"Jackie" of Rolling Stone false rape scandal ordered to testify

ShootSpeeders

Gold Member
May 13, 2012
20,232
2,363
280
Why is the media and govt still withholding the identity of "jackie".? Why do we protect monsters who lie about rape?

‘Rolling Stone' Magazine’s 'Jackie' to Appear in Court

feb 21 2016 A Virginia judge has ordered "Jackie" of Rolling Stone 's now-retracted expose about an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia to appear in court to be deposed.

"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.

The woman 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 the writer of the expose, "A Rape on Campus," Sabrina Rubin Erdely.

Three days after "A Rape on Campus" was published, the university suspended all fraternities and canceled all fraternal activities. But the article came under scrutiny soon afterward, with the fraternity where the alleged rape was said to have taken place, Phi Kappa Psi, telling reporters the events described by Erdely never occurred.

As new details emerged, the magazine distanced itself from the story. A local police investigation found " no evidence " to support "Jackie's" claims. Rolling Stone retracted the story and asked the Columbia School of Journalism to conduct a review to determine where the magazine went wrong.
 
This is good news for what little is left of 'journalistic integrity' in this Country.

Which isn't a lot.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
Has there EVER been a truthful rape accusation? Seems like every one of them turns out to be a scam to get money out of a guy. As long as the govt and media support false rape accusers, this crime epidemic will go on
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
[
BS, utter. Rape happens much more than it is even reported, let alone false reports. Men are monsters.

If it's not reported, how do you know about it.?

Hell - nobody even knows what rape is anymore as the word has been broadened to include nearly everything. "I said yes but i was drunk, and that makes it rape and i want a million dollars."
 
[
BS, utter. Rape happens much more than it is even reported, let alone false reports. Men are monsters.

If it's not reported, how do you know about it.?

Hell - nobody even knows what rape is anymore as the word has been broadened to include nearly everything. "I said yes but i was drunk, and that makes it rape and i want a million dollars."
In legal terms drunk people cannot grant consent. We know what rape is but like porn we know it when we see it. If she's drunk and you don't know her well, walk away.
 
Has there EVER been a truthful rape accusation?
Do grow up, please...

HAHAHA. The board notes you evaded the question i asked. Even you know the answer. False rape accusation is everywhere.
BS, utter. Rape happens much more than it is even reported, let alone false reports. Men are monsters.

There be bitches out there & lots of em that easily rise to the level of what you refer to as monsters.

Where I come from we call em bull dykes. They love to latch onto old men, take everything they got, abuse the shit out of them in the process, & put em in the ground.

Just saying
 
Hell - nobody even knows what rape is anymore as the word has been broadened to include nearly everything. "I said yes but i was drunk, and that makes it rape and i want a million dollars."
In legal terms drunk people cannot grant consent. We know what rape is but like porn we know it when we see it. If she's drunk and you don't know her well, walk away.

That's BS. What qualifies as drunk anyway? The burden of proof should be on the woman to show she was drunk but the courts just take her word!!! THINK
 
They should keep her identity secret to prevent wackoos like the OP from acting on his hatred
 
In legal terms drunk people cannot grant consent.
Not quite true. In Virginia (since that's the subject of the OP) the definition of rape is
§ 18.2-61. Rape
"If any person has sexual intercourse with a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in sexual intercourse with any other person and such act is accomplished (i) against the complaining witness's will, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person; or (ii) through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness; or (iii) with a child under age 13 as the victim, he or she shall be guilty of rape." Emphasis mine.
Mental Incapacity is defined in § 18.2-67.10. General definitions. as "Mental incapacity" means that condition of the complaining witness existing at the time of an offense under this article which prevents the complaining witness from understanding the nature or consequences of the sexual act involved in such offense and about which the accused knew or should have known."

While some severe states of drunkeness might qualify under that definition or ""Physical helplessness" means unconsciousness or any other condition existing at the time of an offense under this article which otherwise rendered the complaining witness physically unable to communicate an unwillingness to act and about which the accused knew or should have known." it's simply not true that "drunk people cannot grant consent."

Choosing the more liberal state of California: PENAL CODE SECTION 261-269 if a person is drunk, sexual intercourse is only rape if "a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused.[/url]
 

Forum List

Back
Top