<p>“Either Sullivan is hearing these accusations for the first time, or she is not. If she is hearing the allegations for the first time, I’d think shock would be the normal reaction, followed by questions about details of the allegations.”</p>
<p>Seriously? Let’s suppose you are correct and Sullivan was hearing these accusations for the first time. Do you seriously think she would ask the reporter for details, and react in any way other than calm, cool and collected? She’s got PR people, legal counsel, and a whole staff to deal with the details. She is NOT going to say - oh wow, that’s shocking, where was this again? What frat? Who are the names? What details did you hear? She’s not stupid. </p>
<p>When did UVA find out and notify the police about the gang rape accusations? I think almost all if not all of us think the police should be involved when these accusations occur.</p>
<p>That is what I would have asked the UVA President.</p>
<p>I guess I just think that someone who hears shocking allegations should be shocked.</p>
<p>Interviewer: I’m investigating three different allegations of students operating a meth lab at Epsilon Epsilon Epsilon.</p>
<p>Interviewee: We’re investigating a fraternity…</p>
<p>Seriously? Shouldn’t there be a part of the interview where interviewee acknowledges that the allegations are shocking allegations of a serious crime, rather than, ho hum, yes, we’re looking in to this meth lab story, and oh by the way we have great substance abuse programs at our school.</p>
<p>It’s not that Sullivan should say the allegations are true, or are not true, just that they are serious, and if they turned out to be true they would require drastic actions and some shame.</p>
<p>ETA: But as I said I haven’t listened to the interview. It’s 44 minutes long, too long for me.</p>
<p>When Sullivan was asked about the gang rapes, she could have said I can’t talk about individual cases. Sullivan did not do that. She answered the question by saying a frat was being investigated and she talked to the national frat organization. </p>
<p>I found that response underwhelming because she did not mention the police. Sullivan did not have to answer the question but once she did…well, we are talking about felonies here.</p>
<p>“Seriously? Shouldn’t there be a part of the interview where interviewee acknowledges that the allegations are shocking allegations of a serious crime, rather than, ho hum, yes, we’re looking in to this meth lab story, and oh by the way we have great substance abuse programs at our school.”</p>
<p>It might make you (or us) all feel better, but process-wise, I’m not sure it really makes a difference. The whole idea that rape gets handled by the u versus involving police straight-up is the piece that’s broken – not whether Sullivan showed shock or not. She’s a human being, I’m sure she takes this seriously; no one wants this on her watch, but having overt reactions in an interview doesn’t change anything. </p>
<p>Just a note that UVa’s policies do not guarantee absolute confidentiality. For example, if a student said she was raped at gunpoint by another student but didn’t want to go to the police, UVa could still call the police.</p>
<p>The police were not involved until after the story was published. But, we don’t know what UVA was told or when at all. We know Jackie told them something when she was failing her classes and met with the university officials with her mom present but what she told them is unknown although they say it’s not the RS gang rape. It could be it’s the story she told her friends or yet another version and if they wanted to investigate just a little and ended up at a fake photo of Drew, well I don’t know that I would call the cops, either. And, Jackie has said she didn’t ID the frat house until a year later which is a little odd., too. We don’t know what they knew is the point, I guess. And, I agree expecting shock is not reality since the presidents job is to be in control of this mess. </p>
<p>Yes, Jackie is the source for the 3 gang rapes scenario, which I mentioned a few posts ago in relation to an article in the Washington Post. It is Erdeley she told this to, not sure how much she told UVa.</p>
<p>Not unless someone checked her story in the most basic way and she wasn’t specifically accusing specific person as far as we know so there is really no charge against anyone to report. It sounds as though her friends had their doubts and we have no clue about UVA. But, the so-called reporter went out her way not to do that, or so it seems.</p>
<p>“We know Jackie told them something when she was failing her classes and met with the university officials with her mom present but what she told them is unknown although they say it’s not the RS gang rape.”</p>
<p>This is where it gets frustrating. You don’t know whether UVA thinks the lie is (a) the entire incident (ie the whole thing was made up out of whole cloth), or (b) some of the details of the incident are not as portrayed by RS but something terrible happened and wrongdoers have not been punished. You keep assuming it’s (a) because that’s your agenda. You are as agenda-driven as you accuse Erdely of being. </p>
<p>Erdely seemed to know more details than anyone about Jackie’s rape and other gang rapes yet it does not appear that she reported any of it to the police. Or did she?</p>
<p>I’ve said “we don’t know” a bunch of times on here PG. Initially, I expected something probably happened but I was fairly certain it wasn’t the opening scene in the story. Now, with the emerging details I am beginning to think probably not. But, even I don’t care what I think and none of know or ever will for sure unless a real Drew or Haven or whoever turns up somewhere, someday. I’m reality driven and it is frustrating, I agree. </p>
<p>Maybe they were, dstark. I think I remember that both UVA and the national fraternity said they reported it to the police, but we don’t know when. </p>
</p>