Categories
News

Five years later: What has (or hasn’t) changed at UVA since Rolling Stone?

On November 19, 2014, Rolling Stone magazine dropped a bombshell called “A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA.” Written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the article alleged that a UVA student named Jackie was gang raped at a party by members of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity in 2012, and that the university failed to respond adequately when a traumatized Jackie reported the incident months later. 

The story would ultimately prove to be false, a journalistic failure of colossal proportions. But it shone a spotlight on a very real problem. In the days immediately following its publication, a flood of UVA students and alumni shared their own stories of campus sexual assault in the article’s comment section, including experiences of reporting assaults to the university only to have their attackers go unpunished. Many claimed that UVA had a culture of sexual assault, especially at fraternity parties. On Grounds, thousands of students protested against “a culture that puts female students at risk,” as the group Take Back the Night put it. Phi Kappa Psi’s fraternity house was vandalized, and UVA officials temporarily suspended the university’s Greek system. 

Under scrutiny, Jackie’s story fell apart, and after a four-month investigation Charlottesville police failed to find any evidence corroborating her claims. Following an independent review by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, the article was retracted in April. But though the story was false, it prompted a public reckoning with how the university handles sexual violence. At the time, UVA was already under federal Title IX review by the Office of Civil Rights —a review that ultimately found that the university’s sexual assault and misconduct policies were in violation of federal law.

In the aftermath, the university undertook a wave of reforms, including revamping its policies and investing in additional staff, training, and resources around sexual assault. New student groups sprang up to provide support for survivors and speak out against sexual violence. But almost five years later, in October 2019, the university’s annual safety report revealed that 28 rapes were reported in 2018, with 20 occurring in student housing, the highest number since 2014. There were also 16 reports of dating violence, 14 reports of domestic violence, 43 reports of stalking, and 16 reports of fondling—all much higher than previous years.

Has anything really changed?

Talking about it

Alex Smith-Scales applied to UVA right after the Rolling Stone scandal. Now a 2019 graduate, she believes the climate surrounding sexual assault on Grounds went through an “interesting transformation process” during her four years there.

“I remember coming in and seeing the Green Dot presentation, and hearing about all the sexual assault prevention during our orientation week when we first got to Grounds,” she says. “It made me know [the university was] taking it seriously.”

Smith-Scales was a part of the first graduating class to undergo comprehensive training on sexual assault. Since 2015, all incoming first-year and transfer students have been required to complete online Title IX and alcohol education modules (and all students must take a refresher course every two years), as well as Green Dot (now called Hoos Got Your Back), a bystander intervention program. Beginning in 2016, the university also began requiring sexual misconduct training for graduate students and student employees, and the NCAA requires that all athletic department staff and student athletes receive annual training.

During her first days at UVA, Smith-Scales was also happy to learn about the many student groups against sexual assault, and knew she wanted to get involved. In her second year, she joined Take Back The Night, and later became co-chair. During her fourth year, she served on the Sexual Violence Prevention Coalition, the umbrella group that helps coordinate advocacy and peer education efforts on Grounds.

UVA officials have pointed to these increased outreach and education efforts, both on the part of administration and students, as the reason behind the rise in sexual assaults reported to the University Police Department, university officials, and other law enforcement.

In addition to the uptick in reported assaults in the university’s safety report, the 2019 Association of American Universities Campus Climate Survey, which gathers data on student experiences and perceptions around sexual assault and misconduct, also reported an increase in sexual assaults at UVA, specifically among men, compared to the 2015 survey

But a rise in reports doesn’t mean a rise in incidents—and in fact, may be a sign that the stigma surrounding sexual assault is lifting. 

“What we find with most, if not all, interpersonal crimes, [is that] when you draw attention to it, and you tell people ‘this is not okay,’ then people who have experienced it start to feel more comfortable coming forward,” says Abby Palko, director of the Maxine Platzer Lynn Women’s Center at UVA. 

According to Sheri Owen, community outreach director at the Sexual Assault Resource Agency, the #MeToo movement could be another reason more students are reporting sexual assaults.

“In the last two and a half years, there’s just really been an explosion of support around survivors. Survivors are feeling like they are being heard and that people are listening to them,” she says. 

Abby Palko has served as director of the Maxine Platzer Lynn Women’s Center at UVA for three and a half years. PC: Courtesy of UVA

Palko believes the movement has had a rather “complicated impact,” as there have been some people not held responsible for their crimes, “reinforcing an old message of, ‘No one’s going to believe you.’”

However, she agrees that it has brought the conversation of sexual assault to the national forefront, encouraging more survivors to come forward.

“It has people who before weren’t talking about it, talking about it, and that can help make it feel safer for survivors to share their experiences,” she says. “There have been some high-profile examples of people being held accountable afterwards; that also makes it feel safer.”

A new approach 

Perhaps the biggest change is the way the university has remade its Title IX process. 

Title IX is the federal law prohibiting gender discrimination; in the 1990s, the Supreme Court ruled that it can be used to require schools to respond appropriately to reports of sexual harassment and sexual violence against students.

In 2011, the Department of Education issued what is now known as the “Dear Colleague” letter, declaring that colleges and universities receiving federal funding had responsibilities under Title IX to ensure the safety of all students from sexual assault, particularly female students. 

Soon afterward, the Office of Civil Rights opened what would become a years-long compliance review of UVA’s Title IX policies, along with those of dozens of other colleges.

Meanwhile, beginning in 2014, the university performed its own comprehensive evaluation of its existing Title IX policies and practices.

In spring 2015, it developed a new interim policy for handling sexual violence complaints and made it available for public comment. After receiving more than 600 comments from members of the UVA community, the university revised and implemented the interim policy, effective July 1, 2015, with approval from OCR that it fully complied with Title IX.

