Author of UVA Rape Story: ‘What Exactly Happened? I Don’t Know.’

Yesterday, I
reported that
Rolling Stone‘s bombshell story about a gang rape at
the University of Virginia was drawing some skeptical appraisals,
most notably from writer Richard Bradley. I wrote that while I had
no reason to distrust Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the author of the
Rolling Stone piece, I shared some of Bradley’s concerns
about the plausibility of the narrative.

Since then, numerous media outlets have cited my concerns while
adding their own. Far too many have weighed in to keep a proper
count, but
The New Republic,
The Washington Examiner,
The Federalist,
The American Conservative, and
The Washington Post all published articles worth a read,
and all have valid questions about Erdely’s reporting.

But perhaps the most serious question about the accuracy of the
story is one inadvertently raised by Erdely herself, at the
prompting of Slate‘s Hanna Rosin, several days ago. Erdely

was interviewed by Rosin’s Double X podcast; when
pressed for crucial details about whether she knew the perpetrators
names and sought their sides of the story, Erdely repeatedly dodged
the question. Eventually, she conceded this: “What exactly
happened? I wasn’t in that room. I don’t know.”

On Tuesday evening, Rosin
wrote a polite but critical response to Erdely in which she
essentially said, that’s not good enough. As
she—and Slate colleague Allison Benedikt—note, there were
supposedly seven other people in that room, and Erdely didn’t
make much of an effort to contact them. Some important parts
(emphasis mine):

It could be that Erdely did try her hardest to reach the alleged
rapists. Or it could be that she didn’t, out of deference to
Jackie. We’ve interviewed many of Jackie’s friends, including some
who were quoted in the Rolling Stone story.
They verified that Jackie did get very upset when Erdely
wanted to find out more about the alleged assailants. Sara Surface,
a good friend of Jackie’s and a member of One Less, a victim
advocacy group at UVA, had the impression that Jackie’s reaction
was “extreme” when Erdely pressed her—meaning that Jackie became so
terrified that she reconsidered going public with her story, even
anonymously. If that’s true, then Erdely was in a tough
position. Push too hard and she might lose Jackie. But not pushing
harder has created a whole new nightmare.

Various writers and media outlets have now started
to pick apart Erdely’s reporting, as well
as the details of Jackie’s story as reported
by Rolling Stone. That’s because, even by the
standards of horrific, despicable frat behavior, this story stands
out. Jackie, who says she was sober, was allegedly led
upstairs by her date into a dark room, where seven men allegedly
raped her as others egged them on. She tells Erdely that she was
smashed into a glass coffee table and raped by a beer bottle. Drew,
who had invited her to the frat party as his date, allegedly stood
by and orchestrated the whole thing. When he later ran into Jackie,
she says that he told her he’d had a “great time.” That’s
not expected behavior even by the standards of rapists. That’s
psychotic.

Rosin and Benedikt mention that they found out who Jackie
is, contacted her, and arranged an interview, only to have Jackie
back out as the public’s skepticism of the story began to increase.
An interview between Jackie and The Washington Post
is apparently forthcoming.

I reached out to Erdely and her editor, Sean Woods, today; I had
questions about the efforts undertaken to speak with the
perpetrators. Neither responded. Instead, I was forwarded a
statement by Rolling Stone spokesperson Melissa Bruno.
It’s the same one that other journalists seeking comments from
either party are receiving at this point, but here it is,
nonetheless:

In response to your questions about Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s “A
Rape on Campus”: The story we published was one woman’s account of
a sexual assault at a UVA fraternity in October 2012 – and the
subsequent ordeal she experienced at the hands of University
administrators in her attempts to work her way through the trauma
of that evening. The indifference with which her complaint was met
was, we discovered, sadly consistent with the experience of many
other UVA women  who have tried to report such assaults.
Through our extensive reporting and fact–checking, we found Jackie
to be entirely credible and courageous and we are proud to have
given her disturbing story the attention it deserves.

Based on what Erdely has said, and what Woods told The New
Republic previously, it seems like Rolling Stone was
positive that the rapists existed. But they only made successful
efforts to reach the fraternity, not the individuals—even though
contacting the individuals is as easy as typing a name into
Facebook’s search menu or UVA’s student directory, presuming one
knows the actual names.

Rosin and Benedikt did speak with some of Jackie’s “supporters”
on campus; what’s striking is that none of these people know the
identities of the attackers, either:

What became clear from talking to Jackie’s supporters at UVA is
that the community of victim advocates operates by a very specific
code. “The first thing as a friend we must say is, ‘I believe you
and I am here to listen,’ ” says Brian Head, president of UVA’s
all-male sexual assault peer education group One in Four. Head
and others believe that questioning a victim is a form of betrayal,
because it will make her feel judged and all the more reluctant to
ever speak about what happened. None of the people we spoke to had
asked Jackie who the men were, and in fact none of them had any
idea. They did not press her on any details about the
incident.

This undermines a claim, made by Erdely to Rosin during the
podcast, that “people [on campus] seem to know who [the
perpetrators] are.”

So we know that Erdely never spoke to the alleged perpetrators.
She hasn’t suggested that she made an effort to contact them
individually at all. We know that Jackie balked at the idea of
giving up “more” information about them. And we know that Rosin and
Benedikt couldn’t find anyone who knew who they were.

At this point, I’m skeptical that anyone other than Jackie knows
their names. To utterly clear up the confusion, my most pressing
question to Erdely was whether she learned the perpetrators’
identities. In return, I was forwarded Bruno’s statement.

Erdely told Rosin that “there’s no doubt in my mind that
something happened to her that night.” That’s more easily proven;
as The Post’s Erik Wemple
noted, sources who were actually named in the article did
testify that something happened to Jackie that
night. But something is a far cry from the
extreme horror story that ran under Erdely’s byline.

Lastly, I should mention that I have fielded criticisms all day
from people—some of them libertarian-leaning—who think it was wrong
of me to write a story questioning a rape accusation at all. Some
believe that by expressing skepticism of Erdely’s reporting, I
risked identifying libertarianism with rape denial. Needless to
say, I disagree; anyone who gives my previous work a fair appraisal
should conclude that I treat sexual assault with the utmost
seriousness. Whatever the extent of the campus rape crisis, I am
interested in exploring potential solutions, and believe I have

pinpointed a major one.

Still, I must go on reporting the news as it actually happens,
not the version of it that is most convenient for making
libertarianism more palatable to the social justice crowd.

Free Minds and Free Markets aren’t free! Support
Reason’s annual Webathon with a tax-deductible donation and help
change the world in a libetarian direction. For details on giving
levels and swag, go
here now.