Luke Skywalker
Super Moderator
{vb:raw ozzmodz_postquote}:
Rolling Stone is trying to dig out of the deep hole it's in after its backlashed story on an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia, Sen. Claire McCaskill called the piece "bad journalism" and a "setback" for rape survivors. VPC
Garrett Durig, a fourth year student at the University of Virginia, walks across campus on December 6, 2014 in Charlottesville, Virginia.(Photo: Jay Paul, Getty Images)
The three friends of a University of Virginia student whose description of a fraternity gang rape was chronicled in a controversial Rolling Stone article are challenging the woman's harrowing account.
"Randall," "Andy" and "Cindy," as they were identified in Rolling Stone, tell The Washington Post the article's description of the events did not match the story their friend "Jackie" told them that night. They also denied they discouraged her from reporting the 2012 attack, a key element of the article's theme that U.Va.'s culture discourages reporting.
"It didn't happen that way at all," Andy told the Post.
The Rolling Stone piece, A Rape on Campus, drew worldwide attention to the very real problem of sexual assault on the nation's college campuses. However, discrepancies in Jackie's story soon surfaced and the magazine drew criticism for failing to sufficiently check it out. The fraternity named in the story later denied the assault took place and said they had no party on the night in question. Jackie has since said she is not certain she named the correct fraternity.
In a Post story published late Wednesday, the friends say they received a panicked call from Jackie, then a "first-year," at 1 a.m. the night of the party. They said she appeared traumatized, "saying her date ended horrifically, with the older student parking his car at his fraternity, asking her to come inside and then forcing her to perform oral sex on five men," the Post reports.
But the friends say Jackie refused their request that she seek help. Still, two said they stayed with her that night.
USA TODAY
Rolling Stone retraction complicates fraught rape story
USA TODAY
U.Va. not the only university with a Greek problem
"The students also expressed suspicions about Jackie's allegations from that night," the Post said. "They said the name she provided as that of her date did not match anyone at the university, and U.Va. officials confirmed to the Post that no one by that name has attended the school."
The friends told the Post that Rolling Stone never tried to contact them. The article says that Cindy in particular discouraged reporting the attack — "Is that such a good idea?" Cindy is quoted as saying that night. "Her reputation will be shot for the next four years."
The students said they tried their best to help Jackie that night. And they don't dispute that something horrible happened to Jackie that night.
"She had very clearly just experienced a horrific trauma," Randall told the Post. "I had never seen anybody acting like she was on that night before, and I really hope I never have to again. ... If she was acting on the night of Sept. 28, 2012, then she deserves an Oscar."
Rolling Stone managing editor Will Dana has published a lengthy clarification on the original story, saying magazine fact-checkers and editors should have worked hard to verify details of the story — and should not have honored Jackie's request not to contact the alleged assailants.
"These mistakes are on Rolling Stone, not on Jackie," Dana wrote. "We apologize to anyone who was affected by the story and we will continue to investigate the events of that evening."
Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed