Phi Kappa Psi at U of Virginia Voluntarily Suspends Activities

[squirrely girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

It would be impossible to compile statistics like that, but in my practice, this is not at all uncommon.

So basically what you're saying here is your position and perspectives are pretty clearly influenced by sampling bias.

[honorgal]

Originally Posted by squirrely girl

There is a HUGE difference between making errors on some of the details of a situation and the situation not having happened at all. This is the most basic of memory research, particularly in terms of memory for traumatic events.

When the primary "evidence" for suggesting it didn't happen is A) the fraternity SAYING they didn't have a party that night, and B) SAYING they didn't have a member with a role at the Aquatic center on campus, I think you're stretching pretty darn far to suggest it "doesn't look like it happened."

Why is what the fraternity is saying suddenly somehow more relevant or believable than what the woman is saying?

We are way past the point of the primary evidence being anything the fraternity has claimed. You might need to catch up on the latest reporting.

[robinseggblue]

Originally Posted by navane

IF she is found to have lied, then I will struggle to understand why she deserves to receive protection for her identity. The only reason I'm reading here so far is that real rape victims may not want to report their cases due to fear of being outed. Ok, I get that.

We are still not sure she lied.

Originally Posted by navane

Here's the thing - I'm going to look at it from the man's perspective. Is it fair for a woman to falsely accuse a man of rape only to have his name and organization publicly smeared and have people conduct protests against him? Then, when his accuser is found to be a liar, be told, "Oh well, sorry. We're not going to release the name of the person who ruined your reputation and life to protect the unnamed, hypothetical, future rape victims that may or may not be telling the truth as well". That would be BS.

The guys who supposedly participated in this were not named so anything you say about naming perpetrators is out of place.

Yes the organization was named. But her organization was named too (UVa anti-rape org...whatever, forgot the name). If she was lying then that organization will be publicly smeared. That's Jackie's equivalent to a fraternity because it's her source of support in the community. And the community can blame it and protest for encouraging making up reports, whatever they feel.

But there's still a big difference in having a name released and having an organization's name released.

[PinkSkyAtNight]

There is no doubt that Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin-Ederly are going to face civil consequences for their lack of due dillingence, and possible willful intent to smear Phi Kappa Psi.

But proving that Jackie was maliciously trying to smear the fraternities and the greek community in general, will be very difficult to prove. Unless there is more evidence along the lines of an admission that she made up the whole thing, I find it doubtful that she will even face any kind of university hearing. Even if there is, we will probably never learn about it, because it will probably remain confidential.

If her friends have solid evidence of catfishing or the fact that she conspired to libel a fraternity or certain individuals all along, they really should come out and use their real names, it would seriously give them more credibility.

It was mentioned that the fraternity could have been shut down with no investigation or recourse.... but that didn't happen. Actually, the exact opposite happened. The national office and locals clearly did their own legwork, as did the Washington Post; and if the university had investigated, they could or perhaps did present these findings. If anything, they come out ahead for suspending themselves, remaining calm and non-retaliatory, all while people were spray-painting and vandalizing their house.

Everyone should sit back, let the dust settle, and let more facts come out. Because with each layer of the onion, the accuser looks worse, and if greeks can remain calm and not take a completely defensive position, in the long run we look better.

[honorgal]

Originally Posted by PinkSkyAtNight

There is no doubt that Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin-Ederly are going to face civil consequences for their lack of due dillingence, and possible willful intent to smear Phi Kappa Psi.

But proving that Jackie was maliciously trying to smear the fraternities and the greek community in general, will be very difficult to prove. Unless there is more evidence along the lines of an admission that she made up the whole thing, I find it doubtful that she will even face any kind of university hearing. Even if there is, we will probably never learn about it, because it will probably remain confidential.

If her friends have solid evidence of catfishing or the fact that she conspired to libel a fraternity or certain individuals all along, they really should come out and use their real names, it would seriously give them more credibility.

It was mentioned that the fraternity could have been shut down with no investigation or recourse.... but that didn't happen. Actually, the exact opposite happened. The national office and locals clearly did their own legwork, as did the Washington Post; and if the university had investigated, they could or perhaps did present these findings. If anything, they come out ahead for suspending themselves, remaining calm and non-retaliatory, all while people were spray-painting and vandalizing their house.

Everyone should sit back, let the dust settle, and let more facts come out. Because with each layer of the onion, the accuser looks worse, and if greeks can remain calm and not take a completely defensive position, in the long run we look better.

If the catfishimg story is true, her motive looks more like trying to make Randall jealous and get his attention than any malicious ill will against against the fraternity or the greek system. They may have just been convenient targets.

[SOM]

Rolling Stone’s UVA disaster just got a whole lot worse

Bizarre new details are the most damning yet — but it's essential not to overgeneralize their importance http://www.salon.com/2014/12/11/roll...rce=newsletter

[AnchorAlum]

Salon's article does go back to the comments made earlier regarding possible issues about Jackie's emotional and mental state, which should be of concern here as well.

I think that UVA's student body is going through some emotional upheaval this semester in general, beginning with the death of Hannah Graham and ultimately coming to a head with this situation. I'm not familiar at all with the culture of UVA, but I think we'd all agree that it's a campus and institution that has over the years earned a reputation for high academic standing and reputation. If this has also created a culture of privilege and social norms that should not be tolerated regardless of an institution's lofty reputation, then by all means this has to at the very least serve as a sobering wake up call. I sincerely hope that Jackie is able to move forward in her life, whether she was truly an assault victim or not.

[1964Alum]

There is still so much we don't know. For one thing, we don't know what Ederly wrote and the Rolling Stone published was Jackie's actual account to her or if it was Ederly's embellishment to make a more spectacular and attention-grabbing story.

Both UVA and the office of the Attorney General of Virginia have initiated investigations, the findings of which have as yet to be released. Additionally, the President of UVA has convened an ad hoc committee comprised of alums, faculty, and student representatives which include members of the GLOs on campus to address the problems which have been revealed with students coming forward with their own stories as a result of the RS story. The president of the Inter Sorority council is a committee member. As reported in the Cavalier Daily and elsewhere, President Sullivan has found the ideas generated within this committee, especially from students, to be very good and workable ones.

UVA students, faculty, alums, and community members are very proud of their school, and are focused on correcting flaws in the system that have failed many.

It should also not be lost on anyone that President Sullivan initiated talks with some of the fraternities -including the one mentioned in the RS article- last spring, well before the RS article appeared. The school is also but one of 12 that will be intensely investigated under the Title IX requirements. Also WELL before the RS article.

Now back to my regularly-scheduled program, which in my case is the magnificent DVD of The Three Tenors Christmas Concert filmed in Vienna, Austria in 1999.

[navane]

Originally Posted by robinseggblue

We are still not sure she lied.

Which is precisely why I used the word "IF" in capital letters and in italics.

The guys who supposedly participated in this were not named so anything you say about naming perpetrators is out of place.

That's not my understanding. My understanding is that Jackie has given names and descriptions for the accused though, for the media, she asked that a pseudonym ("Drew") be used. Some kind of name had to have been given as one of the men suspected was phoned and questioned by reporters.

From the Washington Post, December 5th: "For example, an alleged attacker that Jackie identified to them for the first time this week — a junior in 2012 who worked with her as a university lifeguard — was actually the name of a student who belongs to a different fraternity, and no one by that name has been a member of Phi Kappa Psi. Reached by phone, that man, a U-Va. graduate, said Friday that he worked at the Aquatic and Fitness Center and was familiar with Jackie’s name. But he added that he never met Jackie in person and never took her out on a date. He also said he was not a member of Phi Kappa Psi."

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...bdc_story.html)


Phi Kappa Psi does apparently have the name of the accused as I believe I recall they made a statement saying that no one by that name is in their fraternity.

Now we have another report that Jackie presented one young man's photo to her friends as "Drew".

From Washington Post December 10th: "Also, photographs that were texted to one of the friends showing her date that night were actually pictures depicting one of Jackie’s high school classmates in Northern Virginia. That man, now a junior at a university in another state, confirmed that the photographs were of him and said he barely knew Jackie and hasn’t been to Charlottesville for at least six years."

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...y.html?hpid=z1)

This guy's photograph was being passed around as "Drew"? If I was that guy, I'd be freaked out.

Yes the organization was named. But her organization was named too (UVa anti-rape org...whatever, forgot the name).

You forgot the name of her organization? Interesting. I bet you remember the name of the fraternity in question.

If she was lying then that organization will be publicly smeared. That's Jackie's equivalent to a fraternity because it's her source of support in the community. And the community can blame it and protest for encouraging making up reports, whatever they feel.

No. Why would they be publicly smeared? (Heck, even you can't remember the name of it). They were not accused of aiding in any crimes here. No one has suggested that her rape support group ever encouraged her to lie about her experiences. I doubt the community will vandalize the UVA anti-rape support group meeting room like they did the Phi Kappa Psi house.

[exlurker]

According to a report (see below), on January 9, 2015, the restrictions on UVA fraternities and sororities that were put in place after the Rolling Stone story first came out will be lifted. Reportedly, the Jan. 9 date for lifting the restrictions was part of UVA's initial plan:

http://gawker.com/frats-will-go-back...ary-1669283706

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...208-story.html

[robinseggblue]

Navane: http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...d.php?t=145009

Btw, the only reason I know the name of the frat is because I read it every time I click this thread.

From your own quote: "For example, an alleged attacker that Jackie identified to them for the first time this week"

From what I've read it doesn't sound like she identified any of the alleged attackers until all of this started coming out and being investigated.

And there's a difference between what certain people who are part of the investigation know and what is released to the public. A vague description like blonde hair, blue eyes, junior who worked as a lifeguard in 2012 isn't going to identify anyone unless someone is familiar with who worked as a lifeguard that semester. And it's certainly not going to provide fuel to as many crazy people who are out there and send threats and stuff.

I'm not saying the fraternity shouldn't know who is accusing them or that investigators or journalists shouldn't know. I merely think it's unfair for her name to have been released to the general public.

The guy's name didn't come out to the public at any point (from when he was accused of the crime until now) so no I don't think it's fair that her name comes out to the public at this point in time. That's a double standard and her safety has been compromised while this is still being investigated. No, I don't think that's fair.

[SOM]

Was asked to post this directly here. robinseggblue posted a link to my OP: Side bar to over-all stories we all have been seeing about UVA. Given to past issues and problems that GLO's have had at SDSU one would have thought, hoped that they learned something by now.

Student Body President Pressured To Resign After His Frat Harassed Anti-Rape Activists

A student activist group at San Diego State University is calling for the resignation of the student body president because he belongs to one of two fraternities whose members are accused of waving dildos, throwing eggs and shouting obscenities at Take Back The Night marchers last month.
Marchers participating in the anti-sexual assault march reported taunts from the Sigma Phi Epsilon and Delta Sigma Phi fraternity houses, according to the Daily Aztec, an independent campus newspaper. Sigma Phi Epsilon members allegedly shouted obscenities at marchers, while Delta Sigma Phi brothers reportedly waved sex toys and threw eggs. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...n_6305258.html

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by robinseggblue

I'm not saying the fraternity shouldn't know who is accusing them or that investigators or journalists shouldn't know. I merely think it's unfair for her name to have been released to the general public.

I don't understand the notion of naming her to the public, either. What purpose does that serve beyond putting her safety at risk? I know that the fraternity was harassed and vandalized. That was bad. People should be punished accordingly. But we do not live in a society where we mete out "eye-for-an-eye" justice.

[SOM]

The Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors (AFA); College Student Educators International (ACPA); the Association of Student Conduct Administrators (ASCA); and Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education (NASPA); issue this statement in response to the recent fallout from the Rolling Stone article regarding the student and institutional responses to sexual assault at the University of Virginia. These events illuminate the duty of all professionals on our campuses to ensure that accusations of sexual assault, including those involving members of fraternities and sororities, are handled in a manner that protects the rights and well-being of victims of sexual violence. https://t.e2ma.net/webview/6w1oj/d8c...d90352bf0f7c57

[SOM]

U-Va. uproar about Rolling Stone story spawns debate over fairness to fraternities http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...9d7_story.html