<p>@bluebayou wrote: “If Jackie had spoken with reputable sources of journalism, her story, such that it is, never would have gotten out (since it is so full of inconsistencies).”</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be so sure about that. Most people agree that the Washington Post is a reputable source of journalism (and it is) yet IIRC, not that many years ago a writer completely made up a story and won a Pulitzer Prize that had to be taken back when it was found out she made the entire thing up. </p>
<p>As for why women would falsely accuse someone of rape, there are various reasons one could think of. This article may offer some insight to those who ask. <a href=“False rape accusations: Why must we pretend they never happen?”>http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/09/false_rape_accusations_why_must_be_pretend_they_never_happen.2.html</a>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I find this a disingenuous argument and a non-sequitor. Really, all females see themselves as the same? </p>
<p>IF it is found out that Jackie is lying or exaggerating, why in the world would another female who is upfront and willing to tell the truth, even compare herself to Jackie? Who would look at a liar and say “Hey, that’s me. Look how they treat her. I better stay away from those people.” That would be just plain weird and would be some of the dumbest transference I could think of. </p>
<p>I do not to compare the treatment of criminals and crooks I see, who may be male, to myself simply because I am not a crook, and I am not stealing things or committing crimes. I would hope a truthful female is smart enough to discern the difference between the treatment, just as I can discern the difference between me and another male doing something wrong.</p>
<p>yeah, stuff happens TVcaster, but I’d like to think WaPo has learned from its experience. (Perhaps I’m naive?)</p>
<p>“If Jackie had spoken with reputable sources of journalism, her story, such that it is, never would have gotten out (since it is so full of inconsistencies).”</p>
<p>If Jackie had only gone to the police and / or the hospital immediately afterwards, then whatever story she was telling would be the closest to the truth (the date, where the fraternity was located, etc.). </p>
<p>I do find it a little disingenuous that we’re supposed to accept that Phi Psi said they looked and as far as they could tell, no member of their fraternity worked as a lifeguard during this time. Well, duh, do you think they would say so? It seems as though it would be best if someone else independently compared the lifeguard employment records and the fraternity membership records. </p>
<p>I also wonder - given “kids these days” and their cameras - does anyone in the UVA community have time-stamped photos (such as on an Iphone, or posted on Facebook) that show a party there during that time frame. It also seems disingenous when they say “there was no Phi Psi party on September 28, 2012.” It makes me think - well, what about the day before, or the day after? What about the weekend before? It doesn’t make someone a liar if they think something was September 28 and it was really September 21. </p>
<p>@bluebayou I agree, they probably have. The problem is that a reporter is generally trusted by their editor etc. I used to be a journalist and could have easily lied about finding confirming sources etc. My editor would never have known the difference. They don’t have time to go behind every reporter and story that they are proofing and double-check the facts. In large part they rely on the reporter to be honest, like 99.9% of them are (although I would argue that certain companies have become biased in search of ratings and are no longer objective, but that is a discussion for another time)</p>
<p>This would have slid by as well if it wasn’t just a bit too unbelievable to be believed. She’s very creative, though and I mean the writer, not Jackie. Jackie was used totally.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can agree with this, to a point, if it does turn out she is lying. </p>
<p>This is serious stuff that may end up costing students grad school acceptances and jobs etc. I would be fine with charges filed, a plea deal, then suspended sentence in place of serious counseling. If she damaged lives, I do not think it is good example to set to just give counseling; it should be on her record.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That would possibly be the best outcome for Jackie. However, it would suck for Jackie if the reporter has recordings of her saying some of these details. That is the problem I see for Jackie - the story sounds like a morph in progress that got out of control.</p>
<p>“This is serious stuff that may end up costing students grad school acceptances and jobs etc.”</p>
<p>It could have if names had come out, but they didn’t, unless we’re talking about UVA women named Jackie. No individuals have been named, Phi Psi members can leave that information off their resumes if they like, and no reasonable employer/grad school would refuse to take UVA grads across the board. So I don’t think young men will lose opportunities over this.</p>
<p>A poster on this very thread threw out someone’ s name. Many names are out there and it is not hard to find Facebook connections. So now they nave to leave their fraternity association off their resumes?</p>
<p>Actually, I looked at UVA people search. There are only 7 undergrads with the name Jackie or Jacqueline. I wouldn’t want to be one of those other Jackies.</p>
<p>I want to be careful here. I may have missed a few. I have liked bay’s posts. :)</p>
<p>I like cosar’s too. :)</p>
<p>Exactly. Jackie is not that common a name these days. The reporter has said that is her real name but who even J
Knows if that is true.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess it is male thing then for I darn sure would not want to have to leave of my affiliations and HOPE that no connection is made to me for something I may not have done. </p>
<p>You take damage to people and changes they may have to make way too easy for me. I would hope if a male lies about a female you would be as understanding as to potential damage to her.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I believe I read that the Washington Post spoke with Jackie this week and confirmed the story in RS, so it seems she is sticking by her story, it is unraveling because others are coming forward and saying her story has been changing. I also think I read that the Washington Post actually spoke to the person that Jackie named this week and he is quoted saying he was not Phi Kappa Psi and that he never went on a date with Jackie. So it isn’t relying only on the fraternities reports. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have been to Boar’s Head - 95%+ people that I saw there pay with credit cards because of the amount. The chances of them having the credit card record with name is very, very high. I can count the times I have seen cash used in the place. I am going to guess the CHO police is all over that, as is UVA, as they own it. </p>
<p>“A poster on this very thread threw out someone’ s name. Many names are out there and it is not hard to find Facebook connections. So now they nave to leave their fraternity association off their resumes?”</p>
<p>Yes, Eric Cantor’s son was a member of Phi Psi at UVA, but no one, absolutely no one, has suggested that he was involved. Nor should anyone assume that he was involved. It’s hard for me to argue that there are damages to individual Phi Psi members when they haven’t been named.</p>
<p>My point is that his name should not have been out there with all of the controversy swirling around it . Períod. And now you have Compounded it by putting his name out there again. Would any you think that was okay if it were your son or daughter?</p>
<p>My understanding is that the two sons of the former Congressman were not brothers or pledges of this fraternity during the month of the alleged assault.</p>