not an epidemic of Jews selling secrets to the Germans!


We are truly in the middle of a rape epidemic: an epidemic of women falsely claiming to have been raped.


It's said that "women never lie about rape!" But the evidence shows that women lie about rape all the time -– for attention, for revenge and for an alibi. All serious studies of the matter suggest that at least 40 percent of rape claims are false.

Gillibrand and McCaskill: Perhaps the accusations against Dreyfus were overblown, but that doesn't mean there's not an epidemic of Jews selling secrets to the Germans!

The U.S. Air Force, for example, examined more than a thousand rape allegations on military bases over the course of four years and concluded that 46 percent were false. In 27 percent of the cases, the accuser recanted. A large study of rape allegations over nine years in a small Midwestern city, by Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University, found that 41 percent of the rape claims were false.

To put it in terms Kirsten Gillibrand would understand, two in five women claiming to have been raped are lying.

So why are we always being hectored: Only 2 percent of rape allegations are false!

That oft-cited number comes from Susan Brownmiller's 1975 book, "Against Our Will" -- which sourced the claim to a mimeograph of a speech by a state court judge, who made a passing remark about a New York police precinct with an all-female rape squad. Nothing more is known about whether this was an actual study, and if so, what was examined, how the information was collected or the actual results. Nor can any trace of the speech, the precinct or the data be found.

In Women's Studies classes, that figure is called a "home run."

That's why the feminists are so anxious to move on from the UVA nonsense rape story. They want to move on now so they can come back to it later, when everyone's forgotten, and start citing UVA as their No. 1 example of the fraternity gang-rape culture.


It's crucial that we get a letter in the file that says, "This was total B.S." Otherwise, the UVA hoax will remain in an open file, marked "unresolved."

All we're hearing now is, Enough! Enough! Don't be a bad winner. All this coverage is putting Jackie in a precarious emotional state. If you were a gentleman, you would drop the subject.

Then in three months, they'll be bringing up the UVA gang rape as proof of a college rape epidemic. In six months, the case will show up in feminist textbooks.

Wait a minute! That was a hoax!

We didn't agree it was a hoax. We conceded nothing.

The Duke lacrosse case proves that. In an unusual move, after that gang-rape turned out to be yet another hoax, the players refused to accept the case being dismissed for "insufficient evidence," which is how prosecutors usually drop charges. They insisted on being declared "innocent."

This, the attorney general did. He also denounced the prosecutor, Mike Nifong, and saw that he was disbarred.

A few years went by, and then, this year, some douchebag wrote a book that claims "something happened" in the Duke case between the players and the stripper (who has since been convicted of murder). The book got a rave review from The New York Times.

With feminists, either you lose or the game was rained out.


So before anyone moves on from UVA, we need to get it in writing that this case was a hoax. Jackie's got to apologize to the fraternity; UVA's president has to not only apologize, but pay restitution to the Greek system for shutting it down for an entire semester; and Rolling Stone authoress Sabrina Rubin Erdely has got to swear that she will never, ever write again.

She cannot be an "investigative journalist." She cannot even write movie reviews. Remember, Sabrina: No means no.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

University of Virginia administrators said Wednesday that the findings of an outside review of sexual assaults on campus will be made public when the investigation is completed.

Just a smoke screen.

I don't believe in outside reviews because they usually produce the agenda result desired.

I can almost predict the report' wording yada yada yada.

Take it to official bodies & depositions under oath with due process.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
some douchebag wrote a book that claims "something happened" in the Duke case between the players and the stripper (who has since been convicted of murder).


Nice to see a coalescing of opinion about the matter...

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/18/what-uva-student-jackie-wrote-in-email-about-friend-she-liked/

Here Is What The UVA Student Behind The Rolling Stone Article Wrote About A Friend She Had A Crush On
10:52 AM 12/18/2014

Chuck Ross
Reporter


The Daily Caller has obtained a previously unpublished email purportedly written by Jackie, the University of Virginia student who claimed in a Rolling Stone article that she was gang-raped by seven fraternity members on Sept. 28, 2012.

In the email, Jackie wrote about her romantic interest in a friend of hers named Ryan Duffin. Duffin was forwarded the email on Oct. 3, 2012 by a man named Haven Monahan, who Jackie claimed she was going out on a date with on the night she says she was raped.

