Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
UVA Rape Story Collapses; Duke Lacrosse Redux
Topic Started: Dec 5 2014, 01:45 PM (60,446 Views)
Joan Foster

Someone should ask Gillibrand how she feels about the Catholic bishops that covered up abuses by priests in the Catholic Church. They too were protecting falsehoods in order to protect the larger, greater good as they saw it.

Morally, Gilliibrand is their equal. She protects false accusers and revictimize THEIR victims in order to protect her "belief system."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Duke parent 2004
Member Avatar

Joan Foster
Apr 2 2015, 07:40 AM
Someone should ask Gillibrand how she feels about the Catholic bishops that covered up abuses by priests in the Catholic Church. They too were protecting falsehoods in order to protect the larger, greater good as they saw it.

Morally, Gilliibrand is their equal. She protects false accusers and revictimize THEIR victims in order to protect her "belief system."
My belief system includes the notion that politicians at the national level and highly placed university administrators not infrequently sexually exploit their aides or their students.. God knows theres plenty of documentation to support the many instances of these gross violations of the restraint superiors owe their subordinates.. Who among us would be shocked to hear of many more of these scandals in the coming years?

So . . . , Rolling Stone, thumbing its nose at all the naysayers out there, might as well go out of business with a bang instead of a whimper—by publishing a story insinuating that UVA President Sullivan and New York Senator Gillibrand have been seen doing the dirty with young male (or, better yet, female) subordinates.. Who cares if the evidence is scanty or even non-existent?. After all, isnt the conversation about abuse of power more important?. Shouldnt that widespread belief system take priority?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeKell
Member Avatar
Still a Newbie
http://www.hulu.com/watch/772747#i0,p354,d0

Law and Order SVU did their take on the UVA rape hoax last night

Jackie -->Jane
Rolling Stone -->America's Worst Crimes
Emily Renda --> Emma Dillon
Woman pres --> woman pres
Swim team --> Hockey team

etc
Edited by MikeKell, Apr 2 2015, 10:04 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

MikeKell
Apr 2 2015, 09:13 AM
http://www.hulu.com/watch/772747#i0,p354,d0

Law and Order SVU did their take on the UVA rape hoax last night

Jackie -->Jane
Rolling Stone -->America's Worst Crimes
Emily Renda --> Emma Dillon
Woman pres --> woman press
Swim team --> Hockey team

etc
So how did they spin it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeKell
Member Avatar
Still a Newbie
Joan Foster
Apr 2 2015, 09:42 AM
MikeKell
Apr 2 2015, 09:13 AM
http://www.hulu.com/watch/772747#i0,p354,d0

Law and Order SVU did their take on the UVA rape hoax last night

Jackie -->Jane
Rolling Stone -->America's Worst Crimes
Emily Renda --> Emma Dillon
Woman pres --> woman pres
Swim team --> Hockey team

etc
So how did they spin it?
still watching! So far, Jane's story keeps changing, from 1 assailant to 4 to 6, one admitted to consensual sex, frats closed, rallies "We are all Jane." 1 accused was shown on video on SEN (ESPN) playing soccer at the time of the supposed rape, then the stories keep falling apart as Jane becomes the "face" of a national movement. TV Show then admits they didn't check any part of the story. Retraction.
Edited by MikeKell, Apr 2 2015, 10:35 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeKell
Member Avatar
Still a Newbie
Now the Emily/Emma rape advocate professor is being shown having embellished Jane's memories and story. Jane's story changes again. Emily/Emma is seen as having sourced the story to AWC because of her obsession with her view of the "rape culture".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

I may have to watch this. I gave up on L&O only because I got too good at knowing whodunnit. If you were white, handsome and attending an elite prep school....or a successful doctor, businessman, or resident of the upper East Side...you were surely preying on the other peaceful inhabitants of Manhattan.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeKell
Member Avatar
Still a Newbie
AWC says it was a mistake to trust Jane/Jackie and is asking "Medill School of Journalism" to do an independent review of their story. Jane/Jackie then says Emma/Emily told her that the consensual sex couldn't be because she was drunk. SVU tells Jane there is nothing they can do because of her changing story and lack of affirmative evidence. Charges dropped against all of the accused. 'Something happened' is the feeling conveyed with smirks of the formerly accused.

Ending, SVU detective Benson says "It was the perfect case. AWC and Emma/Emily thought this would be the case that would change rape culture and it did. It set the clock back 30 years."
Edited by MikeKell, Apr 2 2015, 10:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

Thank you, Mike.

Well, well, well. Wonder how Ms. Renda likes being the fall guy?
Edited by Joan Foster, Apr 2 2015, 10:11 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rolling-stone-publish-uva-review-sunday?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

Rolling Stone on Sunday night plans to publish an external review of its disputed story about an alleged gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity, Columbia Journalism School announced Thursday.

Snip

The school will also discuss its report in a press conference Monday at noon ET.
Edited by Joan Foster, Apr 2 2015, 11:43 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

Most likely more lies from rolling stone.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://themuse.jezebel.com/law-and-order-svu-cartoonifies-the-rolling-stone-uva-r-1695220483

Law and Order: SVU Cartoonifies the Rolling Stone UVA Rape Debacle

Anna Merlan

4/02/15 10:35am

Law and Order: SVU aired their take on the UVA rape case last night, in which a seemingly credible young woman says she was gang-raped by a hockey team at New York's fictional Hudson University. In the end—spoiler alert—her story (sort of) falls apart. In between, we got a mixture of smart observations about how rape allegations are handled in the media, and SVU's trademark corny, cringingly ham-handed and caricatured version of real events. Brace yourselves.

The episode begins with Detective Olivia Benson watching "America's Worst Crimes," a super classy TV show which reenacts the young victim, "Jane," getting gang-raped and interviews her in a room that is definitely not dark enough to hide her identity. The mayor's wife is watching the show too, and soon enough, the fictional NYPD is beating down the doors of AWC, trying to find the victim. (The real NYPD was so badly mishandling sexual assault cases that five years ago, then-police commissioner Ray Kelly had to convene a task force and pledge to start retraining officers. Victims and rape crisis counselors alike said the police routinely "ignored or minimized" rape complaints.)

Detectives Rollins and Carisi wind up talking to a Hudson professor who's also Jane's advocate and de facto spokesperson:

It's right here that any devoted SVU fan knows Feminist Professor will be the show's villain, since anyone who doesn't want to cooperate with the heroic police and uses a fruity word like "phallocentric" to boot is definitely Not To Be Trusted.

An exchange moments later between Rollins and Carisi recalls SVU's earliest days, when detectives Ice-T and the 10,000 other identical white men who have been on the show would routinely express skepticism about the credibility of rape claims.

"Rape advocate," Carisi scoffs. "I don't get what that is. There's no burglary advocate. There's no carjacking advocate."

"When was the last time a carjacking victim got asked, 'Are you sure you didn't want your car to get stolen?'" Rollins shoots back.

The SVU team learns Heather's name when they see her speaking at a campus rally against rape, a detail that seems to come from the activism of Columbia University student Emma Sulkowicz. Soon enough, the SVU team has dragooned Jane—real name Heather Manning—and Suspiciously Feminist Professor into coming down to the station, where Heather discloses the details of the rape:

Heather also reveals that on her way out of the frat house, the gentlemen living there threw red solo cups at her, called her a whore and chanted, en masse, "Go to church."

Benson also goes to visit to the university's chilly and impeccably made-up president, who says that when Heather first disclosed her story, it only involved one student. The president says she asked Heather "if she's sure it wasn't consensual" and Heather "became defensive" and left her office. (That kind of insitutional warmth and competence, at least, rings true.)

The Man Detectives head to the frat house, where the bros scoff their way through an initial interview. One admits to having sex with her, and the rest acknowledge that they did make her "run the gaunlet" on her way out the door.

But soon enough, the story begins to fall apart, when one of the boys Heather names as an assailant reveals that he was out of town at a soccer match, and has video to prove it. The SVU team begins to suspect that Heather and Bonerkilling Feminazi Professor are colluding in some kind of vicious scheme to fool the American Public into caring about rape:

In the end, Heather confesses: she was drunk at the frat house maybe-or-maybe-not consensual sex with one person when she lost consciousness. She awakened to find a second frat boy raping her. She reveals that Professor Andrea Dworkin Q. Penis-Smasher convinced her that she could have possibly been gang-raped. And like Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Rolling Stone, Skip Peterson, the "America's Worst Crimes" producer, reveals that he didn't thoroughly investigate her claims.

Benson visits the chilly university president again, where they mutually throw up their hands and declare there's nothing they can do about the student who did actually rape Heather. Benson reflects too that the case fit her own pre-conceived notions about campus rape a little too neatly (as, frankly, I had to do with UVA.)

"I don't blame Heather," Benson says. "Skip Peterson and Professor Dylan, they pressured her into coming forward. They thought this would be the case that would change rape culture. And it did. It set the clock back 30 years."

That part, at least, has the depressing ring of truth.

Screengrab via Law and Order:SVU/NBC

Contact the author at anna.merlan@jezebel.com.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.cotwa.info/2015/04/the-rolling-stone-debacle-doesnt-prove.html


Thursday, April 2, 2015

The Rolling Stone debacle doesn't prove 'rape culture,' it proves ours is a culture at war with young men

Last year, Rolling Stone, a national magazine with a big circulation, reported in great detail on a purported brutal "gang rape" that supposedly occurred at the University of Virginia. The "victim," called "Jackie," asked Rolling Stone, not to contact the alleged rapists to confirm the story, and Rolling Stone kowtowed to her. "Jackie" refused to report the story to police, and the school didn't care. It suspended fraternity activities anyway, without any investigation.

We all know how that turned out. "Jackie's" story was, in the words of the Washington Post, "a complete crock." The Post wrote: "Rolling Stone propagated a biased work built on a mix of naivete and advocacy." A police investigation subsequently found no evidence that Jackie was sexually assaulted. The friends cited in the Rolling Stone article told a different story of events on that night than what Rolling Stone had reported. Cathy Young explains: ". . . the evidence against ["Jackie"] is damning. It’s not simply that there was no party at Phi Kappa Psi, the fraternity named by Jackie, anywhere near the time when she said she was attacked. It’s not simply that her account changed from forced oral sex to vaginal rape and from five assailants to seven, or that her friends saw no sign of her injuries after the alleged assault. What clinches the case is the overwhelming proof that 'Drew,' Jackie’s date who supposedly orchestrated her rape, was Jackie’s own invention."

Despite all this, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand said that "Jackie" should be beyond criticism. "Victim blaming or shining the spotlight on her for coming forward is not the right approach," Gillibrand said. It would be "inappropriate" to charge Jackie, she said. "One of the challenges with survivors of sexual trauma and rape is that they often don’t want to actually participate with law enforcement because they don’t think justice is possible. They don’t think they will be believed; they think they’ll be blamed."

On CNN, a legal analyst named Sunny Hostin clucked: ". . . the suggestion that ["Jackie"] just sort of made this entire thing up flies in the face of statistics." As if the facts of a serious allegation can be assessed on "statistics."

And of course, Jessica Valenti penned a thing called "Inconsistencies in Jackie's story do not mean that she wasn't raped at UVA."

A writer in a college newspaper topped them all: "Instead of tackling a major magazine for slacking on its job, the media criticized the testimony of a traumatized victim who is trying to live with the effects of her trauma." And: "Rape culture is a fundamental part of this investigation. Just because the police report could not find evidence does not discredit Jackie’s experience, and we need to use this case to spark discourse rather than use it as an example of a false rape claim."

We are in uncharted territory -- what can we say about people who mount defenses that don't bother to defend, and about "truth" where the facts don't matter? Like the kid who didn't do his homework but insists "the dog ate it," the explanations are worse than the original misdeed and confirm our worst suspicions. This is a culture where high profile rape case after case after case turn out to be lies, but people pretend the lies are as good as the truth. In case after case, we let them reduce our sons to vile caricature based on absurd, even pathetic, factual narratives that no sane person would believe in any other context. The real lesson of the Rolling Stone debacle is exactly opposite of the one Rolling Stone set out to teach with its bogus rape story. Instead of proving "rape culture," the fact that this story was written at all, published by a major magazine, and believed by so many is conclusive evidence that ours is a culture that has a serious problem with young men, indeed, with maleness itself.

The witch hunt against young men has been brewing at the University of Virginia for years. After all, it's the school where victim blaming is perfectly appropriate -- if its directed against men wrongly accused of rape. A few years ago, its student newspaper wrote this: ". . . there are simple ways for individuals to avoid compromising situations that could lead to false accusations of sexual misconduct. Drinking responsibly at parties and respecting personal boundaries when communicating digitally, for example, would be a good start." Imagine if the newspaper had written something similar about rape victims.

It's also the school where students accused of sexual assault are offered assistance--not to defend themselves against false claims but to deal with the fact that they are abusers.

It's also the school where a council of student leaders wants to have private rape trials.

In the wake of the hysteria ginned up by the Rolling Stone article, the UVA sorority sisters were ordered by their national chapters to stay home for a weekend when they usually party. The sorority sisters had a conniption because it finally dawned on them that the animating impulse of the "war on rape" is that men are predators (they are fine with that) and that women are the pathetic children of the federal government's "Its On Us" campaign who need daddy-surrogates to save them from the bad rapists. And here they thought they were strong, independent women!

Ironically, when students at the University of Virginia made a serious attempt to simulate a sexual assault trial, the students learned how difficult it is to arrive at the truth in that kind of case. It's much easier, and apparently a lot more satisfying for many, to assume that the accused is guilty by reason of penis.
Posted by COTWA at 4:45 PM
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/law-order-svu-airs-university-virginia-rape-article-1.2171570

'Law & Order: SVU' airs take on University of Virginia frat house rape case
BY Melissa Chan
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Thursday, April 2, 2015, 3:58 PM

“Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” on Wednesday aired its take on a University of Virginia student's story that she was gang raped by frat members.

The explosive University of Virginia frat house rape story disastrously unraveled on the small screen, as it did in real life.

“Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” on Wednesday took on the real-life bombshell tale of a college student named “Jackie,” who told Rolling Stone she was gang raped by seven Phi Kappa Psi members in the frat house in September 2012.

Her horrific story fell apart after it was detailed in the pop culture magazine’s November 2014 issue — just like it did on the NBC crime drama.

A fictional young woman named Heather served as the real-life "Jackie" who told Rolling Stone she was gang raped, but whose tale later fell apart.

A fictional young woman named Heather Manning spills her heart to Detective Olivia Benson, sobbing as she describes how four frat boys at New York’s Ivy League “Hudson University” pounced on her like a “pack” before raping and sodomizing her.

She was sought out after a TV show called “America’s Worst Crimes” ran her heartbreaking interview under the name “Jane.”
For editorial use only. Additional clearance required for commercial or promotional use, contact your local office for assistance. Any commercial or promotional use of NBCUniversal content requires NBCUniversal's prior written consent. No book publishing w
Detectives soon discover pieces of Heather’s story don’t match up, and one of the students she names as an attacker had video to prove he was out of town during the alleged rape.

Heather later confesses she was drunk at the frat house, and may have had consensual sex with one person before she passed out.

She was egged on by her professor to come forward with the gang rape story, she says.

“I don’t blame Heather,” Benson says. “They thought this would be the case that would change rape culture. And it did. It set the clock back 30 years.”

“America’s Worst Crimes” producer also later admits to discrepancies in his report — similar to how Rolling Stone ended up apologizing for its own misreporting.

“Jackie’s” allegations led to a months-long police investigation, which found no evidence of a sex assault at the UVA frat house.

mchan@nydailynews.com

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://observer.com/2015/04/law-order-svu-recap-16x18-svu-meets-uva-in-campus-rape-episode/


‘Law & Order: SVU’ Recap 16×18: SVU Meets UVA in Campus Rape Episode
By Anne Easton | 04/02/15 2:40pm

When the supposedly highly regarded news magazine show America’s Worst Crimes presents the horrific tale of a young woman’s gang rape at a fraternity on the campus of Hudson University, everyone is watching; including Sergeant Benson and her bosses. Said bosses immediate decide that the SVU team needs to take a proactive stance by finding the victim, identified only as “Jane” and getting the real story about her assault.

Footwork ensues and after some dead ends by the detectives, Jane outs herself at a rally. Jane, who’s real name is Heather, along with her trusty advisor, Professor Jessica Dillon, reluctantly come to the precinct to describe what exactly happened to Heather in that fraternity house.

Heather details how she innocently went on a date with a hockey player, willingly went back to his place where he promptly shoved her into a darkened room where she was gang raped by four assailants.

While the detectives work to gather more evidence, consulting with ADA Barba throughout, there are more rallies and talk show appearances by Heather amid an ever-heightening media frenzy. During each of Heather’s public speeches her story seems to constantly change, a fact which rightfully agitates all of the law enforcement folks trying to help her.

After arresting three of the four young men (one was out of the country), the whole case rapidly begins to fall apart. Barba realizes that Professor Collins was a bit too zealous about Heather’s case, manipulating the girl, and her story, a bit too much, in the hope that Heather would become ‘the face of a movement.’

Heather herself finally admits that she’s in fact extremely confused about what really happened that night and that she got carried away with the fury of media and her story took on a life of its own.

When she’s alone with Sergeant Benson, she begins to realize that she drank too much and did have consensual sex with her original date. She also remembers that when they were finished she passed out, but upon regaining consciousness she discovered another frat member penetrating her. When she is adamant that he raped her, Benson doesn’t disagree, but explains that after everything that’s happened in this case, a jury will have plenty of reasonable doubt and it’s unlikely that any kind of conviction could possibly be secured. Even though it’s clear that one of the young men is absolutely guilty of rape, Barba, understandably reluctantly, drops all charges against the four fraternity members.

For those not in the know, this episode is based on an ongoing investigation incited by an article that ran in Rolling Stone in November 2014 about a fraternity gang rape at the University of Virginia. Almost as soon as the piece was released, the integrity of both the victim and the publication came under fire.

Rather quickly, Rolling Stone Managing Editor Will Dana admitted that the publication had made errors in judgment in their investigation and reporting of the alleged incident.

As a result of the article, the Charlottesville police department conducted its own inquiry and last week the results of that probe were released.

At a press conference, it was announced that “no substantive basis” was found for the claim by the student, known as “Jackie,” that she was raped by seven men at a fraternity party as a UVA freshman in September 2012.

Charlottesville Police Chief Timothy J. Longo stressed that the department’s conclusion “doesn’t mean something terrible didn’t happen to Jackie” and that the investigation is not closed, but only suspended until new evidence emerges.

In SVU’s fictionalized account of the incident, Rolling Stone’s journalist shortcomings were highlighted well, they fully vet the victims account of what happened, nor did they reach out to anyone at the university or in law enforcement about how to present the facts, or lack there of. In summary, they only showed one angle of the story, claiming that protecting the victim’s identity prevented them from discussing the case with any other parties that may or may not have been involved. This is definitely not how investigative journalism is supposed to work.

Another factor that makes this specific narrative so compelling is that Professor Dillon and Heather weren’t trying to be malicious; they claim they were trying to get the message out about the prevalence of on campus assault. Unfortunately, they did it in such a manner that it ended in utter catastrophe. As Sergeant Benson said, ‘They thought this would be the case that changed rape culture, and it did, it set the clock back thirty years.”

By this she means that many victims are already reluctant to disclose assaults and that what’s transpired here may push them further away from doing so, and that this fuels those who express growing skepticism about the real number of on-campus incidents.

The episode made big and rather accurate statements about the current status of the reporting process and handling of on campus assaults with the main point being that this is a widespread problem that has historically lacked much needed attention to stimulate change. As Heather mentioned, she became ‘the face of a movement’ and the stress of that role overwhelmed her, for all the wrong reasons. The way this story unfolded, one could come to the conclusion that clearly no one would willingly want be the face of this movement.

Until now….

Two rape survivors and activists from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Andrea Pino and Annie Clark, are the focus of a new documentary about the topic entitled The Hunting Ground. The two women, facing narrow-minded administrators, and bureaucratic obstruction, launched the initial efforts that have led to over 80 educational institutions facing Title IX investigations that are now forcing college and university officials to address sexual assault more directly.

One of the most disturbing parts of the episode is the realization that because of all of the changes and ambiguity in Heather’s story a young man did actually get away with raping her with no conviction and seemingly few repercussions for his actions.

That, in and of itself, makes this episode more than just another story about rape. It makes it a true horror story.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply