Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
UVA Rape Story Collapses; Duke Lacrosse Redux
Topic Started: Dec 5 2014, 01:45 PM (60,415 Views)
Payback
Member Avatar

Anyone have extra tickets to Jackie's deposition tomorrow?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

Payback
Apr 6 2016, 09:37 AM
Anyone have extra tickets to Jackie's deposition tomorrow?
Oh, to be a fly on the wall :)

I'll check ebay :) :laughin:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.bustle.com/articles/152664-the-awful-rolling-stone-case-decision-that-never-should-have-been-made

Bustle

The Awful Decision In This 'Rolling Stone' Case
The Awful 'Rolling Stone' Case Decision That Never Should Have Been Made
Lauren Holter
16 hours ago News

The now-infamous Rolling Stone article "A Rape On Campus" detailed a heinous gang rape at the University of Virginia, but was redacted after it was revealed that the allegations weren't backed up by anyone other than the alleged victim, who was given the pseudonym "Jackie." On Tuesday, a Virginia judge ruled that Jackie must give a deposition Thursday in a defamation lawsuit brought against the magazine, its parent company, and the article's author. As the subject of the story, she can help clear up what really happened, but Jackie shouldn't be forced to testify in the Rolling Stone court case, because an alleged victim shouldn't have to suffer for the mistakes a publication made in telling her story.

Associate dean of students Nicole P. Eramo is seeking $8 million in damages in response to the 2014 article that claimed the UVA administrator didn't support Jackie when she came to the dean about her alleged rape. Eramo's lawyer, Libby Locke, said in a statement Tuesday that Rolling Stone "was dead set on portraying Dean Eramo as a callous administrator who discouraged Jackie from reporting an assault to police, when, in fact, Dean Eramo took Jackie to the police, and it appears that Jackie knew that her tale of rape would not have stood up under real scrutiny and investigation." In court documents, Eramo alleges that Jackie is a "serial liar," and her lawyer says Jackie's testimony is "highly relevant" to the case.
Jay Paul/Getty Images News/Getty Images

Chief Judge Glen Conrad's ruling will require Jackie to be questioned by the magazine's and Eramo's lawyers, though the transcripts of the conversations will remain confidential. Jackie's lawyers strongly objected to her testifying, arguing that it would "re-traumatize" her, and a psychologist treating her concluded that a deposition could cause severe psychological trauma.

Forcing Jackie to be involved in the lawsuit — against her own will and the recommendation of a medical professional — puts an alleged victim of defamation above an alleged victim of sexual assault. This isn't to say that Eramo's case isn't important, just that Jackie doesn't need to be forced to participate. Although Eramo believes Jackie fabricated the alleged assault, her real issue is with Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the writer, not Jackie. Journalists and the publications they write for, not their sources, are responsible for what they print.

A review by the Columbia School of Journalism found a multitude of mistakes in "A Rape On Campus" related to the fact that the story wasn't backed up by additional sources and Erdely waited until after it was published to try tracking down the men Jackie named as her alleged attackers. Jackie shouldn't be put in potentially traumatizing situations (in which lawyers will be able to grill her about her alleged sexual assault in an attempt to prove she's lying) because of the magazine's mistakes. The lawsuit is against Rolling Stone and Erdely, and it should remain that way. Yes, Jackie's account of what took place would help clarify details, but the case doesn't have superiority over her needs as an individual.

It would be a very different scenario if Jackie agreed to testify in a criminal case against her alleged attackers, but a sexual assault victim (even an alleged victim) should never be forced to relive their trauma and badgered about the details by attorneys against their will. In keeping her identity hidden, the UVA student obviously didn't want to go public with her alleged assault, so requiring her to talk to even more people about it seems cruel.

Unfortunately, we still live in a society that doesn't believe women who claim they've been assaulted. The scandal surrounding "A Rape On Campus" already had the ability to discourage other women from coming forward about being raped, and this latest development could do so further. Jackie shouldn't be assumed correct despite the holes in her telling of what happened, but she also shouldn't be treated as a criminal for trying to tell her story.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=7452

UVA forms committee to address ‘problematic' 'party culture' mural
Rob Shimshock
Virginia Campus Correspondent
@ShimshockAndAwe
on Apr 06, 2016 at 12:31 PM EDT

The school has created a committee to consider repainting or hiding a mural that depicts student revelers.

The University of Virginia has created a committee to consider repainting or hiding a mural that depicts student revelers and what some professors perceive as an image implying a student-professor sexual relationship.

The painting “depicts a certain kind of party culture in which women are depicted in ways that look problematic to me,” music professor Bonnie Gordon told Newsplex. “It has a picture of a professor and a student who obviously have been doing something that would be a Title IX violation.”

UVA formed a committee to address the mural after Rolling Stone published its now-retracted “A Rape on Campus” article in November of 2014, and Gordon’s criticism of the mural began with a Slate article in which she described the now-disproven allegations as “awful, horrifying, and not shocking at all,” stating that “UVA has a rape culture problem.”

Gordon also noted that “nothing in the Rolling Stone article about University culture is new,” a statement which probably didn’t refer to the story’s inclusion in a pattern of debunked or unproven high-profile rape allegations at elite institutions, such as the ones involving the Duke lacrosse team and the Columbia University “mattress girl.”

With no actions on the mural taken since her article, Gordon wondered “could we ask the artist if he’d be interested in redoing this panel? Could we move the panels? Could we have a contest and put student art in this section?”

The mural, which was painted by Lincoln Perry and consists of several panels painted between 1996 and 2012, is titled “The Student’s Progress” and portrays the fictional journey of a University student named Shannon, who both attends and teaches at the school.

Mason agreed with Gordon’s analysis, stating “I can also see why some people believe that the artwork makes a joke out of what might be called sexual harassment. I know for certain that it makes some people uncomfortable when they see it.”

Another faculty member, Associate Nursing professor Kathryn Laughon, critiqued this part of the panel:

“We could use that shot in a Green Dot training video around when we can recognize when someone is too incapacitated to consent,” she remarked, referring to the Green Dot program which aims to reduce violence and sexual assault by making “a cultural shift.” “[The female’s] head is lulled back, her eyes are closed, and she looks like she is being held up by the guy.”

Laughon continued, saying that the painting contained negative gender and racial stereotypes and that “as far as I’m concerned there’s not really a lot of value in this painting except maybe a living example of a red dot,” referring to hurtful expression and actions. “We can almost think of it as part of the Green Dot campaign. We can use it as ‘where do we need to put green dots over these red dots?’”

Almost all of the comments on the school paper’s article concerning the mural ridiculed the faculty opposed to the painting and/or rejected any changes to the mural. Op-eds by University students supporting political correctness or social justice initiatives receive similar comments, a trend which may reflect a distancing of opinion between academia and the general public.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @ShimshockAndAwe
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.nbc29.com/story/31670979/jackie-sits-through-deposition-for-rolling-stone-lawsuit

‘Jackie’ Sits Through Deposition for Rolling Stone Lawsuit
Posted: Apr 07, 2016 4:41 PM CST

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va (WVIR) -

NBC29 has confirmed a secret deposition of the woman at the center of a now-retracted Rolling Stone magazine article went through Thursday. The woman known as “Jackie” spent hours getting questioned by attorneys on both sides of a federal defamation lawsuit.

Rolling Stone Magazine published "A Rape on Campus" by Sabrina Rubin Erdely in its issue for November 2014. In the article, a student known as "Jackie" described being gang raped at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house at UVA in September of 2012.

Jackie had previously refused to answer questions about her gang rape claims until a judge ordered her to do so this week.

The deposition was scheduled for Thursday but per a court order, details from it will be marked confidential.

Based off that order, Jackie’s deposition was supposed to happen at a mutually convenient location. Rolling Stone lawyers and lawyers for University of Virginia Associate Dean Nicole Eramo both got 3 hours and 30 minutes to ask questions.

Eramo is suing Rolling Stone, its publisher, and the author of that retracted article for defamation.

"In this case, Jackie clearly is a very important part. The initial story came from her, all the details came from her. It's very important to understand what the Rolling Stone did. Did they do a good job journalistically? Did they do a shoddy job and it's got to start with her and what she says,” said NBC29 Legal Analyst Lloyd Snook.

Snook says 90 percent of civil cases are settled before it reaches a jury. He adds this federal case really starts with Jackie and the story she told Rolling Stone magazine.

A federal judge was assigned to oversee Thursday’s deposition. The questioning was limited based off a hearing that happened on Monday in Roanoke.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/04/08/former-u-va-student-jackie-deposed-in-rolling-stone-lawsuit/

Former U-Va. student ‘Jackie’ deposed in Rolling Stone lawsuit
By T. Rees Shapiro April 8 at 8:31 PM

The lawsuit against Rolling Stone filed by University of Virginia associate dean Nicole Eramo proceeded this week with the deposition of the central figure of the magazine’s discredited account of a fraternity gang-rape.

The former U-Va. student known as “Jackie” in the 2014 Rolling Stone article sat for a lengthy deposition Thursday at an undisclosed location. A judge has barred lawyers and those involved with the case from discussing details of what Jackie said under-oath about her account of being assaulted.

Eramo filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Rolling Stone for what she described in legal filings as the magazine’s portrayal of her as callous and indifferent to Jackie’s claims. Rolling Stone retracted the article in 2015 after the Columbia Journalism School confirmed that the account was deeply flawed.

In court documents, Eramo’s lawyers described Jackie as a serial fabulist who made up her gang-rape allegations in a bizarre and unsuccessful scheme to win the pity and romantic interest of a classmate.

In a statement to The Washington Post, Eramo’s lawyers declined to comment on the details of the deposition.

“Although I’m not allowed to speak about the substance of what Jackie said during the deposition, I can say that we feel that Nicole’s case is very strong,” said Libby Locke, a lawyer for Eramo. “It got stronger after yesterday’s deposition. And we expect that it will continue to get stronger as we pursue discovery against Rolling Stone.”

Lawyers for Jackie did not return a request for comment.
T. Rees Shapiro is an education reporter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/10/473702981/revisiting-rolling-stone-s-discredited-campus-rape-story

Revisiting 'Rolling Stone's' Discredited Campus Rape Story
4:05

April 10, 20167:56 AM ET
Heard on Weekend Edition Sunday

T. Rees Shapiro, a Washington Post reporter who helped break the story, brings us updates on what's happened since the magazine retracted its story about a rape at the University of Virginia.

RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:

There are new developments in the story of the widely discredited 2014 Rolling Stone article about campus rape at the University of Virginia. The piece centered around one woman, an undergraduate identified as Jackie. She had claimed to have been raped. But when other news organizations started picking apart the reporting behind the Rolling Stone piece, her account came into question.

The magazine retracted the story, partly due to the reporting of T. Rees Shapiro of The Washington Post. He told me that since then, there have been three lawsuits filed against the magazine, the most significant by Nicole Eramo, an associate dean at UVA.

TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: She argued in her filing that she was portrayed as callous and indifferent to Jackie's claims that she'd been sexually assaulted. And she's sort of viewed in what she describes as sort of this villain in the piece which tries to show that the administration didn't do a lot in light of Jackie's claims.

So right now her lawsuit is still ongoing, and the latest development is that Jackie has been deposed for the case. And that means she had to answer statements under oath, in sworn testimony, that could possibly even be used at trial.

MARTIN: What has been the fallout for Rolling Stone, the magazine that published this piece in the first place? Did anyone lose their job over this?

SHAPIRO: One of the editors of the piece resigned, and that's sort of the most significant fallout. The writer of the piece, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, remains employed by the magazine. She was a contributing editor. And I don't know specifically why that would be, but I imagine that if she were fired or let go by the magazine, the other lawyers could argue that it clearly - the magazine clearly believed that she had some sort of fault in the publication. That's not the case, at least for now. More largely, obviously the magazine's reputation was damaged from its subsequent publication of the story they later had to retract. But other than that, its popularity doesn't seem to be diminished at all.

MARTIN: What about UVA? What's the vibe on campus? How do students feel about all of this?

SHAPIRO: It's a very tight-knit community. And even in the aftermath of the allegations sort of being shown to be untrue, there were still a lot of students on campus who rallied around Jackie and her cause. And there was even a, for a brief time, this sort of movement where they said, I stand with Jackie.

And they're torn because UVA students are not one to turn on each other obviously, but there is a lot of support on campus obviously for Nicole Eramo. She's a beloved figure. And so this is one of those strange moments where they're pitted necessarily against two members of the community.

MARTIN: And have you spoken with any members of the campus community who might work with victims of sexual assault about how this story and the complicated twists and turns of this, how it's affected that group of people, people who've survived sexual assault?

SHAPIRO: Actually right before I was beginning to do my investigation and to publish our first reports, I spoke with a number of advocates, students on campus who work in the, you know, sexual assault prevention sort of sphere, and they questioned me. You know, how will this affect us moving forward? Will this set us back a step, having to admit that perhaps, you know, the allegations that were described in Rolling Stone were false?

And false reporting about rapes, we know statistically, are extremely low nationwide. And these were survivors themselves coming to me. And they actually ended up answering the questions themselves. They came back and they said, you know what? No matter what, the truth is what matters the most. And I can tell just from my experience continuing to report at UVA that students are not coming forward at a pace any less. You know, it's not like all of a sudden women on campus don't feel comfortable reporting a sexual assault. That's in fact the opposite. If anything, it's created an atmosphere where they understand that it's OK to talk about it.

MARTIN: T. Rees Shapiro, a reporter with The Washington Post who's been covering all this. Thanks so much for talking with us, Taylor.

SHAPIRO: Thank you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.roanoke.com/news/virginia/eramo-s-request-to-toss-personal-attacks-in-jackie-deposition/article_a1f8b020-bbfe-573b-978d-fd4d322229e3.html

Eramo’s request to toss 'personal attacks' in 'Jackie' deposition called 'ironic'

Posted: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 10:51 pm

By Dean Seal The (Charlottesville) Daily Progress

CHARLTOTTESVILLE — The University of Virginia associate dean embroiled in a defamation lawsuit with Rolling Stone magazine is asking the court to throw out “personal attacks” made by a former student during a recent deposition.

An attorney for “Jackie” — the young woman whose allegations of a brutal gang rape at an off-campus fraternity party served as the centerpiece of a now-retracted magazine article, “A Rape on Campus” — filed documents in court on Tuesday opposing motions from Nicole Eramo, the UVa administrator who believes she was cast as a villain in the article.

Eramo filed the $7.85 million lawsuit against Rolling Stone in May.

