<p>In what way are they doing anything but claiming things without substantiation? Facts and claims are sometimes the same thing and sometimes they have nothing to do with each other. Anyone can say or write anything in this day and age as long as it doesn’t violate someone’s rights. What on earth would you have had President Sullivan say that wouldn’t violate an individual’s rights - do you really think she was going to say "oh yes Jane Doe reported to our confidential adviser that John Smith and two friends of Loco Loco Loco fraternity raped her and we heard through the grapevine that it might have happened to Betty Sue and Suzie Q and we’ve notified the authorities and we’re looking into it even though Jane Doe doesn’t want anyone to know. Universities only obligation is to have the process and the procedures in place for students to report and the process and procedures in place to adjudicate. The old saying “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him/her drink” is highly applicable. What do you really think colleges and universities can do within the law? Sullivan may even know something that technically she shouldn’t necessarily know and she’s certainly not going to spit that out to a reporter. if she did, she should be fired for violating several laws. And how naive of these young women that think they can affect change but not color in the lines. If you are going to put it out there, then do something about it. Be credible. If you aren’t interested in being part of change or part of investigation and adjudication then by all means, women should have the option to go through counseling and deal with whatever happened in that context. They have that right. If it’s cathartic for them to blog about their experiences they have that right. The processes and procedures for pressing violations are on every single college and university’s website. There is no secret and anyone in society can go read about it. </p>
<p>If we as a society want colleges and universities to do something in the absence of an accuser and accusation, investigation, adjudication then mandatory reporting is the answer and it’s out there. Only then, would something like “hear something, see something, call the police” be the process and procedure.</p>
<p>"The author, asked Sullivan about gang rapes. Sullivan answered this by saying there was an on going investigation.</p>
<p>Saying a fraternity is under investigation is an interesting spin to a question about gang rapes."</p>
<p>What part of “there’s nothing else she CAN say, legally” isn’t clear? What do you want her to say? “Yes, that’s right. We are investigating Bob Smith, Phil Jones, Rob Johnson and Mark Taylor for rape”? (Names made up of course) She can’t say anything BUT. Get with the real world here. Haven’t any of you ever been involved in legal matters or speaking to the press through your work? </p>
<p>Is the president of UVA prevented from
saying the police are looking into this? </p>
<p>I have been involved in legal matters. Not criminal though. </p>
<p>I have spoken to the press.</p>
<p>And this discussion goes beyond can the UVA president mention the police. I want to know what the police involvement is and has been regarding these gang rape allegations .</p>
<p>She doesn’t have to satisfy Erdely’s curiosity. This is not a deposition / trial. At any point, she is perfectly within her rights to say this interview is over, have a nice day. You are acting as though she was obligated to answer Erdely’s questions. </p>
<p>“And this discussion goes beyond can the UVA president mention the police. I want to know what the police involvement is and has been regarding these gang rape allegations .”</p>
<p>Apparently now you know - the police aren’t involved unless the victim desires them involved. Whether that’s good or bad is a different story. </p>
<p>The U. apparently knew from the very beginning that the RS account was wrong, but they were willing to be patient and let the truth come out. The U’s initial statement was that Jackie’s story in RS was inconsistent with what she told the U.</p>
<p>According to emails that have been newly released, the U. was never asked by the reporter or the RS fact checkers about the facts of any specific incidents. Although the U. would not reveal any personal information on its own because of federal privacy regulations on colleges, RS could have revealed what they knew and asked if the U. knew that anything was in error. RS was ready to print a completely different rape accusation at UVa, until UVa informed RS that this other story was unfounded. </p>
<p>Also, Jackie’s 3 close friends (who were condemned in the RS story) were apparently never asked by RS for comment or to support Jackie’s story. </p>
<p>The Cville Police were asked to investigate weeks ago by Pres. Sullivan. A couple weeks ago they said that a criminal investigation usually involves a report from a victim. The Cville Police later said they had 2 detectives assigned to the case. The supposed victim has apparently never cooperated with the Police, and has never identified any suspects, other than an imaginary person named Haven Monaghan. No one by that name has ever attended UVa and the supposed photo of him was of a high school classmate of Jackie’s who has never attended UVa. Her father now says that she had the wrong fraternity, but no one knows which is the supposed right fraternity. How is anyone supposed to do an investigation when they don’t have the basic accusations? </p>
<p>The Cville Police Chief has publicly urged the U. to not discuss the case in the press, and said that any findings of the investigation should be released by the Police or prosecutors.</p>
<p>Probably absolutely nothing unless the victim(s) have asked for police help (no victim no crime remember) or the university asked for help in preparation for any civil action against them is my guess. If it happened not on college property no telling if there is a current on-going investigation or what is being shared with the university. Sullivan did say that had good relationships with the area police for the city and the county. Time will tell. </p>
<p>Is it true that at UVa the police are not involved, ever, unless the accuser wants them to be involved? That is certainly not true on all campuses. The Amherst document that was posted a week or so ago specifically mentioned that the college could bring in the police in if, in their judgment, it was a police matter. They would inform the accuser but would not require her agreement.</p>
<p>on edit: Actually, I can answer my own question with regard to UVa-- no, obviously sometimes the police are involved without the accuser’s consent, because after the article the police were called in. </p>
<p>Correct. If a student reports it, the student is the victim and the crime is what the student reported. </p>
<p>Thanks Charlie for the details. I thought I had read somewhere that the college asked the police to investigate once the accusation was public. As Sullivan pointed out to Eardly the criminal system has subpoena power that the university would not have. </p>
<p>It’s possible UVa would change their process so that if anyone in administration, profs, deans on up, would report crimes to the police. I honestly don’t see this happening since so many students have defended Eramo. If she was required (along with the Title IX administrator and any other administrators) by college process to call the police it would be a game-changer. But the flip side of that is it “takes away” the right of a student to choose to deal with her trauma without punitive action against her attacker. It’s a conundrum for sure. </p>
<p>The headline is about the alleged gang rape in RS. The question in the audio was very general and all three of those were hearsay from Jackie. It was a very general question that Erdely knew wasn’t gong to be answered in anything more than very general terms, which it was.</p>