Posted on 12/16/2014 9:48:40 AM PST by FamiliarFace
Three friends of the alleged University of Virginia rape victim are growing more skeptical about her account, saying they have doubts about information she gave them and why she belatedly tried to get herself deleted from the Rolling Stone article that engulfed their campus in controversy.
The friends say among their concerns is the fact that the woman, named only as “Jackie” in the article, gave them a cellphone number so they could text a man she said she was seeing about three weeks before she alleged she was gang-raped at a fraternity house.
Eventually, the friends ended up with three numbers for the man. All are registered to Internet services that enable people to text without cellphone numbers but also can be used to redirect calls to different numbers or engage in spoofing, according to multiple research databases checked by The Washington Times.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
The story unravels further.
I don’t know what this means?
Either Jackie’s ‘rapist’ had three different shell phone numbers (which would be very odd) to which Jackie asked her friends to send texts...
Or
Jackie herself owned those three different numbers and had her friends send texts to those numbers to bolster a phony gang rape claim.
Either way something is very wrong here.
We are entering into very dark and dangerous times, when objective truth and morality or a sense of honor do not matter in elite academia, (and I might add, the mainstream media or government). Thomas Jefferson’s University is the home of the original Honor Code. Students are expelled for lying or cheating, or tolerating those who do. That is, knowing about a lie and failing to report it is an Honor Code violation. Ms. Sullivan, that P.C; commissar maven, late of the UVA putsch/counterputsch, knows that a vile and despicable slander and lie has been told against the PKP fraternity. She virtually watched from her high window when the mob was sent to throw rocks and paint “RAPISTS!!!” on the side of their house.
This is brownshirt stuff, folks. This is riling up a mob for Kristallnacht.
In this case, thank God, the originator of the lie appears to be a very disturbed young lady, who began with “cat-fishing” an imaginary 3rd year dreamboat, to influence a desired first year beau. The lie went up in spirals, embellished and increased with each retelling until it was purveyed to Rolling Stone by a UVA staff interlocutor. When the bomb was dropped, it quickly became apparent that the mass rape frat initiation reported in Rolling Stone was perhaps the worst group libel since the German Nazis set up false Polish attacks on their border on August 31, 1939, as a pretext for invasion. Or the libel that German Jews were poisoning the Berlin water supply.
In this racially-charged post-Ferguson environment, to send the mob against a house representing white male privilege, with bricks and spray paint, was the act of a Himmler or a Goebbels. This time, the lie was outed, and the damage contained—even if the libelous smear will always exist. The next time, the fury of the mob may not be contained, if the false flag operation or intentional smear campaign against a hated scapegoat group is not revealed in time. The blood will be on the hands of those evil people who stirred the mob into a frenzy. Sharpton at Freddy’s Mart and the subsequent fatal arson attack comes to mind.
Ms. Sullivan, who might as well have passed out cans of gasoline and nooses, must not only apologize, she must be expelled from the Grounds and from Albemarle County, befitting any gross violator of the Honor Code.
If she keeps her seat, well, take it for the signal that it is. It’s brownshirt time ahead.
Matthew Bracken
UVA 1979
I mean that so little of what was told by the RS has been true. The more people dig, the more untruths are revealed.
Jackie made up a person to date that night, in order to get one of the friends jealous.
So if there was no real “Haven” person, and the phone numbers of “Haven” were really Internet based, then Jackie, was making up her date that night.
Since Jackie had no actual date that night, then the rest of her story is likely to also fabricated.
I think she lied to get attention from her friend, and she upped the ante by making up a gang blow job assault story. She got in over her head, and fabricated all of this, likely because she didn’t get the affection from the boy she wanted. This is all a figment of her imagination.
The feminazis are holding tight onto this story because it fits their narrative.
It’s rather sad that the one young man said, “It doesn’t matter if the story is true” because he felt it was illuminating a serious problem. I wonder if he would have the same opinion on the truth of the matter if she had named him as a rapist or alleged that some of HIS friends or family were involved in a heinous crime?
The damage done to others cannot ever be undone. The Bible says “Thou shalt not bear false witness” and that basic moral truth has been acknowledged by all societies for thousands of years. It is part of our legal system because people need the protection of perjury laws in proper legal forums and if someone goes outside the legal system and lies about another person, there is are remedies in civil courts called slander and and libel.
There is no national moral problem that overrides a principal that the truth does matter.
If there was no real date that night, it puts the rest of Jackie’s story at risk. What did Jackie really do that night? Go out for dinner alone? Head to the library to study? Watch tv by herself in her dorm room?
She had no date! There was no one named Haven, nor one named what she told others about in her second version to her rape survivor friends. Neither person is real...therefore, Jackie didn’t go on any date.
She did something else with her night, which appears now to be to concoct a hoax about a gang sexual assault, so as to get sympathy from the boy she really liked. It worked a little. It got him and the other male friend to spend the night with her. However, she wanted more from him, and because he wasn’t interested, she got depressed. She couldn’t keep up with her classes, so blaming her flunking out on a rape hoax was a great cover.
There’s one reason why Jackie didn’t want to open an investigation, and it’s because it is all a lie.
Absolutely right. Remember when the Nobel Peace Prize was given to Rigobera Menchu’ a few years back. Nobody checked her stories at first reports because they matched the ‘narrative’ that the Liberals wanted to put forth.
When a liberal professor with contacts in Guatemala actually started to prove up her story, the events she had related and her own life story came apart at the seams.
The answer from the Left: It doesn’t matter if the events occurred as she said or her life story wasn’t true. The could have been true and that narrative is all that matters.
I wonder if he is saying that because he doesn’t want to be accused of being insensitive to sexual assaults, which I am sure he has already been accused of. I wonder if one day he will regret saying those words.
I can hardly believe the number of people who have come to Jackie’s defense, saying that her lies don’t matter, that SOMETHING must have happened that night. That she’s only misremembering the details, because what happened to her was so traumatic!
They fail to see that she is just a liar, because they want to believe her fabrication.
It’s very disturbing.
Thought you might find this of interest.
Ok, I’ll say it....if the false accusation had been made against a black fraternity, this story would be portrayed in a way different light...WAAYYYYYY different. More specifically, there wouldn’t be a peep heard from the current “facts don’t matter, false but accurate” crowd. NOT A PEEP!!
What are all those people who “stood up” for her when the Board of Visitors tried to flush her last year. This woman is toxic and incompetent.
If this had been alleged against a black fraternity, it wouldn’t have seen the light of day.
The article states that
= = =
Mr. Duffin (one of the friends of Jackie, of which the article is about) said he eventually asked Haven (a made-up ‘boyfriend’ of Jackie) for a photograph, which the upperclassman sent from the BlackBerry number. Last week, The Washington Post confirmed that the man depicted in that photograph never attended U.Va., but did go to high school with Jackie.
= = =
This seems to be strong evidence that “Jackie herself owned those three different numbers and had her friends send texts to those numbers “
I wonder if Erdely was trying to update this story, another gang rape allegation, in which one of the men was eventually convicted. One difference in this story, is that the young woman went straight away to the authorities about what happened. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/16/i-was-gang-raped-at-a-uva-frat-30-years-ago-and-no-one-did-anything.html
My mistake, the young man was not convicted as much as he agreed to a plea deal of a lesser charge.
So in that instance, the woman didn’t go get a rape kit done until a week later. According to her, she showered immediately to try to feel clean, and get rid of his semen. It’s no wonder there was nothing left forensically an entire week later. It became a he said/she said.
Women need to get it through their heads. If you are raped, you must go get a rape kit done within 48 hours of the assault. Do not shower!
Also, if you have consensual sex, but regret it later, it’s not rape.
One thing the young lady says in her story, is that her rape happened on October 5, 1984, which turns out to be a Friday. Then she says when she left after awaking that “the house was eerily silent on a Friday morning after a huge party.” Why did she say “Friday morning”, when it would have been a Saturday? Makes no sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.