The OCR’s investigation finally came to an end in September 2015, finding that the university’s previous sexual assault and sexual misconduct policies “did not provide for the prompt and equitable resolution of student and employee complaints,” and were in violation of Title IX. It determined that “a basis for a hostile environment existed for affected students” and that “the university failed to eliminate a hostile environment and take steps to prevent its recurrence,” specifically from 2008 to 2014. The investigation also concluded that, from 2008 to 2012, the Title IX coordinator did not adequately oversee and coordinate all Title IX complaints.

After an intense set of negotiations, UVA agreed, among other things, to continue to follow its new Title IX policies, provide training to students and employees, improve outreach to students, and develop a system for tracking reports and investigations of sexual misconduct. It also committed to reviewing reports from 2011-2014 to determine whether they were appropriately addressed, and allowed the OCR to review and monitor its response to reports during the 2015-16 academic year.

To better address Title IX reports, in 2015 the university hired a full-time Title IX coordinator, “who participates in the initial evaluation [of reports] and now takes the lead regarding any informal or formal resolutions of Title IX reports,” says university spokesman Brian Coy. 

The same year, the university also hired an associate vice president to lead the Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights office. Since then, EOCR has grown to have seven full-time Title IX staff, including four full-time investigators. 

Back in 2014, then-associate dean Nicole Eramo was one of three deputy Title IX coordinators, and as head of the Sexual Misconduct Board she was heavily featured in the Rolling Stone piece, which presented her as being more concerned about the university’s reputation than Jackie’s alleged assault. (Eramo sued the magazine for defamation, and won.) Reflecting back on her experience in a recent Facebook post, Eramo wrote: “The job as it was structured was impossible—a perspective that I believe is well supported by the fact that 7 full-time staff members and a host of others do now what was, on paper, only 50% of my job at the time.”

More money, more resources

In addition to beefing up its staff and training, UVA has given increased funding and support to organizations that assist sexual assault survivors on Grounds. 

Over the past five years, Counseling & Psychological Services has nearly doubled its staff, which includes licensed social workers, counselors, psychologists, nurse practitioners, and psychiatrists. 

“CAPS staff are trained in a variety of interventions, including evidence-based trauma therapies, and are a confidential resource for students seeking support following sexual assault and other forms of interpersonal violence,” says Coy. 

The Women’s Center has also received more funding and support from the university. Since 2015, it has created four new counseling positions, including two trauma counselors, a case manager, and a resident in counseling with special expertise and experience in the role of cultural, racial, gender, and sexual identity in mental health. 

The center’s counselors provide trauma-informed treatment for students of all genders (not just women), while its confidential advocate “works with students who are going through the Title IX process, if they need that type of support,” says Palko, helping them with paperwork, connecting them with resources, and accompanying them to hearings. 

All of the center’s counselors (with only a few exceptions) are confidential employees, meaning they are not required to share information about students or their experiences with the university’s Title IX office. 

Women’s Center interns help run educational events like the survivor support network trainings, which explain the neurobiology of trauma and “help people understand what someone who has been assaulted is going through and how they can provide support to them,” says Palko.

Outside of the university, Charlottesville’s Sexual Assault Resource Agency also offers support. 

Whenever a student reports a sexual assault at UVA’s Student Health center, staff calls an advocate from SARA, who provides emotional support during the physical evidence recovery kit exam, and can assist victims with follow-up medical and counseling appointments and any subsequent criminal process. Victims who choose to have that exam do not have to make a report to the police, the university, or any other agency, and evidence will not be submitted without their written consent. 

“Our advocacy coordinator also works very closely with Title IX and sits with students during any type of Title IX interviews,” says Owen. “And our outreach team regularly goes and talks with fraternities and sororities…[and] trains all of the Madison House helpline volunteers.”

The UVA Clothesline Project and the Red Flag Campaign invite survivors of sexual violence to share their stories anonymously, and display their messages on Grounds. PC: Take Back The Night and The Women’s Center at UVA

A change in (rape) culture?

But have all of these changes made an actual impact on what students have called UVA’s “rape culture?” What is the atmosphere surrounding sexual assault on Grounds like today? 

From the conversations she has had post-graduation with UVA’s Program Coordinator for Prevention Rachel Kiliany, Smith-Scales believes that “things are on the right track.” Just this year, One Less, a female and gender nonconforming sexual assault peer education group, and One in Four, an all-male identified group, came together to create CORE (Culture of Respected Educators), a gender-inclusive sexual violence advocacy group, which Smith-Scales thinks is “a huge step in the right direction.”

“It’s really helpful to make it more of an accessible space to people who don’t fit into the gender binary, or who maybe just don’t want to be in a single gender space,” she says.

However, during her time with Take Back The Night, she struggled to diversify the conversation around sexual assault and to reach marginalized communities with the group’s events.

“There is definitely a culture and a stereotype of it just being for people who are members of white traditional Greek life,” she says. 

Smith-Scales also saw an overall decrease in participation in sexual assault advocacy. By the time she became TBTN co-chair, “the people that were getting involved were people that came having a desire to fight sexual assault,” not people with a newfound interest in the cause.

“Outreach just became really difficult. I think one of the reasons was because the environment and the culture got oversaturated with causes to care about. I feel like the first one was President Trump being elected to office…and then the second one being August 11th and 12th,” she says. “That really changed…where people put their justice efforts at UVA.”

During the rise of the #MeToo movement, Smith-Scales believes there was an increase in attention on sexual assault on Grounds. However, she does not think it gained much momentum.

“Rolling Stone was so easy to unify on because it was directly affecting our community,” she says. “With #MeToo the conversations became a little bit more nuanced. They weren’t just about college students.”

She ultimately feels “like the university on their end, and also the university students…really just shifted their focus onto different things,” she says. “It was really disheartening to see that the passion wasn’t as present as when the Rolling Stone situation came about.”

In the 2019 campus climate survey, 38 percent of female respondents and 20 percent of male respondents said sexual assault and misconduct was “very” or “extremely” problematic­—a significant percentage, but lower than in 2015, when those numbers were 49 percent for women and 28 percent for men.   

Angela (not her real name), a fourth-year student, is one who believes that the culture surrounding sexual assault is “still a really big problem” at UVA.

