University of Virginia Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity Files $25 Million Lawsuit Against Rolling Stone for Faux “A Rape on Campus” Article
YOU KNEW IT WAS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME AND GOOD FOR THE UVA FRAT …
The Phi Kappa Psi fraternity at the University of Virginia has filed a $25 million lawsuit against Rolling Stone magazine for their false and libelous article they published in 2014 where they alleged that a female freshman was gang raped at the frat house during a party. It was later proved that the story was nothing but a bunch of bunk and poorly sourced and checked by Rolling Stone. The lawsuit stems from the 2014 article, “A Rape on Campus” that was supposed to depict a rape that took place upon a freshman named Jackie at the Phi Psi house on Sept. 28, 2012. The article went into great detail of how how Jackie was raped by seven men while two others watched in a second floor bedroom while a fraternity party raged downstairs. There was just one problem, it was all made up and false. Scared Monkeys had stated back in May 2015 after the UVA Dean had sued Rolling Stone, that it was only a matter of time before the fraternity did as well. Rolling Stone and the author of the article was forced to make a full apology back in April 2015. However, the wheels were already set in motion and we all knew this day was coming.
The Phi Kappa Psi fraternity chapter at the University of Virginia filed a $25 million lawsuit Monday against Rolling Stone magazine, which published an article in 2014 that alleged a freshman was gang raped at the house during a party.
The lawsuit focuses on a Rolling Stone article titled “A Rape on Campus,” which detailed a harrowing attack on a freshman named Jackie at the Phi Psi house on Sept. 28, 2012. The article, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, described how Jackie was raped by seven men while two others watched in a second floor bedroom while a fraternity party raged downstairs. The article alleged that the attack was part of a hazing ritual at the long-time U-Va. fraternity.
The Washington Post found significant discrepancies in the Rolling Stone account, including that the fraternity did not host a party that night in 2012 and that a student identified by Jackie as her main attacker was never a member of the fraternity and did not attend U-Va.
Two investigations — by the Columbia University journalism school and the Charlottesville Police Department — later confirmed that there was no gang rape at the fraternity.
Much more at Legal Insurrection and I second their motion that this lawsuit against Rolling Stone is going to be fun to watch.
More of Phi Psi’s statement from WaPo:
“The fraternity chapter and its student and alumni members suffered extreme damage to their reputations in the aftermath of the article’s publication and continue to suffer despite the ultimate unraveling of the story,” the Phi Psi chapter said in a statement Monday. “The article also subjected the student members and their families to danger and immense stress while jeopardizing the future existence of the chapter.”
Self-Proclaimed Black Woman Rachel Dolezal Once Sued Howard University for Discrimination Because She Was a White Woman
And just when you thought the story of Rachel Dolezal couldn’t get any more bizarre … Thanks Caityn Jenner, you have opened up the I feel therefore I am generation …
The Smoking Gun is reporting that Rachel Dolezal, the white woman who had pretended she was black and the former head of the NAACP Spokane, WA chapter, once sued Howard University for discrimination because she was a white woman. HUH? According to a Court of Appeals opinion, Dolezal’s lawsuit “claimed discrimination based on race, pregnancy, family responsibilities and gender.” Her lawsuit was dismissed in 2004 and later the appeal was upheld by the DC Court of Appeals. So as of 2004, Ms. Dolezal considered herself a white woman. So she is black one minute when it suits her purpose and white the next. Somewhere along the way she went from a discriminated white woman by a black institution to a black woman heading up an NAACP chapter. Who finds this rather interesting and calculating?
Read the lawsuit HERE.
Rachel Dolezal … the chameleon woman
The NAACP official who today resigned in the face of evidence that she masqueraded as black once sued Howard University for denying her teaching posts and a scholarship because she was a white woman, The Smoking Gun has learned.
Rachel Dolezal, 37, who headed the NAACP’s Spokane, Washington chapter, sued Howard for discrimination in 2002, the year she graduated from the historically black college with a Master of Fine Arts degree.
Dolezal, then known as Rachel Moore, named the university and Professor Alfred Smith as defendants in a lawsuit filed in Washington, D.C.’s Superior Court. During the pendency of the civil case, Smith was chairman of Howard’s Department of Art.
According to a Court of Appeals opinion, Dolezal’s lawsuit “claimed discrimination based on race, pregnancy, family responsibilities and gender.” She alleged that Smith and other school officials improperly blocked her appointment to a teaching assistant post, rejected her application for a post-graduate instructorship, and denied her scholarship aid while she was a student.
Judge Zoe Bush dismissed Dolezal’s complaint in February 2004, 18 months after the lawsuit was filed and Dolezal was deposed on several occasions. Bush found no evidence that Dolezal was discriminated on the basis of race or other factors. The D.C. Court of Appeals subsequently affirmed Bush’s decision.
So let’s under stand this, as the Jawa Report opines, Rachel Dolezal has railed against white people and championed the black cause, yet she sued Howard University, a predominantly black college for discrimination. Go figure. So she had her civil rights violated by a black college because she was white, yet she now is a black woman speaking of the ills of whitey. So where is her story to further her narrative of discrimination against white people? She seems to have forgot that portion of her life.
EXIT QUESTION: Did anyone in the NAACP ever bother to vet this woman?
City of New York Orders Al Sharpton’s Daughter (Dominique Sharpton) to Save Incriminating Hiking Pics & Not to Delete Instagram Bali Hiking Photos
RUT-ROH, Some one is in trouble …
As reported at the NY Post, NYC attorney have warned Dominique Sharpton, the daughter of Rev. Al Sharpton, not to destroy or delete any pics on her Instagram account, like the ones that show her hiking in Bali. The 28 year old Sharpton is suing NYC for $5 million claiming she fell in the street and sprained her ankle that supposedly left her “severely injured, bruised and wounded”. Dominique’s lawsuit states she “still suffers and will continue to suffer for some time physical pain and bodily injuries;” however, she stupidly posted hiking pics on her Instagram account showing her hiking in atop an Indonesian mountain and making comments regarding how tough the hikes were. CAN YOU SAY BUSTED!!!
City lawyers warned Dominique Sharpton not to delete Instagram photos like this one atop an Indonesian mountain — where she trekked while claiming in a lawsuit that she has “permanent” injuries.
The city Law Department sent Rev. Al’s daughter a letter telling her to preserve all of the damning evidence that she posted on her social-media accounts.
The warning comes after The Post revealed that Dominique Sharpton has been globe-trotting despite her May 7 suit that says she will never fully recover from a sprained ankle she suffered on an uneven Soho street.
CAN YOU SAY FRAUD!!!
Dominique Sharpton, Al Sharpton’s Daughter Sues New York City for $5M after Spraining Ankle (Update: Pics of Dominique Sharpton Hiking Mountains)
The apple does not fall far from the shake down tree in the Sharpton family … or is it by Shaking the Apple tree, trying to take a bite out of the Big Apple?
28 year old Dominique Sharpton, the daughter of Rev. Al Sharpton is suing the city of New York for $5 million. Dominique Sharpton is claiming she fell in the street, sprained her ankle and severely injured and bruised her ankle because of uneven pavement at the corner of Broome Street and Broadway downtown. Good grief. It would appear that Dominique has learned from the master of shakedown. According to her lawsuit, she “still suffers and will continue to suffer for some time physical pain and bodily injuries.” Dominique Sharpton claims she fell in a crosswalk, which would make hers a “defective roadway” claim. However, in December Dominique was good to go for NAN’s Justice for All march in Washington, DC and for a New Year’s Eve jaunt to Miami Beach. And even with the claims of “permanent physical pain, there are pics on social-media of her in high heels, and another of her climbing a ladder to decorate a Christmas tree. Yup, she has learned well from the Shakedown master.
My Monkey senses make me say the following …
Shakedown artist Al Sharpton’s eldest child wants $5 million from city taxpayers after she fell in the street and sprained her ankle, court records show.
Dominique Sharpton, 28, says she was “severely injured, bruised and wounded” when she stumbled over uneven pavement at the corner of Broome Street and Broadway downtown last year, according to a lawsuit.
Currently on vacation in Bali, the membership director for her gadfly dad’s National Action Network claims she “still suffers and will continue to suffer for some time physical pain and bodily injuries,” according to the suit filed against the city departments of Transportation and Environmental Protection.
“I sprained my ankle real bad lol,” she wrote in a post to Instagram after the Oct. 2 fall.
She was pictured in a walking boot in the weeks following the tumble, but by December, Dominique was good to go for NAN’s Justice for All march in Washington, DC, and for a New Year’s Eve jaunt to Miami Beach.
And despite claiming “permanent physical pain” in a breathless notice of claim, there are social-media shots of her in high heels, and another of her climbing a ladder to decorate a Christmas tree.
Hmm, isn’t that called fraud if you claim one thing and it is a knowing false claim?
From Weasel Zippers comes the screen shot of Sharpton’s daughter, who is currently of vacation in Bali hiking up mountains. How many Americans in this terrible economy can afford to take a vacation to Bali? Oh but wait, I thought she claimed permanent physical pain? So sharpton’s daughter is looking to ceat the NYC tax payers out of money with a trunped up claim that she injured herself as she
Oh wait, here is another picture from Dominique Sharpton’s Instagram site showing her hiking in Red Rock canyon about a month ago. Because everyone knows that some one with a severe and permanent damage to their ankle can hike there. Of course I guess it is just a coincidence that her daddy Sharpton owes $4.5 million in back taxes.
NYC should sue her for fraud.
It not only adds up to no case, it amounts to fraud.
Dominique Sharpton posted pictures to Instagram showing she completed a difficult mountain climb in Bali, Indonesia — even though her suit says that “she still suffers” debilitating pain after twisting her ankle in a street crack in Soho last year.
She didn’t seem to realize that her mountaineering exploits might undermine her legal claims as she bragged online about the difficulty of her ascent.
What legal experts saw as truly unreal, however, is the younger Sharpton’s brazen boasting after she claimed in court papers that she was in “permanent physical pain.”
“It is starting to look like Tawana Brawley is orchestrating the Sharpton trial strategy,” quipped CNN legal analyst Paul Callan. “It graphically demonstrates bad judgment and good feet. It all adds up to no case.”
University of Virginia Dean Sues Rolling Stone Magazine for ‘False’ Portrayal & Defamation Lawsuit in Retracted Rape Story
YOU KNEW THIS ONE WAS COMING, ALSO THE FRAT WILL MOST LIKELY DO THE SAME …
UVA to sue Rolling Stone magazine for defamation. I am generally not a law-suit happy individual; however, this one was a no-brainer. Following the completely irresponsible reporting by Rolling Stone, A Rape on Campus, and the subsequent retracting of the story and apology after the story fell apart, University of Virginia associate dean of students filed a multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit against Rolling Stone magazine Tuesday. GOOD!!! With what Rolling Stone did, might just be the poster-child of cases for defamation.
Rolling Stone reported, A Rape on Ca,pus, What went wrong. Many people have been asking since the magazine retracted their story, Rolling Stone journalism … what went wrong?
A University of Virginia associate dean of students filed a multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit against Rolling Stone magazine Tuesday, alleging that it portrayed her as callous and indifferent to allegations of sexual assault on campus and made her the university’s “chief villain” in a now-debunked article about a fraternity gang rape.
Nicole Eramo is seeking more than $7.5 million in damages from Rolling Stone; its parent company, Wenner Media; and Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the investigative journalist who wrote the explosive account of sexual assault on the campus in Charlottesville. The magazine retracted the article after news organizations and the Columbia University journalism school found serious flaws in it.
Eramo, who is the university’s chief administrator dealing with sexual assaults, argues in the lawsuit that the article destroyed her credibility, permanently damaged her reputation and caused her emotional distress. She assailed the account as containing numerous falsehoods that the magazine could have avoided if it had worked to verify the story of its main subject, a student named Jackie who alleged she was gang-raped in 2012 and that the university mishandled her case.
Read the full complaint HERE.
FRIVOLOUS LAW SUITS MATTER …
The family of Michael Brown, the 18 year old black teen that was shot by a white police officer, is planning on filing a law suit against Ferguson for wrongful death. HUH?The formal announcement is expected Thursday morning in St. Louis. Id the Brown family looking for strike 3? A grand jury has already refused to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of the so-called “Gentle Giant”, see below pic of Brown in a strong armed robbery of a store clerk for a box of cigars. Then, Eric Holder and the Justice Department dropped the civil law suit against officer Wilson as there was no there, there to charge Wilson on racial bias.
Does some one need to remind the Brown family that “Hands Up, Dont’ Shoot” was based upon a lie? Trust me, if Eric Holder could not get a scalp with his DOJ investigation of officer Wilson, there is nothing there. In fact, the DOJ investigation showed that all of the credible witnesses corroborated officer Wilson’s events of what happened. The family may want to really just let this go as they may do even more harm than good to the legacy of Michael Brown.
Lawyers for the parents of Michael Brown, the unarmed, black 18-year-old who was fatally shot by a white police officer in a St. Louis suburb, announced Wednesday night that they planned to file a civil lawsuit the following day against the city of Ferguson.
Attorneys for the family said in a statement Wednesday night that the wrongful death lawsuit would be filed Thursday. The lawsuit had been expected. Attorneys for Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, and his father, Michael Brown Sr., announced at a press conference in early March that a wrongful death lawsuit would be filed “soon.” Attorneys said at the time that the lawsuit would also name former Officer Darren Wilson, who shot Brown.
Newtown, CT Victims’ Families Sue Bushmaster, Manufacturer of AR-15, Gun Used by Adam Lanza in 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School Attack
The Sandy Hook Elementary School murders were unspeakable, however, this lawsuit is misguided and Unconstitutional …
The murders of 27 individuals, 20 of whom were children, at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012 was a crime so heinous that it was hard to fathom how anyone could be so insane and filled with hate. However, 20 year old gunman Adam Lanza committed this act of violence as he barged into a defenseless elementary school and took part in the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. Now the families of nine people killed in the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre are suing Bushmaster, a privately held company based in Windham, Maine that manufacture the AR-15. This was the gun that Lanza used in the mass murders.
The 40 page lawsuit, filed in Connecticut Superior Court in Bridgeport, names Bushmaster, the weapons distributor and the retailer, Riverview in East Windor, that sold the gun used in the shooting as defendants. The plaintiffs seeks unspecified monetary damages.
The families of nine people killed in a 2012 massacre at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school sued the maker of the gun used in the attack on Monday, saying the weapon should not have been sold because it had no reasonable civilian purpose.
While the AR-15 assault weapon used in the attack on Sandy Hook Elementary School was legally sold in Connecticut, the lawsuit contends that the weapon should not have been available to 20-year-old gunman Adam Lanza. The AR-15 is manufactured by Bushmaster, a privately held company based in Windham, Maine.
Lanza shot dead 20 first-graders and six educators in the Dec. 14, 2012, attack, which stands as one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. The massacre sparked a fresh debate on gun rights, which are protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“This is a weapon that is designed for military use, for killing as many people as efficiently as possible,” Michael Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a phone interview. “It’s negligent for any seller to sell a weapon like that to the general public.”
As tragic as the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre was and as much we hope that the families affected by this tragedy can move forward from this devastating act of violence at the hands of Adam Lanza, I am sorry but this law suit is misguided. The gun was legally bought by Adam Lanza’s mother, who was also murdered by this sick kid. The guns were legally registered to Nancy Lanza. Adam Lanza was refused the purchase of a firearm as he did not pass back ground checks. If anyone was negligent, one might say it was the mother who shared her gun enthusiasm with her mentally deranged son and did not properly lock them away from this killer. Millions of Americans own AR-15′s and use them for person and civilian use. The notion that plaintiff attorneys say that this weapon is only for military use is incorrect. The AR-15 is not an assault weapon, however, the liberal MSM would like you to think so. What Adam Lanza did was an heinous an act possible … but suing a gun manufacturer that is protected by the Second Amendment and followed all the laws is wrong.
The lawsuit, hand-delivered to a Connecticut state marshal on Saturday, names as defendants Bushmaster Firearms International LLC, which is owned by Remington Outdoor Co.; Camfour, a company that distributes Bushmaster products; and Riverview Gun Sales, a East Windsor, Conn., gun shop that sold the rifle to Ms. Lanza.
It claims the gunmaker, the firearms distributor, and the store that sold firearm are liable for producing and selling a weapon unfit for civilian use, reports WSJ’s Joseph De Avila.
Remington declined to comment. Camfour and Riverview Gun Sales didn’t return requests for comment.
George Kollitides, the chief executive of Remington Outdoor, told the Washington Times in June 2013 that Mr. Lanza alone, and not the rifle, was to blame for the killings.
“It’s very easy to blame an inanimate object,” he said. “Any kind of instrument in the wrong hands can be put to evil use. This comes down to intent — criminal behavior, accountability and responsibility.”
Memphis, Tennessee Dead Beat Dad: 50 Year Old Terry Turnage Has Fathered 26 Children with 20 Different Women
Sorry, but I think it is time the Court orders Mr. Turnage to be neutered.
50 year old Terry Turnage will not be getting any father of the year awards any time soon. Unless the award because a reward for someone fathering the most children. Turnage has fathered 26 children with 20 different women to date and counting. Twenty-three of them in Shelby County, TN and it appears 3 more across the river in Forrest City, Arkansas. Three women in Forrest City went to court asking for child support from Terry Turnage. He didn’t show up. I don’t know who is more pathetic, Turnage or the 20 woman. What are the odds that all of the twenty woman are single mothers, getting public assistance from our tax dollars. Some how this walking serial impregnation is allowed to just continue along his merry way. UNREAL. Sorry, but this is serial child abuse.
Just curious, where is Barack Obama, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson speaking out against this and the destruction of the black family structure? No where of course.
The Paternity Complaint can be read HERE.
The Tennessee deadbeat who has fathered 26 children with 20 different women has again been ordered by a judge to make child support payments, this time for a two-year-old Arkansas boy, court records show.
Terry Turnage, a 50-year-old Memphis resident, was ordered this month to pay $60 per week to Miesha Davis, mother of the pair’s son Ja’Voin. The support order came as a result of a paternity complaint filed on
Davis’s behalf by Arkansas’s Office of Child Support Enforcement.
A Circuit Court judge also ordered Turnage to “maintain health care insurance” for the child “when reasonably available” through his employer, and pay $365 in court fees.
According to Arkansas court records, state officials have filed income withholding notices with a Memphis company that operates a McDonald’s restaurant where Turnage has supposedly worked (and earned $247.28 weekly).
Conservative Radio Host Rush Limbaugh Threatened to Sue the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for Defamation
According to The Daily Caller, Conservative Radio host Rush Limbaugh has threatened to sue the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for defamation and interference. According to accounts, El Rushbo has retained the services of attorney Patty Glaser, who reportedly delivered a letter to the DCCC on Monday notifying the committee of the possibility of a lawsuit demanding a retraction and apology for intentionally misleading the public. Limbaugh is stating that the DCCC defamed him when they made statements attributed to Rush out of context by Democrat fundraising letters trying to ignite the liberal base. The PJ Tatler is spot on when they say, it is extremely difficult for a public figure to win a defamation case and there is none more public than Rush. However, Democrats have made a cottage industry out of try to defame Rush Limbaugh in the past, why would this be any different?
Limbaugh retained the services of lawyer Patty Glaser and demanded that the DCCC “preserve all records in anticipation of a lawsuit for defamation and interference” after the Democratic Party group led a campaign against Limbaugh based on out-of-context statements the host made about sexual assault. Limbaugh’s legal team delivered a letter to DCCC representatives Monday informing them of the legal threat. Limbaugh has also demanded a public retraction and apology.
The Limbaugh team is currently proceeding from the standpoint of litigating and has not yet made a decision as to whether the DCCC could make any concessions at this point to prevent the lawsuit.
The DCCC “has intentionally disseminated demonstrably false statements concerning Rush Limbaugh in a concerted effort to harm Mr. Limbaugh, and with reckless disregard for the resulting impact to small businesses across America that choose to advertise on his radio program” according to the GlaserWeil law firm’s letter to the DCCC, which was obtained by TheDC. “Mr. Limbaugh clearly, unambiguously, and emphatically condemned the notion that ‘no’ means ‘yes.’”
“Let’s be clear: Rush Limbaugh is advocating for the tolerance of rape” the DCCC stated in a September fundraising email after Limbaugh mocked Ohio State’s new mandatory sexual consent guidelines.
This is one law suit I very much hope goes forward.
Yet another clueless jury, do people understand what they are charged with …
Yesterday, former professional wrestler, former Minnesota governor and 911 truther Jesse Ventura won his court case against American hero Chris Kyle. Actually, since Chris Kyle is dead, Ventura won his defamation law suit against the widow of an American hero. A jury actually awarded Ventura $1.8 million. UNREAL, it would appear we have found a more ignorant one than that of the Casey Anthony case.
Defamation of Character???
A jury awarded former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura $1.8 million Tuesday in his lawsuit against the estate of “American Sniper” author Chris Kyle.
On the sixth day of deliberations, the federal jury decided that the 2012 best-selling book defamed Ventura in its description of a bar fight in California in 2006. Kyle wrote that he decked a man whom he later identified as Ventura after the man allegedly said the Navy SEALs “deserve to lose a few.”
Ventura testified that Kyle fabricated the passage about punching him. Kyle said in testimony videotaped before his death last year that his story was accurate.
Legal experts had said Ventura had to clear a high legal bar to win, since as a public figure he had to prove “actual malice.” According to the jury instructions, Ventura had to prove with “clear and convincing evidence” that Kyle either knew or believed what he wrote was untrue, or that he harbored serious doubts about its truth.
Outrage at Twitchy.com … ‘F*cking disgrace’: Jury helps jagoff Jesse Ventura stick it to Chris Kyle’s widow
Ventura attorney David Bradley Olsen stated Kyle’s claims that Ventura said he hated America, thought the U.S. military was killing innocent civilians in Iraq and that the SEALs “deserve to lose a few” had made him a pariah in the community that mattered most to him – the brotherhood of current and former SEALs. If that is the case, then suing the widow of a deceased US military hero should just do wonders. Olsen stated that Ventura was proud of his military service and would never say anything like Navy SEALs “deserve to lose a few.” Hmm, of course he would say nothing bad about the military. Has anyone actually listened to the comments that Ventura has spewed? He called “Our Military” contract killers on national TV … does any common sense thinking person think he is not capable of making a snarky comment when there are no cameras on?
“Our Military Has Turned Into Contract For Hire Killers” Jesse Ventura (CNN)
And he said Ventura would never have said any of the remarks attributed to him because he remains proud of his and his parents’ military service.
“The statement is completely out of character for Jesse Ventura. He never said anything like that in his life, and he never will,” he said.
As The Gateway Pundits disgustingly says, “Congratulations Jesse! You proved your patriotism by suing the widow of a deceased American Hero! What do you do for an encore, burn an American flag?”