Shocking Police Findings of the UVA Rape Scandal Peddled by Liberals With an Agenda


Ultra liberals love stories of women being victimized by men. It’s a cause for them. The UVA rape scandal turned out to be one of those causes but without any substance whatsoever.

A woman who goes under the pseudonym Jackie was allegedly gang raped by seven fraternity boys at the elite University of Virginia as part of an initiation ritual on September 28, 2012. She had been invited to the Dorm where a party was taking place by a date named Drew (pseudonym), according to her.

She originally reported that five men assaulted her. Another inconvenient fact is that the fraternity does not pledge in the Fall.

Just the same, Jackie’s story became the subject of a Rolling Stone article by their contributing editor Sabrina Rubin Erdely without her ever finding out the facts or having even looked for them. She took the “victim’s” word as gospel and then reported it as a thoroughly researched journalistic endeavor.

Outrage followed the publication of the story.

UVA president Teresa Sullivan threw her students under the bus and suspended all campus fraternities, sororities, and Greek organizations until January 9 and asked Charlottesville police to investigate.

Phi Kappa Psi suspended the activities of its UVA chapter the day after the article was published.

The fraternity was vandalized and its members ostracized, treated as rapists.

People said sexual assault was prevalent on campus and others said they believed Jackie’s story even as it fell apart.

UVA’s reputation was soon in shambles.

The alleged rape occurred on the night she was taken on a date by a man from Phi Kappa Psi. This man, given the pseudonym Drew and later identified as Haven Monaghan, supposedly worked with Jackie at the university pool. She went to his dorm room at his invitation, she said, only to find there were other men in the room.

The men left her beaten and her dress bloody according to her account, later disputed by three friends who she called to help her on the night of the alleged attack.

She claimed they advised her not to report the rape.

They were never interviewed by the author of the Rolling Stone article nor were the alleged rapists.

None of the friends saw her beaten or bloody and they told her to call the police. The one woman in the group was mischaracterized in a negative way in the article and was not allowed by Jackie to be part of the discussion that night. The boy called Randal (pseudonym) said he realized who he was in the story but he was also mischaracterized.


Randal is a handsome young man she wanted to date and who did not want to date her. He was drawn into the situation by her before the alleged rape. She claimed a junior named Drew, later identified as Haven Monaghan, was a handsome man who had a crush on her but he knew she liked a Freshman, the Freshman likely being Randal.

There were strange texts and a phone call exchanged between the friends and Randal with this Drew.

Jackie withdrew from school and social events after the purported rape, however, in addition to the alleged rape, she had poor grades. She told the Dean about the alleged rape but refused to report it to the police.

If you want the background on this story, you can get all the details at NY Magazine. There are more holes in the victim’s story than in a sifter. It is reminiscent of the Tawana Brawley and Duke Lacrosse cases.

The story line ended up giving the impression that sex-crazed frat boys at UVA routinely prey on women.

President Teresa A. Sullivan, on the basis of this one untested article wrote a letter to the students. An excerpt from the letter is below.

I write you today in solidarity. I write you in great sorrow, great rage, but most importantly, with great determination. Meaningful change is necessary, and we can lead that change for all universities. We can demand that incidents like those described in Rolling Stone never happen and that if they do, the responsible are held accountable to the law. This will require institutional change, cultural change, and legislative change, and it will not be easy. We are making those changes.

This morning the Inter-Fraternity Council announced that all University fraternities have voluntarily suspended social activities this weekend. This is an important first step, but our challenges will extend beyond this weekend. Beginning immediately, I am suspending all fraternal organizations and associated social activities until January 9th, ahead of the beginning of our spring semester. In the intervening period we will assemble groups of students, faculty, alumni, and other concerned parties to discuss our next steps in preventing sexual assault and sexual violence on Grounds. On Tuesday, the Board of Visitors will meet to discuss the University’s policies and procedures regarding sexual assault as well as the specific, recent allegations.

This determination was made based on air and the men of UVA were disgraced based on a poorly researched article and a school president who rushed to judgment but did not rush to apologize.

The story that men were abusive at UVA continued without basis and the frat boys were apologizing for something that never happened.

A lot of damage was done to the university’s image.

The final determination was shocking in that none of the story appears to be true. The case will be left open, however, and some people believe something terrible might have happened to the alleged victim Jackie.

The following are some of the uncorroborated details that came out in the police press conference on March 23rd:

The alleged phone call Jackie made to her mother never happened.

Jackie claims there were two other sexual assaults but police cannot verify that.

Jackie refused to reveal the details of the assault on two occasions and she refused to press charges. When she agreed to meet with police, she refused to make a statement or answer questions, supposedly out of fear. She refused to give the police access to her records.

The fraternity members had no knowledge of the sexual assault nor did they know the victim. A questionnaire was sent to fraternity members to see if anyone knew of the assault. No one did.

There was no evidence of a party at the house or any event as Jackie described, in fact it was far more likely from the evidence that there was no event.

There is no evidence of a date with Drew, later identified as Haven Monaghan, or that Haven Monaghan even exists. .

Jackie’s friends remember the details of the event differently. They don’t recall physical injuries as Jackie described them though they think something happened to Jackie..

Jackie said she worked with Drew at the university pool. The men at the aquatic center did not know a Drew or a Haven Monaghan, the two Jackie said worked with her at the aquatic center.

A man who worked at the aquatic center and was in a fraternity was questioned by police for the sake of being thorough. The six people in his fraternity were also questioned and none heard of a sexual assault at their house nor did they know Jackie. All were cooperative.

The photo of Drew aka Haven Monaghan turned out to be a photo of Jackie’s high school classmate who was nowhere near UVA at the time, did not attend UVA, wasn’t in that fraternity and was at another event many miles away on September 28th. He knew who Jackie was but had never spoken with her.

The police investigation found that no incident coinciding with the Rolling Stone article could be uncovered.

The case is suspended until more information comes up.

 The two allegations by Jackie of sexual assaults at frat houses revealed that there is no evidence they took place either.

Jackie won’t be punished nor has she apologized, She is sticking with her story or stories since they changed.

The people who jumped on the bandwagon weren’t punished and have not tried to make up for what they’ve done. Some continue to peddle the storyline that college campuses including UVA are playgrounds of rapists.

Rolling Stone won’t be punished. Their reputation for accuracy is damaged but anyone who knows anything about Rolling Stone shouldn’t think accuracy was ever their strong suit. The author of the article, who did not interview the fraternity boys or the friends who were with Jackie that night, is still an editor. She has apologized and has said that some details of her story might be inaccurate. She went into the story with the typical liberal’s preconceived notion – that there are rampant sexual assaults against women taking place on campuses throughout the United States.

Someone needs to do an article about how easy it is to victimize men with a story of alleged rape.

The only ones punished were the innocent university fraternity boys. They should sue Rolling Stone.

Watch the press conference:


Leave a Reply