“When you like someone more than he likes you, you’ll do anything to switch the scales,” Jackie wrote about Duffin.

It was Duffin who Jackie first called on the night she claims she was raped. Duffin, who showed up to help Jackie along with two other friends, has said that Jackie claimed that night that she was forced to perform oral sex on five men at a fraternity house.

That story changed drastically in the Rolling Stone article, published last month, in which she claimed she was brutally beaten and gang-raped by seven members of Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.

The email forwarded to Duffin, titled “about u,” is bizarre for several reasons.

As Duffin has said in interviews, he found it strange that the man who Jackie claimed had been involved in her rape just days before would be sending him an email — especially one of that nature. (RELATED: UVA Gang-Rape Accuser’s Friend Shares New Details In Interview)

Even more strange — as the Rolling Stone article has been debunked, it has come to light that Monahan likely does not exist.

Before she claimed she was raped and after Duffin had rejected her romantically, Jackie gave Duffin and two other friends the phone number she claimed was Monahan’s. The friends began texting with Monahan, who later sent a picture.

It has been discovered since the Rolling Stone article was published that a picture Monahan sent the friends via text message was actually of a man Jackie went to high school with. The phone numbers Jackie gave to her friends were also registered to an Internet website that allows users to send text messages from cell phones. (RELATED: University of Virginia Student’s Catfishing Scheme Revealed)

All of that evidence suggests that the email published below was not actually forwarded to Duffin by a person named Haven Monahan. It is increasingly likely that the email was both written about Duffin and forwarded to him by Jackie.

When asked by TheDC last week whether he believed that Jackie could have fabricated her rape claims as part of a scheme to get his attention, Duffin said “it’s a definite possibility.”

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Haven Monahan <haven.monahan@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM
Subject: about u
To: “——@virginia.edu” <——@virginia.edu>

you should read this. iv never read anything nicer in my life.

Well yeah…Ryan is fine. Ryan’s great, actually. I mean he’s smart. He’s attractive. He’s funny. He’s a scaredy cat. If you creep up behind him, he’ll jump right out of his skin. It’s pretty amusing. He’s honest. He always calls them just like he sees them. You can constantly count on getting the truth from Ryan, even if the truth hurts. He has the most incredible taste in music. He’s like this walking, talking music library. And he understands how truly important music is. He’s stubborn. He has this regimented way about him that can be so frustrating sometimes. And sometimes the things he says hurt. But he’s a really, really good friend. And loyal to a fault. He’s realistic about everything. And I’m a dreamer so I mean, it’s good to have somebody like that in my life. He’s one of my best friends here, you know? He’s more than that …he’s everything

So, then there’s Ryan. And Ryan…Ryan’s incredible. I didn’t fall for Ryan Duffin the first day I met him. Nor did I fall for him on the second day or the third day for that matter. But once I did fall for Ryan, you see, my world flipped upside down. Kathryn doesn’t understand what I see in Ryan. I guess I don’t understand what she doesn’t see in him. He’s gorgeous, but gorgeous is an understatement. More like you’re startled every time you see him because you notice something new in a Where’s Waldo sort of way. More like you can’t stop writing third grade run on sentences because you can’t even remotely begin to describe something, someone, so inherently amazing. More like you’re afraid that if you stare at him too long, you’ll prove your grandparents right that, yes, your face will get stuck that way…but you don’t mind. You, like everyone else, may think I’m exaggerating, but then again, you probably don’t know Ryan Duffin. Ryan has no idea what he does to me…he can make me feel more emotions in one second then I would normally feel in one year. He makes my head spin. And the truth is, I’m crazy about him. I mean, if I had the choice of hanging out with anyone in the entire world or just sitting in my dorm with him talking about music and watching a crappy TV show…I’d choose him everytime…without a single false step. I know he doesn’t like me. If someone really wanted you, they’d actually put some time and effort into trying to get your attention. Ryan doesn’t even like to be around me sometimes. And that really sucks. When you like someone more than he likes you, you’ll do anything to switch the scales. The thing is, you can’t. You want to tell him how you feel but you know it will end with “It’s just not going to work out.” How can I explain to him that I fell for him because of a million tiny things he never knew he was doing? I know I should just stop trying because he and I are never going to happen. He doesn’t like me, I’m not his type, I’m not the type of person he could ever be with so I should just get over it. The problem is I can’t shake these feelings I have for him, I try so damn hard, but they won’t go away. I can’t move on because the only thing I can find wrong with him, is that he can find so much wrong with me. [Redacted] said I shouldn’t give up. She said she read this quote once that said,” There’s nothing more beautiful than the way the ocean refuses to stop kissing the shoreline, no matter how many times it’s sent away.” She claimed that’s how Ryan and I are. I think she’s wrong. I think he was right from the get-go. He’ll never see me as anything more than some girl and it’ll never amount to anything. He told Alex I’m not his type and I’m a waste of his time. The things he says hurt more than you know but still…there’s something about him that makes me come back for more. All I know is, the girl who gets to be with Ryan Duffin is the luckiest girl in the world. And if she doesn’t know that, then she doesn’t deserve him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
comelately

