Rolling Stone, rape journalism and corrections.

Same thing.

 

I had the same thought. It was pitch black, yet she could see how many young men were there and facial expressions. Unless someone had an incoming call or message that lit up a cell phone momentarily.
The part I'm most curious about now is just what did happen. Was Jackie indeed raped, but under different circumstances (whether it be somewhere else, different night, etc.) than she is describing? Was it sex she didn't think was consensual but the other person(s) did? And just how many other people were there, assuming the event did actually happen? It's hard to tell what the truth is here. It's too bad this was such a sloppy piece of journalism.

 

It's not that hard. She made it all up. Lock, stock, and barrel.

I never thought the pitch black thing was a big detail. Your eyes adjust. Plus, that's just the kind of empty phrase a writer might toss into a story, or a source might use, because it sounds descriptive, without really thinking about it.

 

Your certainty is troubling.

 

PW2 has been wired on this. He appeared on this site like a truth photon, never having been here before and just for this case.

Based on the fact that she MADE UP the person, even faking his pictures, it's somewhat likely the event itself did not happen either.

 

Well, I've followed the story pretty closely.

Until yesterday's revelations, as documented on the Sports and News thread, I was still entertaining the idea that she had at least experienced a gray area sexual encounter. Yesterday's Post story was a game-changer, though.

 

A truth photon?

Would that be a truon?

 

Is that what a truth photon is?

Hmmm. I like that term.

 

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/fo...cores-72-million-playing-stock-market.101606/