After a heated war of words between Jackie and her former counselor, a judge ultimately sided with Eramo and ordered Jackie to comply and sit for a deposition. According to recent filings from Jackie, Eramo is now asking that “personal attacks” Jackie made during the deposition be thrown out of court, a move that Jackie’s counsel calls “ironic.”

“Dean Eramo chose to bring this lawsuit against [Rolling Stone] and decided to attempt to prevail by subjecting [Jackie], a third-party sexual assault victim, to unduly burdensome, overly broad and irrelevant discovery requests,” the motion reads. “Dean Eramo has sought to use the court and the press as vehicles to attack and re-victimize [Jackie] and now seeks to censor [Jackie] in connection with [Jackie’s] effort to invoke her rights and enforce the rule of law.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/22/obama-administration-knew-of-rolling-stone-rape-st/

Obama administration knew of Rolling Stone rape story before publication

Pressure mounts for congressional probe
By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro - The Washington Times - Wednesday, July 22, 2015

The Obama administration disclosed Tuesday it first learned about Rolling Stone's ill-fated story on campus rape in Sept. 2014, about two months before it was published, when reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely called seeking information on the government's investigation of the University of Virginia's handling of sexual assaults.

The revelation from the Department of Education came the same day that a media watchdog group asked congressional oversight committees to start an investigation into what the administration may have known about the story before and after it was published and what it did to address the concerns raised in the article.

"The larger question we raise regards the role of public officials: Was this contrived, indeed fabricated story, part of an orchestrated power grab over U.S. universities by administration officials intent on using a major publication as a political weapon?" the Institute on Government and Media Integrity wrote in a letter to Rep. John Kline, Minnesota Republican and House Education and the Workforce Committee chairman, and Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., the chairman of the Senate education committee.

The request could open the door for Congress to obtain access to documents that have also been sought by news reporters but so far have not been released.

White House officials who talked to The Washington Times on Tuesday said the administration had virtually no involvement in the story except to arrange a short interview between an Education Department official and Rolling Stone, which was supposed to be limited to a broad discussion about Title IX investigations and the Office of Civil Rights ongoing inquiry into UVa.

"In response to the [Rolling Stone] reporter's inquiry, the press office arranged an interview with Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon for Sept. 24, 2014. The interview focused on what it means to be under Title IX compliance review by the OCR. That was our only participation in the reporting of the Rolling Stone story, other than some fact checking about Title IX investigations once the story was written and ready for print. We did not suggest any other people for the reporter to talk to, and she did not tell us who she had interviewed for her story," the department said in a statement to The Times.

Administration officials also clarified Tuesday the relationship between the White House and a UVa. rape victims' advocate who has emerged as an important figure in the telling of a now-discredited story about a purported gang rape at a fraternity house on the Charlottesville campus.

Emily Renda, a UVa. graduate and adviser to the university on sexual assault issues, first disclosed the story of a student named "Jackie" during congressional testimony in the summer of 2014. She then introduced the woman (and four others) to Ms. Erdely, who made the victim's account the primary focus of her article in Nov. 2014, according to court filings by the magazine.

Police have since concluded there is no evidence such an attack occurred, and the magazine has retracted that story in what has become an embarrassing journalism debacle for Rolling Stone.

Ms. Renda has been publicly identified in media stories as an adviser to the White House Task Force on campus sexual assaults and testified to Congress that she was consulting with the task force.

A White House spokeswomen clarified that point to The Times on Tuesday, explaining that they did not consider Ms. Renda an "adviser" or "consultant," but rather a "stakeholder" who was invited to several of the task force's events to "share [her] views."

"The White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault is comprised of federal agencies. There are no nongovernmental individuals on the task force, and there were no formal outside advisers to the task force. The White House Office of Public Engagement and the Office of the Vice President, in the normal course of their outreach, have met with hundreds of stakeholders on sexual assault and related issues," a White House spokeswoman told The Times on the condition of anonymity.

She confirmed that Ms. Renda visited the White House on several occasions along with other "stakeholders."

White House entry logs show Ms. Renda visited the White House six times in 2014, the last time for a private group meeting of about 300 people with President Obama on Sept. 17, 2014.

Two days later, Ms. Erdely contacted the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) seeking information about the university's record of handling sexual assaults. The OCR's investigation of UVa. began in June 2011.

The Education Department official added that there was no relationship between Ms. Lhamon and Ms. Renda despite the two traveling in similar circles.

"Catherine [Lhamon] has never had one-on-one contact with Emily Renda, and they have only been in the same room a handful of times, including at a Feb. 2014 UVa. conference on sexual assault and a public congressional hearing on sexual assault. They have never corresponded by phone or email," the official said.

Ms. Renda confirmed that fact by telephone to The Times on Tuesday evening.


The institute that requested the congressional investigation was recently formed by a group of former journalists and lawyers concerned about the growing lack of independence between media outlets and the government and political figures they cover, according to spokesman George Landrith. It was inspired by the aftermath of the Rolling Stone debacle, he said.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
White House entry logs show Ms. Renda visited the White House six times in 2014, the last time for a private group meeting of about 300 people with President Obama on Sept. 17, 2014.

