December 10, 2007

The Perfect Victim Meets the Perfect Villains

I know I'm going to take a lot of heat for this, but this story just sound so.... well.... er ... far-fetched.

Not the rape part--rape happens all the time (gang rapes, not so much, but occasionally). Not the cover up part--cover ups happen all the time. Not the corporation trying to cover ass part--CYAs happen all the time. Not the administration is covering up part--administrations cover things up all the time.

But combine gang rape + cover up + corporate malfeasance + political intrigue and you have the perfect story. Throw in a crusading lawyer using civil law to find justice when criminal courts have let the victim down and you have the perfect John Grisham book.

Now name KBR, Haliburton, Bush, & set the story in Iraq and you have more than a blockbuster movie pitch-- you also have the perfect conspiracy.

What could be more salacious than this? I can't think of a single thing.

It's perfect. Too perfect.

The kind of story the Left can rally around. The kind of story we aren't allowed to question because, well, questioning the veracity of the claims made by a rape victim makes one worse than pond scum. Automatically.

And normally I agree. Rape victims should be off limits. Too much pain involved. Too many memories of the not so distant past when some argued that the victim somehow brought the crime on themselves. That they deserved it.

Questioning a rape victim is akin to a second rape. Or so I was always taught.

It's why I never personally said anything about the Duke la cross case (lacrosse? whatever). But that same case should remind us that not all rape allegations are true.

The Jamie Leigh Jones case is just, well, difficult to believe. In fact more difficult to believe than the Duke case.

Maybe it's just the way The Blotter reports it. They seem to have simply took Jamie Leigh Jones' story as a matter of fact, only reporting what she and her lawyer claim.

The real culprit here may be the Blotter. The piece is straight advocacy. And straight advocacy pieces beg to taken to task.

Especially when nearly every villain in the left's panoply of villains is included in the story. Halliburton, KBR, and an administration which refuses to change the law so evil private corporations exploiting the war will not be a law unto themselves.

It's the perfect victim meeting the perfect villains. Again, too perfect.

Perhaps this perfection is what spawned both the lawsuit and ABC's coverage of the story? It's the kind of case that can make a lawyer's career. And the exclusive interviews ABC has with Jones is sure to generate a lot of publicity. If the allegations are true then it is surely deserving of a lot of attention & careers and infamy will be achieved--deservedly.

But that's the question, isn't it? Is the story true? By simply telling the story from the victim's perspective, then aren't we doing a disservice to those she is making the allegations against? Perhaps they, like the Duke la cross team members, are the victims?

What if the allegations aren't true? What if some of the allegations are true, but some aren't? What if all of the essential allegations are true, but they are being misrepresented.

What comes to mind immediately is the allegation that KBR guards kept Jamie Leigh Jones under lock and key shortly after the alleged rape. Perhaps there is an alternative explanation to intimidation? Maybe they were trying to protect her?

I dunno. As of this moment, because ABC's The Blotter is so one-sided in its coverage, there is really no way to tell.

Like I said, I know this is going to make me seem like an insensitive asshole, but so be it. Let the name-calling begin.

I'll start it off: Rusty Shackleford is a sexist, misogynist, etc....

UPDATE: Better make that Ace & Rusty are sexist, misogynists, etc. Ace:

I can't say this is nonsense, but it does all seem a bit hard to believe. And very convenient in terms of a multimillion dollar lawsuit against a very deep-pocketed corporation against whom a significant portion of the public is willing to believe literally anything at all.
Read the rest.

UPDATE: How does the fact that a Republican legislator got involved prove anything? So a worried dad calls a Congressman who makes a phone call. It's called constitutient services. Look it up. Morons.

If my daughter made a rape allegation you better the hell be damned sure I'd go to bat for her. And I'd call my Congressman. And I'd raise hell.

None of that goes to essential facts of the case. Dad's are supposed to believe their daughters. When a dude calls your Congressional office saying your daughter is being held hostage in Iraq by KBR, of course you make a phone call to Centcom.

The rest of the facts in this case come directly from the victim or her lawyers.

Everything you morons in the comments section are saying just proves that you can read. Bully for you. You can read an article in which the authors interviewed only one party in ongoing litigation.

What I'm saying is that all we have now is her side of the story. That's it.

It may all be true, but lets see a response first.

UPDATE 12/12/2007: More recent post on the Jamie Leigh Jones Case here. Including links and facts not mentioned in the Blotter report.

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D. at 03:46 PM | Comments |