| UVA Rape Story Collapses; Duke Lacrosse Redux | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 5 2014, 01:45 PM (60,418 Views) | |
| MikeZPU | Jan 28 2016, 03:37 PM Post #1276 |
|
Oh, I didn't realize that Jackie never filed a police report. One question that comes to mind is: how did the Charlottesville police justify spending so much time and effort investigating the allegation of gang rape, if the so-alleged victim never even filed a police report? Interesting. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Jan 28 2016, 04:15 PM Post #1277 |
|
http://news.yahoo.com/police-press-conference-on-uva-rolling-stone-rape-investigation-covered-live-by-katie-couric-205013344.html Police in Charlottesville, Va., say they found no evidence to support claims by a woman who said she was gang raped at the University of Virginia in 2012 — an explosive allegation that gained national attention when it was reported by Rolling Stone last fall. At a news conference Monday, Charlottesville Police Chief Timothy Longo said the woman, identified as “Jackie” by the magazine, refused to cooperate with police in their investigation. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Jan 29 2016, 04:47 AM Post #1278 |
|
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/26030/ Judge: Jackie Coakley not covered by patient-counselor privilege in ‘Rolling Stone’ defamation suit College Fix Staff •January 28, 2016 Jackie Coakley can’t hide her secrets any longer. The student at the heart of Rolling Stone‘s discredited gang-rape story has been ordered by a federal judge to turn over her communications with the magazine and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely, and even her counseling communications with the University of Virginia, though they won’t be made public. UVA Associate Dean of Students Nicole Eramo is suing Rolling Stone for $7.5 million, claiming its portrayal of her and her interactions with Coakley are defamatory. Judge Glen Conrad earlier signaled he would force Coakley, who is not a party in the case, to turn over some communications that are relevant to Eramo’s claims against the magazine. (Though Coakley is still identified only as “Jackie” in the litigation and mainstream media coverage, her full identity has been public for months and her status as a gang-rape victim is in serious doubt, so The College Fix has decided to fully identify her going forward.) Conrad wrote in his memorandum opinion that Coakley’s claimed privilege for being an alleged rape victim doesn’t protect her because federal restrictions only apply to the admissibility of sexual-behavior evidence at trial, not their relevance in discovery, which is what Eramo is seeking. It is “reasonable and proportionate” for Eramo to obtain Coakley’s communications with Rolling Stone, Erdely and “Eramo/UVA” as evidence of defamation and negligence by the magazine, especially because it has already turned over its communications with Coakley, Conrad wrote. Perhaps the most notable part of Conrad’s ruling is his dismissal of Coakley’s claim that her counseling sessions with Eramo and Emily Renda (another UVA employee) are protected by “patient-counselor privilege” – a legally dubious claim that nonetheless became a PR nightmare for the University of Oregon in a countersuit against an alleged rape victim suing that school. Virginia law on the privacy of sexual-assault victims provides an explicit exemption for court orders, Conrad wrote: The court is unaware of any authority that holds that [the relevant law] creates a patient-counselor privilege, and the court declines to do so in this case. In addition, the statutory language permits disclosure of protected information in response to a court mandate, which provides further support for the court’s finding that the statute does not establish an evidentiary privilege. Even assuming that the court could find that this statute establishes a patient-counselor privilege, it appears that Jackie may have waived such privilege by voluntarily disclosing the contents of her communications with Eramo and UVA to defendants. Communications between Coakley’s pseudonym “Haven Monahan” and her friend Ryan Duffin, as well as Monahan’s communications with anyone else Coakley gave Rolling Stone before its article was published, must be turned over: One of the main issues in the defamation action is defendants’ due diligence in relying on Jackie as a source for the Article. Plaintiff argues that defendants could have interviewed Ryan Duffin and others about Jackie’s story and her credibility as a witness, but failed to do so. As such, these communications are relevant and proportionate as they will help resolve the question of what the defendants could have discovered about Jackie’s story and credibility if they had interviewed Jackie’s friends. Only Coakley’s communications about the Rolling Stone article before her last public comment to The Washington Post Dec. 5, and not the “details of her alleged assault,” must be turned over, Conrad ruled: The crux of the dispute in the defamation action is defendants’ portrayal of Eramo and Jackie’s communications with Eramo/UVA . The specific, graphic details about what may or may not have occurred on the night of September 28, 2012 have no bearing on these issues. |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Jan 29 2016, 07:37 AM Post #1279 |
|
How about a "student-teacher" privilege? (Maybe the players wouldn't have known there is no such thing; but shouldn't Trask have known?) |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 3 2016, 05:02 AM Post #1280 |
|
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2016/02/imam-pointlessness-isc-ban IMAM: The pointlessness of the ISC ban Banning sorority women from attending fraternity rush events has more to do with damage control than addressing gender violence by Alyssa Imam | Feb 03 2016 | With the start of the spring semester, the fraternity recruitment process is underway. For members of sororities, this event comes with a change from previous years, as they are not allowed to attend or participate in fraternity recruitment events. While this rule has been in effect since 2011, this is the first year that the National Panhellenic Conference, or NPC — the umbrella organization that governs the University’s fifteen sororities — has enforced the rule at the University. This enforcement certainly seems a well-intentioned attempt to protect members during what some see as a high-risk period. Still, I am skeptical as to whether this enforcement, as well as the rule itself, is an effective means of protecting sorority members and ensuring a safe community. According to former Inter-Sorority Council President Allison Palacios, this change came after the release of Rolling Stone’s “A Rape on Campus” article made it evident to national and international NPC presidents that its member groups were not acting in accordance with the policy. Of course, it only makes sense to zero in on a group subject to a policy if it is not acting as such. However, regardless of the current status of the Rolling Stone article, rape occurs everywhere and is not unique to the University. Unless the NPC made an effort to address this issue at other schools, following up with those with which they’ve already spoken and reminding others of this policy, I have to wonder if this enforcement reflects a true attempt to protect all sorority women under it. Or is it simply a band-aid solution meant to show that something is being done to address this issue, especially given the publicity the article received? Perhaps the biggest issue I take with this policy is that it stigmatizes women on Grounds by restricting those it aims to protect. Telling members not to participate in events it perceives as high-risk seems to be saying that it is the responsibility of those with the potential to be endangered to keep themselves out of harm’s way. As a result, the policy embodies the victim-blaming phenomenon that too often occurs when addressing sexual assault. As a former sorority member from the University remarked last year after the NPC began enforcement of its policy, “With the issue of rape and sexual assault on Grounds, women continue to be punished twice.” Furthermore, many other events throughout the year, such as the Foxfield Races or Halloween, could also be seen as high-risk. Sexual assault can occur at any time. Even during fraternity recruitment, a sorority member could be assaulted while out, whether at bars or at a separate party. Focusing on fraternity recruitment and ignoring other times at which members face harm fails to promote true responsibility. It presents the policy as a way of avoiding a true commitment to tackling the problem of sexual assault on campuses. This view is not only unfair to women by expecting the best behavior from them; it is also unfair to men by assuming the worst in them. I can’t help but wonder how frustrating it may be to support and implement Fraternal Organization Agreement standards only to be regarded as irresponsible. Moreover, by essentially placing the responsibility for its members’ safety on the NPC and ISC, and by presuming that we lack the ability to respect one another, this policy runs the risk of further solidifying any harmful behavior that may occur (as it could on any night) as acceptable, in terms of how those engaging in such behavior view it. While incidents that have occurred do show a lack of respect on the part of those causing them, such a view would simply perpetuate that behavior. Additionally, sorority members have access to a network that provides safety resources, such as sober sisters, and many sisters I’ve spoken with have referred to this time of year as when they feel safest when going out. While both girls who are and are not in sororities could have before been invited to those events, this policy takes out a chunk of girls and leaves only those who are not sorority members, and therefore lack those resources, free to go. I realize there is always an extent to which such a policy could protect members. However, placing the burden of staying safe on sorority women by mandating them not to attend an event presenting a potential to be harmed hardly seems to be an effective way for the NPC to ensure its members’ safety. Alyssa Imam is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at a.imam@cavalierdaily.com. |
![]() |
|
| MikeZPU | Feb 3 2016, 09:59 AM Post #1281 |
|
That's very interesting. So, Rolling Stone should be responsible for the costs of the police investigation as well IMHO. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 10 2016, 05:03 AM Post #1282 |
|
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3439743/Text-messages-UVA-gang-rape-victim-Jackie-faked-love-interest.html Text messages show UVA gang rape 'victim' Jackie faked a love interest By Khaleda Rahman For Dailymail.com The 9,000-word Rolling Stone article about a gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity house sparked a national outcry about sexual violence on college campuses in America. The extensive piece told the story of how an 18-year-old was brutally attacked by seven male students at a party in September 2012 - then left to suffer the consequences of her attack alone without the help of friends or school officials. But soon after ‘A Rape on Campus’ was published in November 2014, it was retracted by the magazine after huge holes emerged in the tale told by the alleged victim – identified in the article only as ‘Jackie’. As a result, the magazine is facing numerous defamation lawsuits. Now, hundreds of text messages obtained by lawyers representing UVA’s associate dean show how the whole saga was sparked by Jackie’s crush on a boy who didn’t feel the same way - and how she faked a love interest and cried rape so he would come to her rescue. Scroll down for video The debunked Rolling Stone article 'A Rape on Campus' stemmed from the alleged victim's crush on a boy. 'Jackie' (left) faked a love interest and cried gang rape so Ryan Duffin (right) would come to her rescue The 9,000-word Rolling Stone article (pictured) sparked a national outcry but was found to have significant inaccuracies and was investigated by Columbia University's school of journalism Ryan Duffin, 21, quickly realized that Jackie, who he met on his second day at UVA, had a crush on him, but says he made it clear he was not interested. ‘I think that began to become pretty clear maybe about a week after I met her,’ he told CBS6. ‘She started expressing some physical interest in me, which I quickly rebuffed.’ It was this that led Jackie to hatch an elaborate catfishing scheme to win Duffin’s affections. She told her friends that she had met someone – a student in her chemistry class called Haven Monahan, who she would later accuse of rape. But Jackie also convinced Duffin to text her love interest – pretending to be a girl named Brianna. The Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house where 'Jackie' claimed she was gang raped. The fraternity is now suing Rolling Stone for $25 million over the discredited article ‘She came up with this plan and got me and Alex [another friend] to pretend to be other girls in Haven’s class and text Haven to gauge whether he was a good person or not,’ Duffin said. The messages, sent between September 2012 and December 2014, were turned over as evidence in lawsuits filed as a result of the sensational article. They show that Monahan was desperate to date Jackie, but hindered by her interest in another student (Duffin). As Monahan, she tries to make herself more appealing to Duffin - for instance, claiming to not like flowers and chocolates 'like most girls' and insisting Jackie is 'special'. As herself, she tells Duffin that Monahan is 'creepy' and 'persistent'. 'Please get him to leave me alone!' she texted Duffin. 'Tell him I sound stupid and like a waste of his time.' Shockingly, she even appears to have fabricated having a terminal illness in messages to Duffin. She tells him: 'It’s a big deal because people treat you differently, like you’re about to break at any given moment. 'And it’s not cause they like you and it’s not cause they care...it’s because you’re perishable and that scares them.' But then, she tells Duffin that she is going on a date with Haven. 'She said that when they got up to his bedroom there were other men in the room he locked the door behind her and forced her to perform oral sex on five men in the room,' Duffin told CBS6. He says he urged Jackie to report the rape, but she refused. In October 2012, the messages show that Duffin was suspicion at the time of both Jackie and Monahan. They stopped speaking, but after Duffin read the Rolling Stone article, he contacted Jackie to apologize for not realizing the 'magnitude of the situation'. Jackie then insists that the reporter took 'liberties' and apologized for the way Duffin and his friends are portrayed. They stop speaking again when Duffin again raises doubts about her story. 'I’m portrayed as a heartless friend basically I’m telling her not to report the rape because I want to join a fraternity,' he said. In the Rolling Stone article, Jackie said Haven – who was called ‘Drew’ in the article – of luring her to the frat house where she claimed to have been attacked. She said she called Duffin and two other friends after escaping at around 3am and running barefoot into the street with her face beaten and a blood-splattered dress. Bur Duffin insisted that she looked 'pretty normal' that night. The article's author, Sabrina Erdely, claimed that after 'Jackie' reached out to the three friends - Duffin (called Randall in the article), Alex Stock ('Andy') and Kathryn Hendley (Cindy) - 'launched into a heated discussion about the social price of reporting Jackie's rape'. Hendley allegedly said: 'She's gonna be the girl who cried "rape", and we'll never be allowed into any frat party again.' But all three challenged Rolling Stone's accuracy and said they were never contacted by the reporter. A police investigation found there was no evidence to support the version of events she gave to Rolling Stone and no-one called Haven Monahan was enrolled at UVA. In November last year, Daily Mail Online revealed that Jackie, now 21, has left the school – but she is still facing being deposed over the claims she made in Rolling Stone. Despite apologizing for getting the story so wrong, the magazine is being sued by the Psi Kappa Psi fraternity, who are seeking $25million in damages, and three fraternity members maligned in the article are also suing separately for undefined damages. UVA’s associate dean Nicole Eramo has also filed a lawsuit against the magazine and reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely for $7.5million. Police: No evidence to support UVA Rolling Stone rape story http://www.scribd.com/doc/298611022/Text-messages-between-Jackie-and-Ryan-Doc-can-be-enlarged Edited by abb, Feb 10 2016, 05:06 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Payback | Feb 10 2016, 01:52 PM Post #1283 |
|
Just a sweet girl who wanted an imaginary playmate . . . .?
Edited by Payback, Feb 10 2016, 06:11 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 11 2016, 05:40 AM Post #1284 |
|
http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/10/you-can-finally-read-uva-jackies-bizarre-catfishing-texts/ You Can Finally Read UVA Jackie’s Bizarre Catfishing Texts Posted By Blake Neff On 6:39 PM 02/10/2016 In | No Comments It’s been over a year since Rolling Stone’s big story on an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia was exposed as a hoax, but the public has long lacked specific details about how UVA student Jackie Coakley concocted her wildly false story. Now, that’s no longer the case. Text messages have finally been released showing Coakley’s fictional “Haven Monahan” personality trying to catfish her crush Ryan Duffin. The text messages have been released as part of an ongoing $7.5 million defamation lawsuit brought by UVA Dean Nicole Eramo against Rolling Stone. In January, Eramo’s lawyers successfully forced Coakley to turn over text messages, emails and other communications pertaining to the case. The communications were supposed to be confidential, but now at least some of them have come into the possession of Virginia news outlet WTVR News. Now, WTVR has released almost 50 pages of text messages showing correspondence between Coakley and Duffin, as well as a month-long correspondence between Duffin and “Monahan,” who appears to have simply been Coakley all along. In Coakley’s telling, Monahan was a local boy she was in a relationship with, who then sprung a trap on her at a UVA frat party that resulted in gang rape. But a police investigation was unable to establish that Monahan even existed, and instead “he” appears to have been an invention of Coakley’s, who hoped to use him as a vehicle to win the affections of Duffin. It is almost impossible to easily summarize the texts, which reveal a positively byzantine effort to trick Duffin. Initially, Duffin pretends to be a girl named “Brianna,” having been told by Coakley to correspond with Monahan to find out if he liked her. Duffin consistently funnels information about Monahan to Jackie, who in turn acts as though she is disturbed and put off by Monahan’s romantic interest. When Duffin eventually drops the charade and reveals that he is a male student, Monahan acts furious and tries to tell Duffin to stop being friends with Coakley, presumably in a ploy to push them closer together: Monahan: “Wat the f*ck who the f*ck are you? Wat the fck does she see in you. You f*cken preten to be a f*cken girl. … Monahan: You f*cked this up for me. Just f*cken stay out of her life so she can get the f*ck over you and move onto me. Duffin: And it’s coming off as creepy. It won’t work. And we’re still friends, and she’s moving on. But it won’t be to you if you keep acting the way you do towards her. You act like you’re entitled to her. Monahan: No you cant be friends with her f*ck off leave her the f*ck alone. The situation only becomes more surreal from there: At one point, Monahan claims that Coakley suffers from lupus and is frequently hospitalized, which is how he claimed to have met her. He suggests she could die soon, and that in her will she “left all her stuff to kids in Honduras.” Monahan repeatedly refers to Coakley having an interest in Duffin, warning that he will “break her heart.” Monahan claims he has spent over $300 on flowers and chocolates for Coakley, even though she is supposedly not interested in her. Monahan has a small meltdown after saying he hasn’t been able to find Coakley for several days, and says he is about to call the police, a course of action Duffin discourages. Following Sept. 28, the day Coakley told Rolling Stone she was raped at Phi Kappa Psi fraternity, Monahan starts making allusions to some incident with Coakley, where”she promised she wouldnt report anythin if I didn’t talk about her or to her.” Combined with texts between Coakley and Duffin that discuss some unclear horrible event of a sexual nature the night of the 28th, showing that Coakley was developing her alleged rape narrative from the beginning. Eventually, Duffin becomes suspicious and insists he wants to speak with Monahan verbally instead of exchanging texts. This causes a hostile reaction from Monahan, and the conversation ends shortly after. Duffin remains surprisingly composed throughout the exchanges, refusing to blow up at Monahan despite repeated provocations to do so. Monahan, meanwhile, displays stalker-like behavior and makes heavy use of almost every brand of profanity. Along with the bizarre Haven Monahan text messages, WTVR also released text messages between Duffin and Coakley following the release of Rolling Stone’s article. Initially, Duffin praises Coakley for having the bravery to come forward, and apologized that he “never realized the magnitude” of Jackie’s alleged rape, which he appears to believe actually happened. But several days later, once a Washington Post story had poked massive holes in Coakley’s story, Duffin turns more hostile. “So if I can just ask a question, then … Why did you tell us before the date ever happened that his name was Haven?,” Duffin asks. “Haven Monahan? A name that belongs to no UVA student ever? Why has the name changed since then?” Minutes later, Duffin says that because of legal concerns, it would be best if he stopped talking with Coakley. No further messages are exchanged between the two. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 19 2016, 05:47 AM Post #1285 |
|
http://www.newsplex.com/home/headlines/Attorneys-Ask-for-New-Trial-Date-in-Eramo-Lawsuit-369286031.html Attorneys Ask for New Trial Date in Eramo Lawsuit Updated: Thu 5:07 PM, Feb 18, 2016 By: Tomas Harmon - Email Attorneys representing Rolling Stone, Sabrina Erdely and Wenner Media are asking for a new trial date in the lawsuit following the subpoenas of "Jackie" and the University of Virginia. CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA (NEWSPLEX) -- In court documents filed on Wednesday, attorneys representing Rolling Stone, Sabrina Erdely and Wenner Media are asking for a new court date. According to the request, the discovery period, which includes the subpoenas of "Jackie" and the University of Virginia, took longer than expected. As a result, the attorneys say they need more time to prepare for the case. The new court date they are asking for is Oct. 11 through Oct. 24. The current court date is set for July 18 through July 29. Earlier this year, "Jackie" and UVa were roped into a legal battle with attorneys representing UVa Dean Nicole Eramo. Ultimately, a judge ruled that both "Jackie" and UVa need to produce certain key documents for the case. Eramo is suing Rolling Stone magazine, its publishing company Wenner Media and author Sabrina Erdely over the article "A Rape on Campus." Eramo argues that now-defunct article defamed her. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 21 2016, 05:28 AM Post #1286 |
|
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/20/jackie-woman-at-the-center-of-controversial-rollin/ ‘Jackie,’ woman at the center of controversial Rolling Stone UVA rape article, to appear in court By Kellan Howell - The Washington Times - Saturday, February 20, 2016 The woman at the center of Rolling Stone magazine's now-retracted story about a rape at the University of Virginia has been ordered to appear in court to answer questions as part of a civil suit. "The court believes that a one-day, seven-hour deposition will be sufficient," Judge Glen Conrad wrote in a court order this week, calling for the woman identified only as Jackie to appear in court on April 5, Newsweek reported. Jackie will be deposed as part of an ongoing lawsuit filed by Nicole Eramo, an associate dean at the University of Virginia, against Rolling Stone, the magazine's owner, Wenner Media, and Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the writer of the controversial story "A Rape on Campus." The story, based mostly on testimony from Jackie, alleged that she was the victim of a brutal gang rape at the Phi Kappa Psi house on the campus. Three days after the story was published, the university suspended all fraternities and canceled all fraternal activities. But the article came under scrutiny as the fraternity denied the events described in the article ever occurred. Those accused of rape complained that they were never contacted for an interview for the story. As new details emerged, the magazine distanced itself from the story. A local police investigation found no evidence to support the woman's claims. The article was eventually retracted when Jackie's narrative fell apart. Rolling Stone asked the Columbia School of Journalism to conduct a review to determine where the magazine went wrong. In May 2015, Ms. Eramo filed a suit against the magazine for defamation. She argued the story portrayed her as a villain and characterized her as uncaring and callous to Jackie's needs following her alleged rape. She reportedly received hateful messages and death threats after the article's release and argues that her career and reputation were seriously damaged in the aftermath, the Daily Progress reported. Jackie has remained anonymous throughout the legal proceedings. She also refused to cooperate with the police investigation that found no evidence of her claims. Judge Conrad also set an Oct. 11 trial date for the case, which is expected to last two weeks. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 21 2016, 08:06 AM Post #1287 |
|