“A lot of cases are still not dealt with properly,” she says. “It’s hard for survivors to come out and actually talk about things because…of the confidential/non-confidential employee [policy],” which requires all responsible employees (including professors and resident advisors) to report prohibited conduct to the university’s Title IX coordinator.

“As a survivor, I have friends who are RAs, and I can’t even talk to them about my experience because then they’d have to report it,” she says. “That’s just kind of messed up.”

And like Smith-Scales, she feels that “the Grounds-wide conversation has kind of dwindled since Rolling Stone.”

“When it’s talked about, it’s among groups that are actively trying to bring up the issue,” says another fourth-year student. “It’s not really with the general population.”

A variety of student groups regularly host events and campaigns against sexual assault at UVA, including Take Back The Night and the Red Flag Campaign. PC: The Women’s Center at UVA

Room for improvement

Ultimately, while the university has made a lot of positive changes, students say there is still more work to be done.

Smith-Scales wishes that the university would put more momentum behind the conversations surrounding sexual assault, as well as hire more staff to assist Kiliany.

Kiliany “is incredible at her job, but she is the only prevention coordinator when other universities have dedicated teams to causes like this,” says Smith-Scales. 

Others hope the university will improve its initiatives and resources for sexual assault, becoming more proactive than reactive.

“The university needs to do more than just run those programs when you’re a first-year, and the review you get when you’re a third-year,” says Angela. It also pushes “a lot of students into CAPS,” when “CAPS doesn’t have the capacity to serve all students.”

Though fraternities are not the only perpetrators of sexual assault, Rebecca (not her real name) believes the university’s frat culture is still a “big contributer” to the problem, and that administration needs to do a better job of reprimanding Greek organizations. 

“There’s a lot of things that go on within those organizations that remain unchecked,” she says. “At the end of the day, there’s a lot of big donors to the school that may be former members of a fraternity or a sorority. The university knows if they hand down a really harsh punishment to these groups, they’re not going to receive funding.”

“Check a basement of any frat on Friday or Saturday night, and you’ll see some questionable stuff,” she adds. 

And, as students like Angela have pointed out, the university’s mandatory reporting policy needs improvement, says SARA’s Owens. She says students can be afraid to report or talk about sexual assault because of uncertainty over who is a mandatory reporter and who isn’t. “I think all intentions were good, but in some instances…[it’s] turned out to not be as good as we had hoped.”

Meanwhile, federal guidance on Title IX policies may be changing under Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. Pulling back from the Obama administration’s efforts to increase protections for victims, the proposed guidelines would add new requirements designed to protect the rights of students accused of sexual assault, including the ability to cross-examine accusers. They would also narrow the definition of sexual harassment and restrict administrators to investigating only certain incidents, as well as allow universities to set their own standards of evidence for finding an accused student guilty of assault.

In 2016, UVA came under a federal Title IX investigation that was sparked by an individual complaint from a former male student who claimed that he was discriminated against in the investigation process based on his gender and disability, according to a UVA spokesperson at the time. Coy declined to comment on the specifics of that case or another investigation opened in February 2018, both of which are still active. 

Once the new regulations are made official, UVA will determine if any changes to its Title IX policy and procedures are necessary. 

Smith-Scales believes the changes could make universities less accountable, putting an increased burden back on students to demand justice for victims. 

“It also sends a message from our government that they don’t care and that the sexual assault and harassment isn’t something we will prioritize,” she says. “That message in itself will lead to losses.”

Updated 12/5 to correct the number of staff positions added to the Women’s Center at UVA

Categories
News

Court costs: After winning jury trial, Eramo settles

Nearly two years after filing a more than $7.5 million defamation suit against Rolling Stone, its parent company and “A Rape on Campus” reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely—and five months after a jury awarded her $3 million—former UVA associate dean Nicole Eramo settled her case, likely for much less.

The November 19, 2014, Rolling Stone article shook UVA to its core and became a national sensation—until the story told by alleged gang-rape victim Jackie began to unravel. By December 5, 2014, Rolling Stone announced it no longer had faith in Jackie’s tale, and in April 2015, following a lacerating analysis by Columbia Journalism Review, the magazine retracted the story.

A month later, Eramo, the university’s go-to sexual assault administrator, filed suit. Among her complaints were that the article made her the “chief villain” in a tale of institutional indifference to rape, damaged her reputation and caused her emotional distress.

The jury trial lasted 17 days last fall in the U.S. District courthouse, culminating in the jury’s November 7 $3 million award.

Libel attorney Alice Neff Lucan says it’s not that uncommon to settle defamation cases after a jury verdict.

“One reason for a plaintiff to settle is to avoid more legal fees,” she says. “Any libel case is ripe for appeal.”

And indeed, the same day the jury made its award, Rolling Stone attorney Elizabeth McNamara said the magazine would appeal.

In February, Rolling Stone asked a federal judge to set aside the jury’s verdict, arguing that Rolling Stone’s December 2014 publication of the story with an editor’s note expressing lack of confidence in Jackie’s story did not constitute republication with actual malice. Judge Glen Conrad had not ruled on the motion when the case was settled.

Filing such a motion is “standard operating procedure,” says Lucan, who said she hadn’t followed the trial. “I’m assuming without knowing that the settlement is less than the award.”

A crowdsourcing website to help pay Eramo’s legal fees raised $31,086 of its $500,000 goal from 178 donors. “Nicole’s lawyers have agreed to discount their legal fees, but lawsuits are expensive and Nicole needs our help to cover the costs of litigation,” says the CrowdRise fundraiser page created by True Hoos.

And the cost of a trial that ran more than three weeks? “You could buy a couple of houses with what that cost,” says Lucan.

In January, Eramo’s attorneys at Clare Locke filed with the court a bill of costs incurred for the trial for $144,673, including more than $90,000 for transcripts.

Besides the expense of fighting an appeal, Lucan says there are other reasons to settle. “Being involved in a lawsuit is so draining,” she says. Emotionally it’s very difficult, and there’s the “personal wear and tear that really is part of the costs,” she says.

In a statement, the magazine says, “Rolling Stone, Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Nicole Eramo have come to an amicable resolution. The terms are confidential.”

And Eramo’s attorney, Libby Locke, says, “We are delighted that this dispute is now behind us, as it allows Nicole to move on and focus on doing what she does best, which is supporting victims of sexual assault.”

The settlement gives both sides control and it also ends it, says Lucan. “Maybe vindication for Dean Eramo means more than the dollar award.”

Categories
News

In brief: Payne, Ross outta here, Woodriff buying arena and more

Payne, Ross closing

When politicians need flack assistance stat, there’s one number they call: Payne, Ross and Associates. And around the beginning of the new year, Charlottesville’s public relations institution will close its doors after almost 35 years. “It’s a new vision,” says principal Susan Payne. Partner Lisa Ross Moorefield says the closing is a mutual decision, and she’ll be “exploring less structured options.”

Woodriff confirms arena deal

Hedge fund founder Jaffray Woodriff is buying the Main Street Arena, as previously reported by C-VILLE. Attorney Valerie Long says, “Our client is now the purchaser of the ice park for an entity he’s involved with.” His QIM firm is not involved in the deal, and he is not ready to talk about whether there will be an ice park in another location, says Long.

sydneyBlair
Courtesy UVA

R.I.P. Sydney Blair

Beloved UVA creative writing prof Sydney Blair, 67, died unexpectedly December 12 after being hospitalized for pancreatitis. She joined the faculty in 1986, won the Virginia Prize for Fiction for her novel Buffalo in 1991 and wrote many stories, articles and reviews for journals.

Why it’s not paying for West Main

UVA generates $4.8 billion in economic activity in this region, according to a recent study. The university has been cool to city suggestions that it pitch in on the West Main streetscape project, saying it already significantly contributes to the local economy. UVA doesn’t pay Charlottesville property taxes.

Albemarle County Executive Tom Foley says the good news about an otherwise grim budget is that no one gets laid off and county employees get a raise. Staff photo
Tom Foley. Staff photo

County exec wanted

Albemarle’s Tom Foley is riding into the sunset, er, to Stafford County, to be head administrator there. Foley started in Albemarle in 1999, and succeeded Bob Tucker as county exec in 2011.

Day in the sun

Solar Panel 2 by Dominion“The sun is my almighty physician,” once said the ubiquitous Thomas Jefferson.

In a small room at UVA on December 6, packed wall-to-wall with people eager to celebrate the installation of 1,589 solar panels on university rooftops, President of Dominion Virginia Power Bob Blue said, “I’m not exactly sure what he meant by that.” But what he does know is that UVA is one of 10 groups participating in Dominion’s Solar Partnership Program, and once all the panels are installed atop Ruffner Hall and the University Bookstore, they will generate 364 kilowatts of energy—or enough to power 91 homes.

Bright future

  • 965 panels, which could power the equivalent of 52 homes, are already installed
  • Students and Dominion will study the energy pumped back into UVA’s grid
  • The school’s 2008 Delta Force sustainability program reduced energy usage in 37 buildings, saving $22 million in energy costs so far

Steak of America

The Downtown Mall will be Bank of America-less, but will have another steakhouse. Staff photoWhen Bank of America closes its branch doors downtown in February, it leaves a grand 1916 building in its wake that will house a steakhouse, according to building owner Hunter Craig. And while he declined to identify the grilled-meat purveyor, he did say it would be locally owned, not a national chain.

Also inhabiting 300 E. Main St., which began as Peoples Bank and during its 100-year history has morphed into Virginia National Bank, Sovran Bank and NationsBank before Bank of America, will be…another bank. “Not Virginia National Bank,” specified Craig, who sits on the VNB board of directors.

Other as-yet-undisclosed tenants will lease office space in the building.

Quote of the week

“Plaintiff threatens to set a dangerous precedent for news organizations and those who rely upon them for accurate up-to-the-minute news throughout the country.”—Brief filed by eight news organizations in support of Rolling Stone’s motion to overturn Nicole Eramo’s $3 million judgment

Correction 12/19: Sydney Blair’s age and date of death were both wrong in the original version.

Categories
News

In brief: Screwdrivered, Uber option and more

And the next election cycle begins

platania
Joe Platania. Susan Parmar Photography

Charlottesville Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Joe Platania says he’ll seek his boss’ job in 2017. Commonwealth’s Attorney Dave Chapman plans to retire after 24 years as the city’s top prosecutor. And state Senator Bryce Reeves officially threw his hat into the lieutenant governor’s ring, vying with two other Republicans who want the nomination.

Screwdriver stabbing

City police say Keith Lamont Brooks, 40, stabbed a family member with a screwdriver December 3 at 4am in the 800 block of St. Charles Avenue and fled the scene before police arrived. He was arrested the following day without incident. Brooks’ rap sheet includes possession of cocaine, grand larceny, multiple probation violations and driving as a habitual offender.

Streak snapped

UVA men’s basketball’s 24 home game-winning streak ended December 3 when West Virginia’s Mountaineers cleaned house at JPJ with a 66-57 victory.

Rolling Stone rebuffs verdict

eramo-eze-amos
Nicole Eramo’s $3 million award is being challenged. Photo Eze Amos

The magazine filed motions December 5 asking a judge to overturn the jury’s $3 million award to UVA administrator Nicole Eramo, contending Eramo did not prove Rolling Stone and reporter Sabrina Erdely acted with actual malice in publishing “A Rape on Campus” in 2013.

Look out, Uber

HyperFocal: 0Ride-share competitor Lyft began offering rides and gig economy jobs December 1. New passengers using the code VALOVE got $5 off their first ride.

Don’t give money to strangers who call

The Albemarle Sheriff’s Office is NOT demanding immediate payment of fines for skipping jury duty and warns of a holiday scam.

Quiz: Real or fake?

toy guns_edit
Albemarle County Police

Safety first

Police officers in America killed at least 28 juveniles and adults carrying BB or pellet guns in 2015, in instances in which the officers did not realize the firearms were fake. In preparation for every parent’s inevitable Christmas shopping frenzy, the Albemarle County and Charlottesville police departments are preparing a program to inform families of the dangers of buying and using these faux firearms.

“We’re hoping to prevent a local tragedy,” says ACPD Crime Prevention Specialist Andrew Gluba, adding that there have been several instances locally in which law enforcement officers encountered toy gun-toting juveniles. “We’re not saying don’t let your kids play with these, we’re saying educate them if they do,” he says.

How to help:

  • Don’t buy toy guns (i.e. BB/pellet/airsoft).
  • Talk to your kids about the dangers of how their toy guns can be perceived.
  • Teach them to put the gun down immediately if confronted by police or someone else.

Answer key: 1. Fake 2. Fake 3. Fake 4. Fake 5. Fake 6. Fake 7. Fake. All guns pictured were confiscated locally.

Quote of the week

“This whole issue of matters by the public is a tempest in a teapot. Just ignore it. You’ve got far more important things to do.”

—John Pfaltz at the December 5 City Council meeting, where petitioners sought to throw out new comment procedures

Categories
News

Day 17: Jury awards $3 million in Rolling Stone defamation trial

As former UVA dean Nicole Eramo’s marathon $7.5 million defamation suit against Rolling Stone rolled into its fourth week, a jury awarded her $3 million in damages Monday for the magazine’s November 2014 story, “A Rape on Campus.”

“This was nothing short of a complete repudiation of Rolling Stone and Sabrina Erdely’s malicious journalism,” said Eramo attorney Libby Locke.

The award put $2 million of the liability on reporter Erdely for statements in her story and post-publication publicity, and found Rolling Stone liable for $1 million for republishing the story December 5, 2014, with an editor’s note saying it found one-named source Jackie no longer credible.

“I’m certainly happy to be putting it behind me and getting to the next chapter of my life,” said Eramo after the jury award.

“The real win was Friday and the verdict and the public repudiation of Rolling Stone,” said Locke. “Shame on them. Shame on them.”

The Rolling Stone legal team, along with Erdely and managing deputy editor Sean Woods, left by the federal courthouse back door, and when spotted in The Pointe lounge at the Omni Hotel, declined to comment, but seemed rather cheery despite the jury’s decision.

“Yeah, we’re going to appeal,” said attorney Elizabeth McNamara.

Friday, November 4, was when, after two-and-a-half days of deliberation, the jury found that Rolling Stone, Erdely and Wenner Media acted with actual malice when it published the now debunked tale of UVA student Jackie’s alleged gang rape at Phi Kappa Psi and its assertions that Eramo discouraged victims from reporting assaults and had a “nonreaction” when Jackie told her about two additional gang rapes at Phi Psi.

The jury was back in court Monday for the damages portion of the trial.

Rolling Stone attorney David Paxton, representing a chastened Rolling Stone that heard the jury’s verdict “loud and clear” on Friday and wanted “to take our medicine,” he said, reminded jurors that the scope of the initial suit had been narrowed to three statements in the story, and not the article as a whole nor the illustration of Eramo that she said made her “look like the devil.”

After the Rolling Stone article came out, Eramo’s anguish was so great, she said she curled into a ball, wanted to disappear and considered suicide, testimony that had one juror wiping a tear and another nodding her head in agreement with the harm Eramo said the story caused her.

When she first read the story, Eramo found its account of a gang rape “heartbreaking,” and she was confused. She said, “I didn’t understand why [Jackie] didn’t let me help her.”

Then she read the parts about her, and said, with her voice breaking, it was “somebody who had my name, and then the picture was somebody who had my face, but not somebody I recognized.”

The depiction of her discouraging survivors from reporting their assaults “was devastating to me,” she said. “That was exactly the opposite of what I tried to do.”

Eramo described the “surreal” feeling of walking through Grounds after the story came out with everybody upset. A SlutWalk to end rape culture ended up protesting outside her office, and “created the picture that was in the story,” she said.

Fearing for her physical safety, her husband would pick her up from work at night. She turned the more than 200 vicious e-mails she received over to University Police, and she read a sampling of them:

“I’m sickened by what I have read and you should be ashamed of yourself and how you treat victims of sexual assault.”

“You are a despicable human being.”

Another had the subject line: “Dean of rape.”

Eramo told the jury she cried constantly and couldn’t sleep or eat. Using student lingo, she said, “I was a hot mess.” She retreated into herself and “felt like a pox upon people near me,” she added.

The damages hearing also included testimony about her breast cancer. A double mastectomy had been scheduled for December 19, 2014, exactly one month after the Rolling Stone article was published.

By the end of January, she had an infection and ended up in the hospital for nine days, which caused her to abandon reconstruction and push back chemotherapy.

“I felt seriously debilitated going into my surgery,” she said.

Her doctor, Kant Lin, testified, “Stress is a very insidious thing,” and created “an unfavorable situation for surgical healing.”

Her husband, Kirt von Daacke, a UVA history professor and assistant dean, described the impact of the Rolling Stone story: “Holy cow. When the article hit, it was as if someone set the University of Virginia on fire.”

The day the article came out, he heard his wife crying at 5am. “And it got worse from there,” he said, with protests outside her office and a faculty e-mail chain calling for her to be fired. “I’ve never heard so many angry people talking about my wife,” he said.

“They destroyed her,” he said.

And on the Sunday after the article came out, he heard “sobbing from the abyss,” he said. “It was a wail I’ve never heard from her. She was curled up in the fetal position in a little ball. I don’t know how we got through that.”

He also noted, “To me, it looks like she’s aged five years in the past two years. It’s hard when you’re nearly 50 to have the career you thought you had taken away.”

Eramo’s attorney Tom Clare directed the jury to consider the injury his client had suffered from pain, embarrassment, humiliation or mental suffering. Injury to her reputation and her professional standing, including the “loss of her dream job,” should also be part of the award, he said.

“Nicole’s great-grandchildren will never know her,” he said. “What they will know is what’s on the Internet.”

Paxton countered that when her descendants Google her, “the story is going to be about the vindication of Ms. Eramo.”

Categories
News

Judgment day: Jury rules in Eramo’s favor

As soon as the clerk in federal court read the first verdict finding actual malice in Nicole Eramo’s defamation lawsuit against Rolling Stone reporter Sabrina Erdely, the UVA administrator crumpled against her attorney.

And as the clerk went on to read more than two dozen statements upon which the jury had to decide in the suit against Erdely, Rolling Stone and Wenner Media LLC, with only a few exceptions, the jurors found actual malice on each count November 4.

“Today was a really good day,” said Eramo attorney Libby Locke with her client at her side, along with Eramo’s supporters. “We said all along Rolling Stone published a false article.”

Rolling Stone attorney Elizabeth McNamara declined to comment. Erdely remained composed in the courtroom, but she was weeping as she went out the back door of the U.S. District Court.

The decision came after 16 days in court and two and a half days of jury deliberation in Eramo’s $7.5 million suit stemming from the November 2014 Rolling Stone story, “A Rape on Campus.” The story, which recounted the tale of Jackie, who claimed she was gang raped at Phi Kappa Psi, quickly unraveled, and by April 2015, after a searing examination by Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, Rolling Stone retracted the story.

Eramo, who was in charge of handling victims of sexual assault and the Sexual Assault Misconduct Board at UVA, filed suit the next month, contending that the story portrayed her as a callous and indifferent administrator, according to Erdely’s preconceived storyline.

A judge earlier had ruled that Eramo is a public figure, and the jury had to determine whether Rolling Stone acted with actual malice in its publication of the story and three specific statements that Eramo contends are false: that she discouraged Jackie from sharing her story, that she said, “Nobody wants to send their daughter to the rape school,” and that she had a “non reaction” when Jackie told her in April 2014 that two other young women had been gang raped at the same fraternity.

Erdely faced the most counts of defamation, and the jury found all of the statements actionable, but did not find the “rape school” statement was published with actual malice.

The jury also believed that in post-publication interviews on the “Brian Lehrer Show” and Slate in November 2014, Erdely made statements with actual malice about Eramo, as well as in an e-mail to the Washington Post November 30, 2014.

Rolling Stone and Wenner Media were found to have acted with actual malice when the magazine republished the story December 5, 2014, with an editor’s note saying that it no longer found Jackie credible, although the jury did not believe the original November 19, 2014, story was published with actual malice.

After the verdict, Rolling Stone issued a statement and apology to Eramo.

“For almost 50 years, Rolling Stone has aimed to produce journalism with the highest reporting and ethical standards, and with a strong humanistic point of view,” it said. “In our desire to present this complicated issue from the perspective of a survivor, we overlooked reporting paths and made journalistic mistakes that we are committed to never making again. We deeply regret these missteps and sincerely apologize to anyone hurt by them, including Ms. Eramo.”

Legal expert David Heilberg, who is not connected to the case, says, “Obviously the jury thought it was more than pure negligence.”

He compares it to walking toward a goal. “The difference between negligence and actual malice is with negligence, you’re walking toward a goal and ignoring everything else. With actual malice, you’re walking toward a goal with blinders on and you’re not using your peripheral vision.”

Heilberg also says, “I find it interesting that in exactly the time where we’ve set new lows in our political discourse, the jury could find actual malice.”

The jury adjourned for the day and will return Monday for the damages portion of the trial, in which it hears testimony about how the article affected Eramo and awards some or all of her $7.5 million claim.

Categories
News

Jury deliberates for third day in Rolling Stone trial

The waiting game continues Friday for Nicole Eramo, Sabrina Erdely and Rolling Stone deputy managing editor Sean Woods, along with their lawyers, support staff and the media as Day 16 in Eramo’s defamation lawsuit trial against the magazine begins and the jury deliberates for a third day.

The jury will decide whether Rolling Stone acted with actual malice when it published the now-retracted “A Rape on Campus” November 19, 2014. The story recounted first-year Jackie’s lurid tale of a gang rape at Phi Kappa Psi, which wreaked havoc on grounds at UVA before her account fell apart within a few weeks. A later Charlottesville Police investigation could find no evidence of the assault.

Eramo’s $7.5 million complaint says she was unfairly depicted as an indifferent administrator who tried to steer sexual assault victims from reporting to police to keep rape statistics low, because, “Nobody wants to send their daughter to the rape school,” a statement in the article she says she never made.

The case drew national attention, and even now reporters from the Washington Post, New York Times, CNN and ABC are waiting for a decision.

“The only thing predictable about a jury is its unpredictability,” says legal expert David Heilberg, who is not connected to the case.

And if the jury rules in favor of Eramo, the trial will continue with a damages phase, which her attorney Libby Locke has estimated could take another half day of testimony. That will send the jury back to determine how much to award.

Categories
News

Day 13: Attorneys make final pitches in Rolling Stone trial

It was closing argument day November 1 in U.S. District Court, the site of former UVA associate dean Nicole Eramo’s defamation trial against Rolling Stone for its now-retracted “A Rape on Campus,” and lawyers for both sides spent more than three hours each trying to sway the jury to find for their clients.

Plaintiff’s attorney Tom Clare noted the “tremendous amount of material” thrown at jurors during the trial, which is now in its third week, and he tallied the 12 live witnesses, 11 hours of video and 286 exhibits that have been presented.

He returned to the theme from his opening argument: “This is a case about journalism,” not about rape, nor whether Jackie, the troubled young woman whose tale of a gang rape at a fraternity actually happened, nor whether victim choice on reporting sexual assaults on campus is a good thing.

The case, he said, is about how people like Nicole Eramo, who was the sexual assault point person at UVA, “became collateral damage in a sensational story.”

Clare described the “avoidable” missteps Rolling Stone and reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely made, which were investigated and identified in a lacerating 13,000-word report in the Columbia Journalism Review, as “Journalism 101” at least a half dozen times.

