The explosive account in Rolling Stone of a brutal gang rape at University of Virginia fraternity lost more credibility Friday as the fraternity ’”vehemently” challenged key facts in the story and the magazine’s editor expressed doubts about the key source and apologized for “discrepancies.”
Managing editor Will Dana said in a letter to readers Friday that his trust in the source for the story, identified only as “Jackie,” was “misplaced,” about an hour before the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity issued a statement rebutting information in the Nov. 19 article, “A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA.”
“In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced,” Mr. Dana said in the letter.
“We were trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault and now regret the decision to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account,” Mr. Dana continued. “We are taking this seriously and apologize to anyone who was affected by the story.”
In its first extended response to the allegations in the 9,000-word article, the U.Va. fraternity at the center of the controversy added to the number of details from the victim’s account that have been questioned in multiple publications since the article was published.
The Virginia Alpha Chapter of Phi Kappa Psi said in a statement that the fraternity “did not have a date function or a social event during the weekend of September 28, 2012,” when the gang-rape allegedly occurred at the fraternity house.
The Rolling Stone article by contributing editor Sabrina Rubin Erdely relied on the account of a first-year student identified as “Jackie,” who said she was raped by seven men upstairs at the fraternity house Sept. 28, 2012, during a party.
In addition, the fraternity said that none of its members worked at the university’s Aquatic and Fitness Center as a lifeguard in 2012. The story reported that “Jackie” attended the party with “Drew,” who lured her upstairs, and that they both worked as lifeguards at the U.Va. pool.
While saying it supported the continuing investigation into the incident, the fraternity also said that its pledge and initiation activities take place during the spring, not the fall. It took particular exception to the claim in the article that the gang rape was part of a fraternity initiation program for new pledges.
“Moreover, no ritualized sexual assault is part of our pledging and initiation process. This notion is vile, and we vehemently refute this claim,” says the statement.
Initial outcry
The article, which criticized what it described as the university’s botched response to the alleged assault and the school’s history of indifference to sexual misconduct, touched off an outcry at U.Va. and drew national attention to the school’s so-called “party culture.”
The university had no immediate response to the Rolling Stone apology and fraternity statement, but the account has roiled the Charlottesville school, sparking protests shortly after the story appeared and fueling demands from students, faculty and alumni for a crackdown on sexual misconduct.
University President Teresa Sullivan reacted by suspending all of the school’s fraternities and sororities until Jan. 9 and promising “a new student sexual misconduct policy and a related training program, a campus climate survey, and an in-depth bystander intervention program,” she said in a Nov. 19 statement.
Emily Renda, project coordinator of sexual assault response and prevention for the Vice President and Chief Student Affairs Officer, told the Cavalier Daily, the student newspaper, that the “slipshod” Rolling Stone account may make reporting rape more difficult.
“It’s an advocate’s job to believe and support, never to play investigator or adjudicator,” said Ms. Renda in an email to the newspaper. “I didn’t and don’t question Jackie’s credibility because that is not my role. Rolling Stone played adjudicator, investigator and advocate — and did a slipshod job at that. As a result Jackie suffers, the young men in Phi Kappa Psi suffered, and survivors everywhere can unfairly be called into question.”
Added Ms. Renda, a recent graduate who was quoted in the original article, “We still have to build a culture of support and reporting so that justice can be done right and survivors can find healing. Rolling Stone has run roughshod over years of advocacy, over fairness and justice, and ultimately, over Jackie.”
Ms. Erdely could not be reached immediately for comment Friday. The Washington Post, in a long account published online Friday, quoted Jackie as saying the magazine pressed her to put details of her assault on the record, and refused her request to remove her story shortly before publication.
In its statement, the fraternity said its undergraduate members have worked with the Charlottesville Police Department in its investigation of the allegations.
“Our initial doubts as to the accuracy of the article have only been strengthened as alumni and undergraduate members have delved deeper,” the statement said.
“We continue to be shocked by the allegations and saddened by this story,” said the fraternity. “We have no knowledge of these alleged acts being committed at our house or by our members. Anyone who commits any form of sexual assault, wherever or whenever, should be identified and brought to justice.”
Rising scrutiny
The Rolling Stone article has come under scrutiny in the past two weeks by journalists and pundits who have raised questions about the account’s credibility and a lack of verification from sources other than “Jackie,” who remains anonymous.
“Is the U.Va. rape story a gigantic hoax?” says the headline on a Dec. 1 article in Reason magazine by editor Robby Soave.
Leading the skeptics is Richard Bradley, editor-in-chief of Worth magazine, who scrutinized the article in a Nov. 24 blog post entitled, “Is the Rolling Stone Story True?”
“Let me be very clear: I don’t doubt that it’s possible that this happened. People can do terrible things, things that one doesn’t want to believe happen. And I certainly don’t want to think that this could have happened,” Mr. Bradley wrote “But more than that: I don’t believe that it happened — certainly not in the way that it is recounted.”
Since then, the account has been called into question by pundits who include Rod Dreher in the American Conservative, Jonah Goldberg in the Los Angeles Times, Howard Kurtz at FoxNews.com, and Rich Lowry in Politico.
Ms. Erdely has been criticized for failing to contact any of the seven men who allegedly committed the rape on a floor littered with glass shards as part of a fraternity-initiation rite, although at least two of the perpetrators were known to “Jackie.” The fraternity’s local chapter and a representative from the national office were quote, though neither had first-hand knowledge of the incident.
Even writers for liberal Slate magazine, Allison Benedikt and Hanna Rosin, took issue with that lapse in a Dec. 2 post.
“If you fail to reach the person, you write a sentence explaining that you tried — and explaining how you tried — as a way to assure your readers that you gave the person a chance to defend themselves. We’re not sure why Rolling Stone didn’t think that was necessary,” said the article.
— Andrea Noble contributed to this report.
• Kellan Howell can be reached at khowell@washingtontimes.com.
• Valerie Richardson can be reached at vrichardson@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.