As many of you know, the University of Virginia plays an important role in my life. I met my wife while in school there, got married at the UVa Chapel, hold two degrees from Mr. Jefferson’s University, and have a daughter who is part of the Class of 2017. Needless to say, I have followed the Rolling Stone story on an alleged rape at a University of Virginia fraternity very closely. This sad debacle teaches some good lessons that every lawyer and business person can learn from.
In a nutshell, on November 19, 2014, Rolling Stone magazine published a story which described, in excruciating detail, a horrific rape of a freshman student by seven men at a fraternity party. The story went on to describe the victim’s friends as uncaring, even alleging that they instructed the victim not to report the rape because of what it may do to their social status. Additionally, the article portrayed the University administration, as well as certain key officials, as more concerned with protecting the UVa brand than investigating an alleged gang rape.
As it turns out, there were a number of factual inconsistencies in the story. The fraternity in question did not host a party on the night of the alleged rape; one of the rapists was not a member of the fraternity; the friends who allegedly discouraged the victim from going to the police claim she never reported to them anything like the conduct described in the article. Today there are reports that the victim’s father says she named the wrong fraternity in the article. The end result in that, while something very awful may have happened to the alleged victim, it appears to be something very different, and involving different perpetrators, than what Rolling Stone described.
How did this happen? It happened because Rolling Stone failed to do some rudimentary fact checking. The reporter did not speak to any of the alleged rapists, nor did she speak to any of the friends who allegedly discouraged the victim from reporting the rape. Within days of the article’s publication, the Washington Post was able to discredit many aspects of the story. Had Rolling Stone made even half the efforts the Washington Post made to verify the story, it very well may have chosen not to run with this story.
Unfortunately, Rolling Stone’s haste to go to press has left much carnage in its wake. The alleged victim is now being accused of being a liar, further exacerbating whatever trauma she may already have suffered. UVa’s reputation, as well as that of the named fraternity, has been besmirched, and it may take years to overcome the reputational damage. Perhaps most tragically, the very real issue of campus rape has been set back, with the fallout from this article likely serving to discourage other victims from telling their stories.
So what does all this have to do with employment law? The link is that those of us who practice in this field are often charged with investigating claims of workplace misconduct. I have personally been involved in cases where an employee tells a compelling story of harassment, and there is an urge to act quickly to discipline the harasser to show how seriously the company treats this type of behavior. But a premature rush to judgment can have a devastating impact on the lives of innocent people. No matter how credible a victim’s story may appear to be, always – and I mean always – take steps to verify the allegations before taking disciplinary action. This means that alleged harasser should always be given a chance to tell their side of the story, and witnesses should always be interviewed. As the events of the last couple of weeks have shown, the failure to do so can produce tragic results.