Two days later, Ms. Erdely contacted the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) seeking information about the university's record of handling sexual assaults. The OCR's investigation of UVa. began in June 2011.


A contrived story to help the narrative along?

One wonders if there was any federal connection to helping along the Duke story...?


Edited by Quasimodo, Apr 14 2016, 12:42 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://wtvr.com/2016/04/14/rolling-stone-suit-sets-off-war-of-words-between-two-women-in-rape-saga/


Rolling Stone suit sets off war of words between two women in ‘rape’ saga
Posted 6:48 pm, April 14, 2016, by CNN Wire

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — A lawsuit over Rolling Stone’s discredited story about an alleged frat house gang rape has set off a bitter war of words between two women at the center of the saga.

The latest shots were aimed at University of Virginia administrator Nicole Eramo who was accused by “Jackie,” the woman who claims she was the victim of the gang rape, of making “offensive, harmful, and untrue statements” in court and in the press.

“Dean Eramo should be ashamed of herself for her treatment of [Jackie], and for the impact her statements will have on all sexual assault victims, especially those at the University of Virginia,” Jackie’s lawyers said in the documents.
Related: Girl who cried UVa gang rape pretended to be her rapist to win a boy, lawyers say

Eramo is suing Rolling Stone over the way she was depicted in the 2014 story, “A Rape on Campus,” that set off a national firestorm before unraveling under scrutiny.

The scathing court document filed by Jackie’s attorneys this week came in response to a motion filed by Eramo on March 29, asking the court to strike “personal attacks” purportedly made by Jackie in court filings.

“It appears that Dean Eramo takes issue with anyone who expresses a negative opinion of her,” Jackie’s motion said.

Jackie’s attorneys called it “ironic” that Eramo asked the court to toss out “truthful statements that [Jackie] has been forced to make to defend herself.”

“Yet Dean Eramo fails to identify a single such statement that she seeks to have stricken from the record,” the motion continued.

The motion said that Eramo appears to take issue with a series of “uncontested facts” raised by Jackie, including a letter from the National Organization of Women denouncing Eramo’s treatment of Jackie and an unflattering conclusion by the the Office of Civil Rights on Eramo’s handling of sexual assault reports at UVA.

“[Jackie] is not surprised Dean Eramo would rather these facts not be publicized further,” the motion said.

The Rolling Stone story about the alleged rape quickly fell apart after it was published, and police in Charlottesville, Virginia, ultimately found no evidence that the rape occurred.

A report last year by Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism found major failures in Rolling Stone’s reporting on the story.

Jackie maintains that the rape did happen, and her attorneys have described her repeatedly in court papers as a “sexual assault victim.”

Her lawyers opposed a subpoena for Jackie to be deposed as part of Eramo’s suit against the magazine, arguing that the testimony could re-victimize their client. The judge presiding over the case didn’t agree, and Jackie was deposed last week. All records and transcripts from the deposition have been sealed.

Eramo’s attorneys have been highly critical of Jackie, calling her a “serial liar” in previous court filings. In the motion filed on Tuesday, Jackie’s counsel singled out one of Eramo’s attorneys, Libby Locke, for recent comments to the press — including a statement provided last week to CNNMoney.

Locke, the attorneys argued, “both attacked [Jackie] and mischaracterized the facts of this case, all at the expense of [Jackie], a non-party, sexual assault victim.”

In a statement to CNNMoney Thursday, Locke dismissed these accusations.

“Jackie’s latest filing is just part of her lawyers’ continuing pattern and practice of engaging in unprofessional ad hominem attacks. If anyone is to blame for mischaracterizing facts, it is Jackie and her lawyers,” Locke said. “The facts of the case have been well documented — both the Columbia Journalism Review and the Charlottesville police found no evidence to corroborate Jackie’s alleged assault, only a series of lies and a continued pattern of non-cooperation by Jackie about the night in question.”

An attorney for Jackie, Philip O’Beirne, declined to comment.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.nbc29.com/story/31996653/charlottesville-judge-reviewing-rolling-stone-magazines-argument

Charlottesville Judge Reviewing Rolling Stone Magazine's Argument
Posted: May 17, 2016 2:31 PM CST
Updated: May 17, 2016 4:13 PM CST

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va (WVIR) -

On Tuesday a Charlottesville judge reviewed Rolling Stone's argument to throw out a defamation lawsuit filed by a fraternity at the University of Virginia.

The case stems from a now retracted Rolling Stone article about a gang rape in the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house.

Attorneys for Rolling Stone and the article's author, Sabrina Erdley, made their argument before a Charlottesville judge Tuesday morning.

They're facing a $25 million defamation suit from Phi Kappa Psi at UVA.

The fraternity says the November 2014 article destroyed its reputation by focusing on a student named Jackie and her claims she was gang raped at the Phi Kappa Psi house.

Lawyers for Rolling Stone argued the allegations in the article did not smear the fraternity as an organization, but instead focused on a few bad individuals. They say a reasonable person reading the article would not take away the idea that Phi Kappa Psi supported gang rape.

In court, the fraternity's attorneys read several sentences from the article that they say paint the fraternity as "out of control" and "predatory".

Several members of the fraternity were in the courtroom for the hearing.

The judge asked to take some time to read the full article and consider the arguments from both sides. He promised to rule on the magazine's request to throw out the suit as soon as possible.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/attorneys-debate-portrayal-of-uva-fraternity-in-rolling-stone-article/article_530f2cd4-2de9-5635-a69a-5b5bfccac7a1.html

Attorneys debate portrayal of UVa fraternity in Rolling Stone article

BY DEAN SEAL | Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 8:40 pm

One of the three outstanding lawsuits facing Rolling Stone related to a now-retracted story that rocked the University of Virginia was back in court on Tuesday.

Counsel for the university’s chapter of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity faced off with attorneys for the magazine, its publisher and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely on Tuesday morning to discuss objections to the $25 million defamation lawsuit filed last November against Rolling Stone.

The fraternity alleges that it was unduly maligned by the magazine’s November 2014 release of “A Rape on Campus,” a 9,000-word article penned by Erdely about the climate of sexual assault at American universities. The article’s centerpiece is the story of a UVa first-year named “Jackie” who describes a night in which she was invited to a party at Phi Kappa Psi’s off-Grounds fraternity house and brutally gang-raped by seven men in an upstairs bedroom.

The article’s release created a firestorm of controversy and outrage from the UVa community; protests were led by students and faculty alike outside of Phi Kappa Psi house, and university President Teresa A. Sullivan promptly suspended Greek life for the remainder of the fall semester. Unidentified protesters vandalized the fraternity house and levied a deluge of threats against its inhabitants, leading them to vacate the residence.

Weeks after its release, the story began to unravel as media outlets found substantial flaws in Jackie’s story, and by early December 2014, the magazine stated that it had “misplaced” its trust in Jackie. After an investigation by Charlottesville police that turned up no evidence of Jackie’s claims and a scathing review of the story by the Columbia University journalism school, Rolling Stone retracted the story in April 2015. Its editor, Will Dana, resigned the following July.

In the months since the retraction, the magazine has been hit with three lawsuits. UVa administrator Nicole Eramo, characterized in the article as being ineffective and indifferent to survivors of sexual assault as part of her duties as an associate dean, filed a defamation lawsuit in May seeking $7.85 million. Then in July, three alumni, all Phi Kappa Psi members, filed a defamation lawsuit claiming they were subjected to “vicious and hurtful attacks” after the article’s publication.

When UVa’s Phi Kappa Psi chapter filed its own lawsuit in November, it alleged that all of its members had become the object of “an avalanche of condemnation worldwide” since the article’s release and that the fraternity’s membership and reputation had been severely damaged. It accused Erdely and the magazine of having “set out in advance to find a sensational story of graphic and violent rape” and intentionally avoiding sourcing to corroborate Jackie’s story.

Since its filing, attorneys for the magazine have made objections to the contents of the lawsuit, saying that “A Rape on Campus” could not have been reasonably interpreted as a censure of the fraternity so much as a critical look at the sexual assault reporting system in place at UVa.

In Tuesday’s court hearing, the magazine’s counsel further objected to the notion that a reasonable reader would come away from the article believing that Phi Kappa Psi maintained an “institutional policy of systematic gang rape” as part of an initiation ritual into the fraternity.

Before attorneys for the fraternity could respond, Judge Richard Moore commented that, after his initial reading of the article, he believed there was a clear implication that the fraternity was the story’s primary villain.

“Don’t you come away thinking … why didn’t the university do something about this frat?” Moore said. “That’s why it was so earth-shaking.”

The magazine’s counsel disagreed, but attorneys for the fraternity quickly stepped in to say that Moore’s initial reaction to the article spoke volumes about the matter at hand. They went on to read sentences from the article that appeared to directly implicate Jackie’s assailants as members or prospective members of the fraternity and pointed to Erdely’s comments during a Sirius XM interview, in which she said the story about Jackie’s assault “would lead one to believe it was some kind of initiation ritual.”

The two sides invoked several historic cases dealing with the extent to which an organization is responsible for the actions of its members before Moore stated that he would need more time to review the case before making a decision on the defense’s objections.

While Moore promised to be prompt, he added that it could be weeks before he can make an official ruling due to his busy court schedule. If he rules in favor of the fraternity, the case will move into the discovery phase. A 10-day trial is currently scheduled for October 2017.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/05/18/lawyers-in-rolling-stone-lawsuit-file-new-evidence-that-jackie-created-fake-persona/?tid=sm_tw

Lawyers in Rolling Stone lawsuit file new evidence that ‘Jackie’ created fake persona
By T. Rees Shapiro May 18 at 6:09 PM

New evidence shows that a University of Virginia student who alleged that she was gang raped at a campus fraternity created the fake persona of the alleged ringleader of the attack, according to lawyers representing a U-Va. official who is suing Rolling Stone magazine for defamation.

The legal team representing U-Va. assistant dean Nicole Eramo filed the new evidence Monday in federal court in a case involving the magazine’s retracted portrayal of the incident and the university’s handling of sexual assaults on the Charlottesville campus. The magazine published the 9,000 word account in 2014, and it centered on claims by a U-Va. student, named Jackie, that she’d been gang-raped as a freshman in a fraternity house in September 2012.

In the filing, Eramo’s lawyers submitted new data from Yahoo concerning an e-mail account linked to “Haven Monahan,” the man Jackie identified to friends as the perpetrator of her assault. An investigation by the Charlottesville Police revealed that no person by that name has ever been a student at U-Va., and Eramo’s lawyers have presented evidence in court documents indicating that he is a figment of Jackie’s imagination.

Ryan Duffin, a student who knew Jackie at U-Va., told The Washington Post that he believed that the character was created by Jackie in an effort to attract Duffin’s romantic interest, a tactic known as “catfishing.”

Duffin said that Jackie told him and other friends that Monahan was a junior she met through a chemistry class. Duffin said that he exchanged messages with “Haven,” who spent much of his time talking about how Jackie had a crush on a fellow freshman named Ryan. In late September of their freshman year, Jackie claimed that “Haven” assaulted her after a dinner date.

Also, photographs that were texted to one of Jackie’s friends showing the alleged attacker were actually pictures depicting one of Jackie’s high school classmates in Northern Virginia. That man, now a student at a university in another state, confirmed to The Post that the photographs were of him and said he barely knew Jackie and hadn’t been to Charlottesville for many years.

The data from Yahoo that Eramo’s lawyers acquired via subpoena shows that the e-mail account “Haven.monahan@yahoo.com” was created on Oct. 2, 2012 while connected to U-Va.’s computer network. The next day, Duffin received an e-mail from “Haven” passing on a letter Jackie had written to “Haven” about Duffin. In the letter, Jackie confesses her love for Duffin.

After filing the lawsuit, Eramo’s lawyers asked Jackie and her legal team to hand over all documents in their possession related to “Haven.” In multiple responses, Jackie’s lawyers wrote that they had already given Eramo’s legal team everything they had.

“We have taken the necessary and appropriate steps to collect, maintain and produce documents consistent with our discovery obligations,” wrote Rebecca Anzidei, one of Jackie’s lawyers from the Stein Mitchell Muse Cipollone & Beato law firm. “To be clear, Respondent is not withholding any responsive documents relating to the category identified in your letter.”

In the most recent court filing, Eramo’s lawyers note, however, that the data from Yahoo shows that someone on the Stein Mitchell law firm’s network accessed the Haven.Monahan@yahoo.com e-mail address on March 18, 2016. Four days later, Eramo’s lawyers assert in court filings, Jackie’s lawyers sent another letter indicating “that Jackie was not in possession of these emails.”

Jackie’s lawyers did not respond to a request for comment.

In the new court filing, Eramo’s lawyers write that the data from Yahoo leads to “only one logical conclusion: Jackie is ‘Haven Monahan.'”

Data also shows that Jackie has not complied fully with a court order to hand over everything in her possession for evidence that could be used in the trial for the lawsuit, Eramo’s lawyer wrote. They have deposed her, under court order, regarding the Rolling Stone story, but parties to the lawsuit have been barred from discussing that deposition.

Eramo’s lawyers claim that Jackie is “a serial liar who invented” her account of being raped by seven fraternity brothers participating in a hazing ritual that had left her bloodied and emotionally scarred.

“Jackie was the primary source for Rolling Stone’s false and defamatory article that included her story about being the victim of a violent sexual assault,” Libby Locke, one of Eramo’s attorneys, told The Post earlier this year. “But there is no evidence whatsoever that the story that Jackie told her friends, or the very different story she told Rolling Stone, actually transpired. Instead, it appears that Jackie fabricated her perpetrator and the details of the alleged assault.”

Eramo filed her lawsuit a year ago, seeking more than $7.5 million in damages for what her lawyers describe as the magazine’s false portrayal of the associate dean as callous and indifferent to Jackie’s sexual assault allegations. Eramo’s lawyers have requested communications between Jackie and Rolling Stone, as well as the student’s correspondence with U-Va. staff.

After apologizing for inconsistencies in the account, Rolling Stone officially retracted the article in April 2015. Rolling Stone has declined to comment on the case.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.roanoke.com/news/education/higher_education/jackie-withholding-documents-in-rolling-stone-case-lawyers-for-uva/article_1fcb9193-1d51-5ff1-812c-cfff02e3944a.html

'Jackie' withholding documents in Rolling Stone case, lawyers for UVa associate dean say

Posted: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:06 pm

By DEAN SEAL The (Charlottesville) Daily Progress

CHARLOTTESVILLE — The University of Virginia associate dean currently suing Rolling Stone magazine is accusing “Jackie” and her attorneys of disobeying a court order, and it appears they have proof.

Attorneys for Nicole Eramo, the UVa administrator who filed a $7.85 million lawsuit against the magazine last May, submitted a motion on Monday to hand over supplemental documents that they say show that Jackie, a third party in the suit, has withheld documents that are being sought as part of a federal court order.

Jackie’s story of her brutal gang rape by seven men at a fraternity party served as the centerpiece of “A Rape on Campus,” a 9,000-word article on the climate of sexual assault at American universities that was released in November 2014, stirring up widespread controversy and condemnation of UVa and its Greek life. When key elements of Jackie’s story were disputed by other media outlets, a Charlottesville police investigation and a review by the Columbia University journalism school, the magazine backpedaled on its support of Jackie’s account and, in April 2015, retracted the story.

Eramo, an administrator tasked with providing support for student survivors of sexual assault, said her career, reputation and personal health suffered after the highly publicized article inaccurately portrayed her as ineffective and uncaring in her dealings with Jackie, and she filed a defamation suit against the magazine, its publisher and the story’s author a month after the article’s retraction.

While she is not named as a defendant in the case, Jackie has been a frequent subject of Eramo’s court proceedings since the initial filing. Eramo has sought to have Jackie turn over all communications related to her alleged rape and to sit for a deposition, but those motions have been challenged at every step by Jackie’s attorneys, who have long stated that their client should be excused from participating in the lawsuit, given her status as a third party and as a victim of sexual assault.

In January, the court ordered Jackie to comply with Eramo’s subpoena and therefore turn over any requested communications in her possession, including communications between Ryan Duffin, a friend of Jackie’s around the time of her alleged rape, and someone named “Haven Monahan,” the man identified in the article as having allegedly brought Jackie to the fraternity house and participated in her assault.

The Charlottesville Police Department’s investigation into Jackie’s claims said authorities never found evidence that Monahan ever existed, and Eramo’s attorneys have long contended that Monahan is a love interest invented by Jackie.

Since that January order, Eramo’s attorneys say they still have not received any of the communications related to Haven Monahan, and that Jackie’s counsel refuses to state whether Jackie did in fact author any of the Haven Monahan documents that are known to exist.

According to a series of emails obtained through court records, the two sides of counsel maintained a contentious back-and-forth from mid to late March about the Haven Monahan documents, with Eramo’s attorneys insisting they have evidence that Jackie penned the communications and have access to them, and Jackie’s attorneys maintaining they have fulfilled their obligation to turn over all of the documents in Jackie’s possession.

“But to be clear, this isn’t a negotiation,” states Andy Phillips, one of Eramo’s attorneys, in an email from March 21. “There is an outstanding, unambiguous court order that requires you to produce certain documents that you and I (and the Court) know exist. … You have not told me why you have not produced those documents.”

“To be clear, I never stated that I was seeking a negotiation,” Rebecca Anzidei, one of Jackie’s attorneys, replied the following evening. “As we have already explained, [Jackie] is not withholding any responsive, non-privileged documents. We continue to believe that any motion filed with the court would be baseless and a waste of time and resources.”

A week after this exchange, Eramo’s attorneys issued a subpoena to Yahoo! Inc. seeking information associated with the email account “haven.monahan@yahoo.com.” Yahoo responded to the subpoena on April 23, providing Eramo with the IP addresses from which the email was accessed and the corresponding dates and times.

According to court documents, Yahoo showed that the email account was created in Charlottesville at an IP address “allocated to the University of Virginia” on Oct. 2, 2012, only one day before that same account sent an email to Jackie’s friend Ryan Duffin.

Yahoo further showed that the Monahan email had last been accessed from an IP address in Washington, D.C., that was “allocated to ALTG, Stein, Mitchell, Muse & Cipollone LLP” — the same firm representing Jackie — on March 18, days before and after Jackie’s counsel stated they were not in possession of the Haven Monahan documents.

Eramo’s attorneys state that the Yahoo subpoena “definitively and conclusively” proves that Jackie created the email account and that her counsel has had access to the account all along without telling the court.

Eramo’s counsel reached out to Jackie’s on May 2, providing Yahoo’s findings and again demanding the Haven Monahan communications. Jackie’s counsel again responded that they had complied with the January court order and that Yahoo’s findings “[do] not alter or change the above facts in any way,” according to a letter from Anzidei sent on May 6.

Anzidei has not responded to calls for comment on the matter.

In their Monday filing, Eramo’s attorneys said they believe sanctions against Jackie’s counsel at Stein, Mitchell, Muse & Cipollone LLP are “warranted and appropriate.” Eramo’s attorneys could not be reached for comment on the matter.

Rolling Stone is facing two other lawsuits related to the retracted article: one from the UVa chapter of Phi Kappa Psi and another from three alumni fraternity members.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply