UVA and the alleged frat rape - Rolling Stone backpedals

No. You've compiled rape stories from college campuses.

That's not the same thing.

You want to keep saying it IS a problem, but you don't want to put it in any context.

It's a problem compared to what?

 

It's not unusual to not file suit right away. It varies, but generally you have a two-year window to file a lawsuit. The frat's lawyer could argue that clock started ticking today, the day RS retracted its story. There's no hurry.

The damage to the fraternity both at a local and national level - in terms of bad press as a direct result of the story is pretty solid.
Correct me If I am wrong, but didn't UVA react to the story without an investigation with sanctions against both the fraternity and the greek system?
The fraternity and its members (as a group and individually) can argue the story ruined its reputation and resulted in negative and unfair treatment.

I don't think they'll be too hard-pressed to find a lawyer to take this case.
1: Because it's a slam dunk.
2: Because I'm sure the fraternity has a some attorney alumni
3: Some attorney sensing a payday out of this (however small, though I don't think that's the case) will also enjoy the publicity. Plus the eternal gratitude of the alumni, parents and benefactors of the aggrieved fraternity members, as well as the fraternity members themselves. In other words, It might be pretty damn good for business down the road.
Plus, you figure RS has money. Money worth going after.

 

No. Reread them again.

I'm not going to repost everything I ever posted, but here's one:

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf

In a nationally representative survey of adults, 37.4% of female rape victims were first raped between the ages of 18-24.

In a study of undergraduate women, 19% experienced attempted or completed sexual assault since entering college.

We've already argued about the numbers. We've already argued about the deflection to greater problems. We've already argued about the definitions of "assault" and "completed" and everything else.

There's no need to do it again, especially for a mundane acknowledgement that the story distracts from and worsens the actual problem.

 

Evil, what are the damages? The only thing you could really point to is if there is some drop in the frat's enrollment numbers as a result. I don't think there will be.

And I can't think of anyone who can demonstrate real harm that has come to them because of this. The closest would be "Drew," but as noted in that WP link, he doesn't really exist.

It's not going to be worth it. They might get some token amount -- kegger time! -- and an apology to frame in the doorway. But that's about it.

Also, it's oddly enough probably in the university's best interest that the whole deal goes away. They are still facing the DOJ investigation after all. I'd expect some heavy arm-twisting influence from university administrators to get them to drop the whole thing.

 

No, you're right, defamation is hard to win. I just don't this is particular case is going to be hard to win. RS fucked this up from Go.

As for McDonald's and Komen, I picked those out of thin air. McDonalds and Komen aren't specific groups of people. If you claim Komen is using its money to spread breast cancer to women so it can continue to raise funds, NO no one individually is being hurt, but the entity is being defamed. It can sue.

You post made it sounds like the frat can't sue because there's no one to be defamed. That's not true. Entities can be defamed. They have standing.

 

1 in 5.

 

I think a lawyer(s) will be all over RS, because there's money for them to be made. As a pledge of of the fraternity, or even the national fraternity, they be lucky to see a $100. I can see a lawyer pulling several thousand dollars from RS for this.

Yeah, a drop in pledges. Plus the college sanctions as a result of the story, that could result in the closure of the chapter. Is any one individual hurt? Prolly not.
But that doesn't mean there's no standing for the frat to sue the shit out RS for a reckless piece of journalism.
Although as pointed out, the pledges and current active members could also make claims as individuals.

Google Richard Jewell. Why not think Phi Kappa Psi won't suffer the same type of stigma? It can sure as hell be argued. And again, given the fact this story is a complete fabrication, I think RS is nailed to the wall.

 

Richard Jewell?

Christ, thst's a Baron-level analogy.

 

Like I said, I'm not fighting this battle again. Especially with you.

Go back and reread the threads.

 

I ought to. I wasn't around when this thread started. Was anyone skeptical of the Rolling Stone piece early on?