“Erdely has a career of writing stories about institutional indifference,” said Clare. He dubbed her MO the “three Vs”– victim, villain and vindicator. In “A Rape on Campus,” Jackie was the victim, Eramo the villain and Rolling Stone and Erdely were the vindicators, exposing UVA’s callous handling of sexual assault, he said.

Because a judge ruled Eramo is a public figure, she has to prove Erdely and Rolling Stone acted with actual malice, and according to Clare, Erdely’s failure to corroborate Jackie’s claims, her departure from Journalism 101 standards and a preconceived story line constituted a “reckless disregard for the truth,” which is part of the actual malice definition.

Clare also cited “giant waving red flags,” and had a high-production value presentation to show jurors Rolling Stone’s marked-up copy before and after facts or quotes had been edited out, complete with a red pen striking through the deleted material.

Among the red flags: Jackie only introduced Erdely to people who had heard the story from Jackie, but refused to identify the alleged perpetrator of the gang rape or the three friends she claimed discouraged her from going to the police after the alleged September 28, 2012, incident, said Clare.

Nor did Erdely attempt to find “Armpit” and “Blanket,” two of Jackie’s alleged assailants at Phi Kappa Psi, or physical evidence of the rape, such as Jackie’s bloody, torn dress or her medical records for the syphilis she claimed she contracted, said the attorney.

Most damning, according to Clare, was that Rolling Stone had removed from the story the fact that Eramo took Jackie to the police after Jackie was allegedly beaned with a bottle in April 2014. “That’s actual malice,” said Clare.

Not surprisingly, defendants’ attorney Scott Sexton disagreed.

“There’s a temptation to piggyback on the mistakes” in the article, he said. “We acknowledge those mistakes.” But even if Rolling Stone had not used Jackie’s story of a gang rape, “it would not have prevented them from publishing a story about how UVA responds to rape,” he said.

And because Eramo is a public figure, “a highly compensated official at a state institution,” he said, that’s why she has to prove malice.

“We are entitled to criticize public figures,” said Sexton.

He dismissed Clare’s red flags: “Roughly 97.3 percent of what Mr. Clare said in his opening is irrelevant.”

Yesterday, Judge Glen Conrad dismissed Eramo’s claim that the article defamed her by implication, which included the illustration of Eramo that she testified made her “look like the devil.”

“Gone,” said Sexton.

He disputed the three specific statements in the article that Eramo claims are false: that she discouraged Jackie from sharing her story, that she said, “Nobody wants to send their daughter to the rape school,” when Jackie sought rape statistics, and that Eramo had a “nonreaction” when Jackie told her in April 2014 that two other young women had been gang raped at Phi Psi.

The latter, said Sexton, “is not even defamatory,” because Erdely had asked Jackie to describe Eramo’s face when she told her about the other alleged incidents.

He said actual malice means the defendants would have to have published the story with knowledge of or with reckless disregard of the statements’ falsity.

Erdely found Jackie credible, said Sexton, as did the editors and fact checker at Rolling Stone.

“This is what serious doubt looks like,” he said, showing a copy of the 1:54am December 5, 2014, “our worst nightmare” e-mail Erdely sent to Rolling Stone deputy managing editor Sean Woods when she no longer believed Jackie credible.

And Clare’s contention that Erdely was negligent in failing to investigate Jackie’s bogus claims is not actual malice, explained Sexton.

Both attorneys displayed verdict forms the jury will use for each of the defendants after it determines whether the story was actionable and whether the defendant acted with actual malice.

Clare marked the two questions with “yes.” Sexton marked his with “no.”

The jury will begin deliberations Wednesday morning.

After the hearing, Eramo attorney Libby Locke said she thinks the jury deliberation is “going to be very quick,” because the actual malice is “very compelling.”

If the jury finds in Eramo’s favor, the next phase of the bifurcated trial is damages, which Locke said will probably take a half day. “I think it’s going to be a heart-wrenching phase of the trial to hear how this has affected Nicole and her family.”

 

 

 

Categories
News

Day 12: Judge tosses part of Eramo’s suit against Rolling Stone

The third week of former UVA dean Nicole Eramo’s $7.5 million defamation trial against Rolling Stone began October 31, and in a nod to Halloween, Eramo chose black and orange attire for her court appearance. Her attorney, Libby Locke, came in sporting crutches, but those were not a costume and came from a sprained ankle over the weekend, according to the judge.

Otherwise, it was a trial day with a hint in the air that it all might be over soon, especially after Judge Glen Conrad dismissed a portion of Eramo’s claim that the overall article, “A Rape on Campus,” defamed her by implication.

No reasonable juror would find that “the story implies that Eramo was a false friend to Jackie who pretended to be on Jackie’s side while seeking to suppress sexual assault reporting,” the judge ruled. He also found that Eramo did not establish that the defendants “designed and intended this defamatory implication.”

Rolling Stone called it “a critical element” of Eramo’s case, and said in a statement, “We are pleased that the judge recognizes the limitations of Plaintiff’s lawsuit and we trust the jury will find that her remaining claims also have no merit.”

Conrad refused to throw out other parts of the suit, and he said the jury will consider “the things Jackie said to Eramo, things that can be read that Eramo was indifferent to sexual assault victims” and whether Eramo discouraged the reporting of sexual assault.

And the magazine had less success in arguing that its republication of the story on December 5 and 6, 2014, with editor’s notes that first said the magazine’s trust in Jackie was misplaced and then that the mistakes were the magazine’s responsibility, did not constitute actual malice.

“Every time a publication enters a correction, that would constitute republication,” said Rolling Stone attorney Elizabeth McNamara.

“You and I are going to have to disagree on that,” said Conrad.

The judge cited Rolling Stone founder Jann Wenner’s testimony from Friday, in which Wenner said that in order to understand what is being taken back, you have to reread the article. ”That can be deemed republication under that law,” said Conrad. “I’m going to let the jury decide.”

