UVA dean speaks after winning defamation lawsuit

[@aubsta1]

Good on you, Dr. Eramo!

[@morganghetti]

Quoting false numbers like the 1 in 4 college women are assaulted is what helped lead to this.

[@hollykm]

"1 in 4 college women are assaulted" is a true statement.

[@mindovomatter5181]

Exactly, the media and some feminist have a war against men. They will not let shame, lying, or ruining innocents stop them. Stop believing all women and look for truth.

[@mindovomatter5181]

@@hollykm it is a flat out lie. You probably protested UVA

[@CloveCoast]

Sabrina Rubin Erdely. Don’t let them hide the name.

[@alialessi687]

Why didn't they sue Jackie Coakley?

[@spatchmo6938]

You asked this awhile ago, but if you were still curious, I thought I would chime in and give you an answer if you were still wondering. It was entirely a journalistic failure. Jackie did not report the rape to police. Jackie reported the "incident" to the dean a year or so after she made the claims to her friends because, at the time, Jackie was not doing well in school and she wanted an excuse to give for her poor grades and attendance. Somehow, it went from there to being presented to Sabrina Erderly as one of a few instances of university campus sexual assaults for her to cover. Erderly had roughly three or four stories to choose from and she went with the most dramatic of the stories to base her article on. Jackie was still technically (if not legally) a kid, at only 17 or 18 years old. While it was certainly terrible that Jackie made up a fictional rape in the first place, she only did it for two purposes: originally she wanted to get sympathy and attention from the man she had a crush on, and then she used it as the excuse for her poor school performance. Rolling Stone published the story for multiple purposes, one of which was to make it seem like college officials (such as Nicole Eramo) don't care about rape victims, and they explicitly named Eramo in their article. Someone making up a story for attention is much different from a professional magazine reporting that story as truth to make money and to push an agenda. Again, just to stress this, Jackie did not report the story to police nor did she name names of real, actual people in her story. Eramo came up in passing when Jackie was telling the story to Erderly. Jackie is not legally or civilly responsible for anything here, even though making up that story was morally terrible. I hope I did a good enough job explaining that for you.

[@PattyAcevedoKohagen]

@@spatchmo6938 thank you!

[@tommym321]

@@spatchmo6938 why do you think she couldn’t be held civilly liable for what she said? I’m not so sure about that. If you tell a lie about someone to a reporter you can be sued, can’t you? I think the real reason was money- Jackie doesn’t have “deep pockets” so spending tens or hundreds of thousands to pursue a judgment against her would be fruitless.