http://www.roanoke.com/news/virginia/jackie-to-face-deposition-in-eramo-lawsuit/article_b79ff22b-3807-546d-89a7-31b914ef54e4.html 'Jackie' to face deposition in Eramo lawsuit By Dean Seal The (Charlottesville) Daily Progress | Posted: Saturday, February 20, 2016 12:08 am A federal judge has set a trial date in the legal battle between a University of Virginia associate dean and Rolling Stone magazine over a now-retracted article, and the young woman at the heart of the controversial story has been ordered to face a deposition. Judge Glen Conrad said in a court order this week that the case brought by UVa Associate Dean Nicole Eramo against the magazine and one of its writers will go before a jury on the morning of Oct. 11. The trial is scheduled to last 10 days. Last May, Eramo filed a lawsuit seeking $7.85 million for defamation relating to “A Rape on Campus,” an article Rolling Stone published in November 2014 about the culture of sexual assault on college campuses, for which UVa served as the backdrop. While initially stirring controversy and rousing several rallies on UVa Grounds, the article soon fell apart and ultimately was retracted when its central narrative about a student named “Jackie” fell apart. In the original article, Jackie told author Sabrina Rubin Erdely that in 2012 she was the victim of a brutal gang rape at a UVa fraternity house during a party. The details of the assault quickly fell under intense scrutiny, and by December 2014, the magazine said its trust in Jackie had been “misplaced.” The following month, Charlottesville police said it could not find evidence the alleged rape had occurred, and a review by the Columbia University School of Journalism called the article a “journalistic failure.” Rolling Stone retracted the story in April. Eramo, a UVa administrator tasked with aiding student survivors of sexual assault, argues the story portrayed her as a “villain” and characterized her as uncaring and callous to Jackie’s needs following her alleged rape. She reportedly received hateful messages and death threats after the article’s release and argues that her career and reputation were seriously damaged in the aftermath. Court documents show that Eramo and the defendants agreed on the date after several setbacks in obtaining Jackie’s cooperation in the matter. Following several unsuccessful attempts to have Jackie turn over communications related to her alleged rape, Eramo asked the court to compel her cooperation. While Jackie’s attorneys argued that doing so would be an invasion of privacy, Conrad officially ordered her to cooperate late last month. On the same day that motion was granted, counsel for both Eramo and the magazine filed a joint motion for a new trial date and an amended scheduling order. The trial previously had been scheduled to start July 18 and last two weeks, but the motion argued that complications with third-party discovery in the case — assumingly the fight to have Jackie turn over documents and comply with subpoenas — had extended the discovery phase of the proceedings. “Significant third-party discovery has been necessary, including the discovery of education records under FERPA and document and deposition discovery from third-party sources that have (and will be) the subject of motions practice,” the motion reads. “Due to its scope, and the complexities presented by third-party discovery in this case, discovery has taken longer than anticipated.” FERPA, or the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, is a federal law that protects the privacy of students’ educational records. Jackie’s attorneys had previously argued that her communications with the university about her alleged rape qualified for FERPA protection, but the judge disagreed. Conrad agreed to push the case’s schedule back. Fact discovery in the case must be completed by May 13 and expert discovery must conclude by June 10. Furthermore, the judge ordered Jackie to face a deposition from both sides of counsel on April 5, which is expected to last seven hours. If additional time is needed, counsel will have to request it by March 15. An attorney for Jackie did not respond to a request for comment. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 21 2016, 08:35 AM Post #1288 |
|
When Coakly goes under oath in this civil case and admits the hoax, does she then become criminally liable? |
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Feb 21 2016, 08:48 AM Post #1289 |
|
Will she admit it? It never ceases to amaze me how resilient these liars are in maintaining their hoaxes. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 21 2016, 08:57 AM Post #1290 |
|
I have to believe that many of the questions in the deposition will focus on her veracity. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







9:15 AM Jul 11