Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Rolling Stone defamation lawsuit: Jury finds reporter liable for damages over University of Virginia rape allegation story

A federal jury said the magazine, reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely and the publisher are liable

Rachael Revesz
New York
Friday 04 November 2016 19:48 GMT
Comments
Reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely, left, and Rolling Stone deputy managing editor Sean Woods, right
Reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely, left, and Rolling Stone deputy managing editor Sean Woods, right (AP)

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A federal jury has found that Rolling Stone magazine, its publisher and a reporter are liable for damages in a defamation lawsuit centering around an article about an alleged rape.

The 2014 article, reported by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, told the story of an alleged brutal gang rape of a woman at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia.

Other publications soon spotted major inconsistencies in the reporting, including how the journalist leaned too heavily on the the story of alleged victim “Jackie”.

Rolling Stone soon afterwards retracted the story.

As reported by NPR, an investigation found that “repeated, systematic failures within the magazine led to the article’s publication”.

Nicole Eramo, the former associate dean of students who featured in the article, sued for $7.85 million due to the way she was portrayed.

She said the article painted her as the “chief villain” who showed no empathy towards an alleged case of sexual assault in order to protect the university.

The court has not yet calculated total damages liable. A judge is meeting with lawyers to discuss when the damages phase will start.

Ms Eramo’s lawyer, Libby Locke, told CBS News that they are not limited in their claim of $7.5 million compensatory damages and “much has changed since then”.

Rolling Stone lawyers argued that everyone believed Jackie until after the story was in print.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in