I have seen this kind of writing before, around year 2000. One of our daughters belonged to a fiction writing club (or whatever they were calling it) during the last couple of years in high school: several girls writing lies like this and calling them fiction. She showed us some of it, but NOT the stuff SHE was writing. None of them seemed to have any talent, and all could write competently. And most of it was about relations with (non-existent) boys...

I have to say one thing in these girls' defence: they did not pretend that their stories actually had happened!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

That e-mail reminds me of a 12 year girl with little self-worth, certainly not a old college student who was accepted at UVA

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Stranger and stranger. Now it appears the email was plagerized from a Dawson Creek episode.

Quote:
 
Did UVA Student Plagiarize ‘Dawson’s Creek’ In Love Letter To Friend?

5:36 PM 12/18/2014

Chuck Ross is a reporter at The Daily Caller.


The story of Jackie, the University of Virginia student at the center of a discredited Rolling Stone article, only gets weirder.

An email likely sent by Jackie to a friend of hers who she was romantically interested in appears to be plagiarized from an episode of Dawson’s Creek, a popular television show which ran from 1998 to 2003 on The WB.


A friend of Jackie’s, a UVA freshman named Ryan Duffin, received an email on Oct. 3, 2012 from a person he knew as Haven Monahan.

This was five days after Jackie claimed she was forced to give oral sex to five men after she went on a date with Monahan. Monahan is now believed to have never existed. His fabrication is one of many inconsistencies in Jackie’s story. In the Rolling Stone article, she claimed she was brutally gang-raped by seven members of Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.

The email, sent from Haven Monahan’s email address to Duffin’s university email account, reads:

Ryan is fine. Ryan’s great, actually. I mean he’s smart. He’s attractive. He’s funny. He’s a scaredy cat. If you creep up behind him, he’ll jump right out of his skin. It’s pretty amusing. He’s honest. He always calls them just like he sees them. You can constantly count on getting the truth from Ryan, even if the truth hurts. He has the most incredible taste in music. He’s like this walking, talking music library. And he understands how truly important music is. He’s stubborn. He has this regimented way about him that can be so frustrating sometimes. And sometimes the things he says hurt. But he’s a really, really good friend. And loyal to a fault. He’s realistic about everything. And I’m a dreamer so I mean, it’s good to have somebody like that in my life. He’s one of my best friends here, you know? He’s more than that…he’s everything.


That letter is almost identical
— with a few grammatical tweaks and name changes — to the script of a scene from Dawson’s Creek in which Dawson, played by James Van Der Beek, expressed his love for Joey, played by Katie Holmes.


She’s great. I mean, she’s smart, she’s beautiful, she’s funny, she’s a big ol’ scaredy cat. If you creep up from behind her she’ll jump out of her skin. It’s pretty amusing. She’s honest. She always calls them just like she sees them. You can always count on getting the truth from Joey even if the truth hurts. She’s stubborn. We fight a lot. She can be so frustrating sometimes. But she’s a really, really, good friend. I know her to a fault. She believes in me. And I’m a dreamer so it’s so good to have somebody like that in my life. If she goes away, I don’t know what I’m going to do. I mean, she’s my best friend, you know? She’s more than that. She’s everything.

snip


http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/18/did-uva-student-plagiarize-dawsons-creek-in-love-letter-to-friend/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply