BREAKING: Here’s Jackie Coakley “Rape Obsessed” Pinterest Account #UVAHoax

http://gotnews.com/breaking-heres-jackie-coakley-rape-obsessed-pinterest-account-uvahoax/ ^

[867V309]

I don't know what happened (or maybe didn't happen) to "Jackie" but clearly she is a person in a lot of pain. I pray for her, and I hope God will take care of her.

If she falsely accused people of rape, I hope she gets help in prison.

[Sherman Logan]

Idiot article.

Women who HAVE been raped are often, for fairly obvious reasons, obsessed with the subject.

As is someone who’s built an identity around being a rape victim, whether she is genuinely one or not.

[caligatrux]

How about the people that she caused “pain” to?

Look, I'm not apologizing for her, or defending her, or anything.

I just refuse to believe what the media tells me 100%, whether it be Rolling Stone or Breitbart.

I have been invovled with enough things in person, and then later watched or read news coverage about them, to realize that the "facts" goes through a lot of filters in the media process and doesn't always look like it did when it entered.

Did Jackie get some details wrong? Was she confused? Did she embellish? Or was she actauuly gang-raped and I don't know. All of that is possible.

But it is also VERY possible that a young woman, who was traumatized by a sexual assault, was manipulated and used by a Rolling Stone reporter to generate a more salcious story in order to set more magazines.

Rolling Stone had the narrative they wanted to write about already. Whether Jackie willingly fed them half-truths, or whether they just used Jackie to write the kind of story they wanted to write, we may never really know.

In other words, Jackie may have been sexually assualted at UVA and then raped and used again by Rolling Stone.

And as for the other persons involved, if any of them are guilty, I hope they burn for it. And if they are innocent, I pray for them too.

[hoosiermama]

So when does JJ and Sharpton turn his into a racial attack?

[TigerClaws]

She got a bunch of things wrong:

1. The date of the alleged party.

2. The fact pledges assaulted her when there’s no rush that semester.

3. She asked the writer to not try to verify the story (granted, that’s on the writer for being an idiot and RS for publishing).

4. She wasn’t covered in blood that night.

5. No guy at the frat ever worked where she said he did.

And there are other false aspects to the story.

I think it’s a Duke lacrosse story and will unravel over time. She’ll be deposed in the civil suits for sure.

There’s no law requiring that the accusers be private. That’s just something the press agreed to do over time. In this circumstance, with the publisher of her story, RS, saying they no longer believe her, I think it’s appropriate to out her identity and for her to be called on to publicly defend her potentially libelous statements.

I also think the UVA admins who suspended all Greek activities without a bit of proof here should be fired.

[maggief]

WTF, another post removed.

[beandog]

Do you hope she “burns for it” if she’s lying.

[MeatshieldActual]

Didn’t know which frat? I call BS on that. Surely she could identify which frat house she was at, unless this was all BS.

[caligatrux]

I must not be expressing myself clearly enough. Let me try again:

1. I was extremely skeptical of the story about Jackie when I first read it in Rolling Stone. I didn't believe it was 100% true then, and I still don't now.

2. I don't assume that, because the story was wrong, that Jackie is an evil man-hating bitch who made up this entire story out of nothing just to have an excuse to drop out of school or whatever.

3. I think it's much more likely that Rolling Stone had a narrative about the "campus rape culture" that they wanted to write, and that they used Jackie to write that story, and they didn't care if any of it was true.

4. I think it is just as likely that Rolling Story made up lies or embellished the truth as it is that Jackie lied or embellished.

5. I'm think that what really happened was that Jackie did have a traumatic experience, and that Rolling Stone used it to sell magazines. Even if Jackie was a raving psycho who made it all up, Rolling Stone should have been able to see that and verify it.

Just because Rolling Stone said it was true, I don't automatically believe it's true. Just because Breitbart said it was false, I don't automatically believe it was false. Just because Rolling Stone came back and blamed all the falsehoods on Jackie, I don't automatically believe that Jackie was the one doing all of the lying.

Bascially, I think everyone is probably lying, wrong, distorting the facts, or presenting only what they want you to see, and the truth is somewhere in between.

[caligatrux]

Do you hope she “burns for it” if she’s lying.

If she maliciously put out rape allegations with the intent to ruin a certain person or persons, then yes.

[vladimir998]

“Didn’t know which frat? I call BS on that. Surely she could identify which frat house she was at, unless this was all BS.”

Well, it came out a few days ago that she was only told what frat she supposedly had been at by her friends something like 2 weeks or 2 months later. Jackie said she did not know where she really was and her friends had to come find her the night of the alleged attack. One of them later said to her something like, “Oh, it had to be that you were attacked at Phi Psi that night.”

I can see Jackie, being brand new to UVA, might not know one frat from the other (there are 32 of them after all), but Drew asked her to come with him to his frat. He didn’t mention the name? I find that hard to believe.

[Southack]

Rolling Stone is married to Code Pink

[beandog]

I don’t care why she did it. Maliciously or otherwise. There is absolutely no excuse for falsely accusing others.

[Baladas]

I wonder if it really didn’t happen in Honduras:http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2013/11/para-los-ninos

[TigerClaws]

She most likely is bipolar. They can tell very convincing stories that are completely made up.

The key moment was, “I don’t want you contacting the fraternity involved or doing any due diligence with the perps as I fear reprisals.”

First, not acceptable. Relying 100% on one side of the story is irresponsible.

Second, the story will be a national publication sensation. So fear of reprisals? Sorry. That cat’ll be out of the bag.

Third, the style of ‘journalism’ here was first person, narrative. No ‘alleged’ or ‘reports’ or ‘claims.’ Was written from the perspective of the victim, very personal and emotional, and terrible.

Fourth, these guys at the frat are implied to ALL had to rape to be admitted to the frat. It was part of a ritual hazing. So EVERY guy there at the time and a few years prior was part of it.

She can’t remember the frat now? It happened somewhere else?

B.S.

She’s mentally disturbed and was used for political reasons.

65% of college students are now women.

There’s a war on MEN in this country. Just as there’s a war on whites and successful people.

[clintonh8r]

Your last sentence is 1000% on target.

[abb]

Recall Crystal Mangum, the erstwhile heroine of The Duke Lacrosse Frameup, is now in prison for murder.

She was a psycho, the authorities knew it, yet she was allowed to roam free until she killed someone.

[chesley]

Actually, unless it is a complete case of misstaken identity in a case that really happened, there is no such thing as a non-malicious accusation of rape. IMNSHO