The magazine called to the stand Susan Davis, UVA associate vice president of student affairs, who was the point person between the university and the Office of Civil Rights when it began its investigation into UVA’s handling of sexual assaults in 2011.

Davis’ name came up in testimony last week in an e-mail, in which she said she wanted to kill a story the UVA alumni magazine was working on about sexual assault on campus unless it was substantially revised. The alumni magazine piece was in the works that same fall Erdely was reporting the Rolling Stone piece, and it never ran.

Davis testified that the OCR investigation had been dormant for 17 months until November 20, 2014, the morning after Rolling Stone published “A Rape on Campus,” the now-debunked tale of first-year Jackie’s gang rape at a fraternity.

In its September 2015 findings, the OCR determined UVA did not promptly investigate two cases of assault at fraternities, presumably Jackie and Stacy, who was also in the Rolling Stone story, although Davis said she did not know to which cases the OCR report referred.

The jury got a replay of Erdely’s recording of a September 12, 2014, dinner she had with Jackie, Alex Pinkleton and Jackie’s boyfriend, Connor, who learns that Jackie allegedly got syphilis from the alleged gang rape.

“Oh, that made my heart leap a little,” Connor said. Jackie assures him the STD is no longer a problem. When Erdely asked her for medical records, Jackie said she’ll get them from her mother, and then back tracks. “Actually she doesn’t have them,” said Jackie. “I never told her.”

On rebuttal with Erdely back on the stand, Locke pointed out the inconsistency.

“She was thinking out loud,” said Erdely. “She was flustered.”

Locke also focused on Jackie referring to Phi Kappa Psi, the fraternity where she claimed the gang rape occurred, as “Pi Phi,” which is a sorority, rather than Phi Psi in an interview with Erdely.

“I knew Pi Phi is a sorority,” said Erdely, “and I didn’t think she was telling me she was raped at a sorority.”

Locke pointed to another instance in Erdely’s notes where Jackie says Pi Phi. “She doesn’t have her story straight,” said Locke.

“No, it isn’t that she doesn’t have her story straight,” said Erdely. “It’s all Greek to her.”

Shortly after 2pm, with all evidence in, the judge dismissed the jury for the day, and was greeted with an arm pump and a “yay” by one of the jurors.

The jury returns for closing arguments Tuesday morning.

Categories
News

Day 11: Wenner defiant, Eramo rests in Rolling Stone trial

After 11 days of evidence, plaintiff Nicole Eramo rested her case against Rolling Stone October 28– but not before testimony from magazine founder Jann Wenner raised stakes and eyebrows in this $7.5 million libel case.

“We have never retracted the whole article– and don’t intend to,” declared the magazine owner in a videotaped deposition played for the jury in federal court.

In the video, Rolling’s Stone’s colorful leader appeared relaxed enough to occasionally put his boots on the table and gesticulate. And curse– as when discussing an editor’s note that began the process of disavowing the 2014 story of a vicious gang rape of a woman named Jackie at the University of Virginia.

“Who wants to post something that’s, ‘Oops, we fucked up so bad’?” asked Wenner.

Dressed in a sage green jacket over an open-collared sport shirt, Wenner acknowledged the flavorful writing style and point-of-view journalism that have become Rolling Stone hallmarks, but said there was nothing casual about Rolling Stone’s approach to reporting and fact-checking. Even in this case.

“I think we were the the victim of one of these rare, once-in-a-lifetime things that nobody in journalism can protect themselves against, no matter how hard they try,” said Wenner.

The evidence has shown that Rolling Stone, to accommodate Jackie, avoided pressing its protagonist for the full name of the alleged rape ring-leader and failed to contact the three friends who comforted her the night of her claimed attack.

“We had virtually 50 years of a perfect record in the most extreme stories– highly reported, difficult, complex stories with a lot of controversy,” said Wenner. “And all of our systems worked.”

As it turned out, investigations by journalists and by the Charlottesville Police Department refuted practically every aspect of Jackie’s story, and previous trial testimony showed that the trio of friends could have done so– if only the reporter had asked. So Wenner apologized to Eramo– in his own way.

“To the extent that we have caused you damage, and obviously we have– the fact that we’re here– I’m very, very sorry,” said Wenner. A moment later, he said, “Believe me, I’ve suffered as much as you have.”

There were other moments. For instance, Wenner accused the New York Observer of manufacturing a quotation until a lawyer showed him he’d sent the words via email. But it was his claim that he didn’t retract the whole story that made Friday afternoon headlines.

“It was a full retraction of our support of all that Jackie stuff,” Wenner explained.

When pressed to explain how a reader– given Rolling Stone’s attribution errors– could ascertain which pieces of the 9,000-word story came from Jackie, Wenner conceded that he didn’t know.

“I haven’t read it in quite a while.”

Wenner’s partial retraction stance puts him squarely on the side of the defense’s theory of the case: that for all its faults and errors, Rolling Stone’s story rendered a public service by showing how UVA improperly handled sexual assault reports, an assertion validated several months later by the civil rights office of the U.S. Department of Education.

“We were not retracting the fundamentals to that story,” Wenner testified. “We’re not retracting what we had to say about the overall issue of rape on campus.”

After Wenner’s testimony, Judge Glen Conrad seemed to find Wenner refreshingly “unfiltered,” but said the partial-retraction comments kept alive the plaintiff’s allegation that Rolling Stone continued to publish defamatory statements about Eramo.

Another Friday witness– again appearing on video– included UVA’s VP for student affairs, Pat Lampkin, who declined to specify why she blocked Rolling Stone from interviewing Eramo. The magazine’s digital director, Alvin Ling, testified on video that the online version of story got 2.4 million unique visitors before the first editor’s note went up– and other 285,000 uniques before it was taken down in April 2015.

The final witness for the plaintiff– again on video– was Will Dana, the managing editor sacked in the wake of the debacle. Even after acknowledging widespread “fabrications” from Jackie, he declined to malign her.

“I feel bad for what this girl has gone through since the story came out,” said Dana. “I will give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that she has been victimized in some way.”