◼ Washington Post's dismantling of Rolling Stone rape exposé continues apace - T. Becket Adams/Washington Examiner
◼ There have been many low moments in the history of modern journalism, but this must be one of the lowest. - JOHN HINDERAKER/POWERLINE
As investigation into Rolling Stone’s sensational story about an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia continues, the story unravels further. The Washington Post has interviewed the three friends who saw the alleged victim, Jackie, after the alleged assault. They say that their interactions with her were completely different from the utterly implausible callousness described by Sabrina Erdely, Rolling Stone’s reporter.◼ U-Va. students challenge Rolling Stone account of alleged sexual assault - Washington Post
Most damning is the fact that what Jackie told them about what happened to her was totally different from what Erdely reported. No fraternity was mentioned. Jackie told her friends she was going on a dinner date with an upperclassman that night, but it seems clear that the person she described was an imaginary friend, complete with photographs of someone she barely knew in high school, taken apparently from a social media site. It turned out, too, that the name that Jackie gave for the person with whom she had a date on the night of the alleged rape was not the name of anyone who has ever attended the University of Virginia. Subsequently, she gave a different name for the person with whom she had the alleged date....
◼ Rape and Rolling Stone - The Editors at National Review
Consider the almost comically inept, and entirely unethical, reporting of Rolling Stone in the matter of the gang-rape allegation at the University of Virginia: the university’s ham-fisted overreaction in suspending all fraternities and sororities; the enraged protests; the subsequent media firestorms and sociological navel-gazing; and — most important — the fact that all of the preceding was based on a fiction that nobody bothered to try to verify. Taken together, that constitutes an excellent argument for something we already know: that there is only one public institution well suited to dealing with rape and other crimes, and it is the criminal-justice system.◼ Rolling Stone UVA Reporter: I Shop Around For Victims [VIDEO] - Alex Griswold/Daily Caller
The odd and lamentable encroachment of deans of students and other university administrators into a field that is properly the responsibility of police and prosecutors is a worst-of-both-worlds outcome...
A new video, uncovered by GotNews founder and conservative activist Charles Johnson, depicts the author of the debunked Rolling Stone University of Virginia rape story saying that she “absolutely” shops around for stories that fit the narratives she wants to tell. (RELATED: UVA Gang Rape Story Falls To Pieces, Rolling Stone Admits It Was Fooled)◼ No wonder Jackie wanted Rolling Stone to take her out of the story before it was published - Neoneocon
...“Yes, I absolutely do. In fact, I’m working on one right now where that’s the case,” Erdley replied. “That’s something I’ve done a lot when I’ve written for women’s magazines, where I’ve written a lot about women’s health and women’s rights.”
She gave the example of how she once wanted to write about domestic violence, but was looking for the perfect victim to share their story.
“It’s very hard when you find a topic, and then you want to find the story,” she continued. “Because then you want to find the right story.” She explained how she sometimes has to hold pre-interviews and “tryouts” to find the right victim....
After reading this article in the WaPo, we can safely say that it now appears likely that UVA’s Jackie didn’t just lie about whether she was raped at a fraternity. She appears to have lied about almost everything connected with whatever did or did not happen during some sort of incident that may or may not have occurred, and about the immediate aftermath.
Other than that, a very believable narrator.
Or maybe it was reporter Erdely who is responsible for some of the lies. At this point, we can be forgiven if we have trouble sorting it out....
There’s more, lots more, but you get the idea. It’s becoming more and more apparent that Jackie is most likely a fabulist, perhaps with some pre-existing mental/emotional problems, that it’s time for Erdely and the editors at Rolling Stone to choose another profession. However, I wonder whether there will be any repercussions for any of this.
