The Cavalier Daily pretends they were for due process all along
The UVa President, student body leadership, and Cavalier Daily staff have shown extremely poor judgement in their response to the accusations by Jackie in Rolling Stone’s article on sexual assault.
They are overly credulous, and were all too happy to pile on innocent men in order to push their agendas. Only excellent follow-on journalism by the likes of Richard Bradley and the Washington Post exposed the lies in the Rolling Stone article.
The Cavalier Daily, the University of Virginia’s student newspaper, just posted an editorial entitled “The Next Chapter”. (This article you are reading is based on a comment in response to that story. As yet the comment has not been approved by the CD’s moderators.)
The CD’s editorial starts out limply and only gets worse.
“Though the police department has yet to close its investigation, it seems as though this latest development is one of multiple indications that the story surrounding the Rolling Stone report is coming to a conclusion of sorts.”
One can discern the concealed embarrassment and indignation the Cavalier Daily editors felt at having to admit, at least begrudgingly and sideways, the possibility that the sexual assault accusations might not be completely true.
“But despite many conclusions that Jackie’s story was completely fabricated, many in the University community are open to the possibility that some elements of her story are genuine, even if she was mistaken about the fraternity house she was taken to the night it occurred.”
Unbelievably, despite the utter lack of evidence, and the police finding no substantive evidence for the charge, the CD continues to believe “some elements in her story are genuine”,
The CD then changes the subject to “due process”. But not the kind of “due process” that would have brought the deception to light quickly.
“But due process must work for both parties — accused and complainant. The community is only made safer if the correct offender is apprehended. But there have been cases where the justice system has failed rape victims in unacceptable ways.”
The first link goes a letter to the editor from an anonymous UVa student who had been falsely accused of rape. “It was expected I would plead guilty to a lesser charge because of the weight of the allegations. I am one of few students who has successfully resumed my life at the University after being charged of serious felonies.”
The second link quoted from the editorial highlights alleged harassment of a sexual assault accuser. Adding this link so close to the falsely accused’s letter makes it clear where the Cavalier Daily’s sympathy lies.
The CD claims that it “continue[s] to uphold due process”. However none of their previous editorials look like they were for “uphold[ing] due process”:
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2014/11/struggle-today-strength-tomorrow
Nothing on due process.
December 1st:
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2014/12/zero-tolerance-100-percent-support
“A zero-tolerance policy against sexual assault must not contradict the principles of victim advocacy”
Nothing on due process.
December 7th:
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2014/12/finding-solid-ground
“The retraction of Rolling Stone’s story does not undo the need for policy and cultural change”
“All parties should get a chance for their stories to be heard — that is a principle of good journalism, as it is a principle of the justice system. And those systems need to be fair for everyone, if we are ever going to say we’ve uncovered what is truly wrong, and reached a solution that is truly right. Because Rolling Stone did not thoroughly fact-check the story, the reputation of Phi Kappa Psi fraternity has been damaged by a case which is *unproven*” (emphasis added)
This was the closest the CD came to any kind of advocacy of due process. However by saying “unproven” they imply that the story could still be true (impossible given the weight of the multiple debunkings).
The CD also lays the blame at Rolling Stone’s feet for their own over-credulity, and for the damage to the reputation of the fraternity. Keep this blame in mind when you read the next CD editorial on sexual violence, which mentions “fraternity” or “greek” twenty-one times.
January 12th (well after total evisceration of Rolling Stone’s journalism):
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2015/01/one-step-at-a-time
“Though the facts of Rolling Stone’s report were later called into question,”
A hilarious sentence which basically says “though the facts were wrong, conclusions based on those facts still hold.”
“New IFC regulations have potential to increase safety, but will not solve the University’s problem of sexual violence”
Nothing on due process, continued implication of a “problem of sexual violence”. Nothing on a “problem” of rushing to judgement.
A Cavalier Daily editor tweeting support for Jackie (mid December!)
https://twitter.com/KatherineRipley/status/545015654110486529
“#IStandWithJackie and all other survivors whose stories are disbelieved *no matter how much evidence there is*” (emphasis added)
Given that zero evidence confirms Jackie’s account of the sexual assault, it is clear that Ripley means she will believe any story of sexual assault no matter how little evidence there is.
In her tweet, Ripley also links to an article on the same case used to counter the falsely accused’s letter to the editor. One can infer her influence on the CD’s editorial. One can also infer from her disregard for evidence that her priorities have not and do not include due process for the accused.
UVa Student Council rushed to judgement as well, almost immediately posting a site that said “Rolling Stone should unite us”.
Their statement on Rolling Stone’s apology was simply pathetic.
Worst of all was UVa President Sullivan, who should have counseled patience and, yes, due process. Had she done so she would have won a world of credibility and respect in the long run. Instead she immediately rolled over and assumed guilt.
And finally, none of the Cavalier Daily’s editorials, the Student Council site, or President Sullivan’s response mention an actual indicted rapist with evidence against him in at least five sexual assault and/or murder cases, including the murder of a UVa coed last seen with him in downtown Charlottesville.
In Jesse Matthew, sexual violence existed on grounds, but not with the narrative-preferred type of perpetrator.
