At PJM: The Jamie Leigh Jones Rape Case
I have a pair of posts up at Pajamas Media this morning regarding the alleged July, 2005 gang-rape of a young female contractor in Iraq. ABC News blog The Blotter broke the story and it seems to have triggered an investigation in the House Judiciary Committee as a result. Unfortunately, what came off the pages of The Blotter has significant discrepancies with the claims made in the legal documents.
It isn't fabulism, but it is sensationalism. The second post at Pajamas this morning is the chronology of Jaime Leigh Jones experiences that was once published as "Jamie's Journal" that was pulled down yesterday and delinked in the site navigation as if it ever existed. I'd emailed Ms. Jones' attorney yesterday morning with questions, and within several hours, the page was down. Those are the facts. I'm not yet sure if there is any cause and effect involved, but I should be able to clear that up with I speak with her attorney, Todd Kelly, later today. For those of you who might expect me to be trying to debunk the case... don't. Though there are some inconsistencies with certain aspects of the case and the way it has been reported, absolutely nothing seems to contradict the key claim that she was savagely, brutally raped. Nothing contradicts the fact that she has not be able to find justice for 2 years. I think she's a brave young woman, and hope that she can find both emotional and physical healing.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:38 AM
Comments
Though there are some inconsistencies with certain aspects of the case and the way it has been reported, absolutely nothing seems to contradict the key claim that she was savagely, brutally raped. Nothing contradicts the fact that she has not be able to find justice for 2 years.
I think she's a brave young woman, and hope that she can find both emotional and physical healing.
Those words should have been in the original post. Not here where they are divorced from what is being read by commnters at PJM as a debunk. If they are here and not there too, they look like a CYA afterthought to a hatchet job on Jamie leigh Jones.
Posted by: Cernig at December 12, 2007 12:13 PM (1Tw+U)
Posted by: Ray Robion at December 12, 2007 12:20 PM (kZ5Z5)
Posted by: shunha7878 at December 12, 2007 12:26 PM (qppR1)
Posted by: Scrapiron at December 12, 2007 12:29 PM (d/RyS)
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at December 12, 2007 12:30 PM (Lgw9b)
The PJM post clearly goes after The Blotter.
ABC interviewed Jones in September, and still didn't do the due diligence to note the serious discrepancies between the account they reported, the court filing, and the Foundation's web site that they linked to.
It was never a "hatchet job" in the least, and I don't see how it could be considered so by anyone objective.
reread the first line of the post:
Bob Owens takes a close look at the allegations of a gang rape in Iraq's Green Zone in 2005 by employees of KBR, and finds some omissions and inconsistencies in the ABC News scoop.
Not with her or her case, but with the ABC story.
further down:
In what the Associated Press described as a preview of allegations to air on "20/20" next month, ABC News may have exaggerated some elements of the story for dramatic effect while downplaying other facts.
Again, going after ABC, not Jones.
You don't have to like the fact that I've uncovered inconsistencies, but don't try to manufacture them into something they clearly aren't, and this clearly was only a criticism of ABC News.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at December 12, 2007 12:35 PM (vxbTC)
I think that CF is taking the most objective approach to this. Very few people know what happened. To simply Tawana Brawley this or blame a "slick" lawyer, is nothing more than sidestepping Ms. Jone's extremely serious allegations.
I think her recourse to a civil claim is not so much as to seek compensation, though I am sure that is one basis, it's that there does not appear to be any criminal court jurisdiction and thus almost no way of pursuing criminal charges. From a civil litigation standpoint, Ms. Jones would have a much easier time recovering a civil judgment after a criminal conviction than to simply pursue this matter in a civil court.
The fact that she has prior claims to her employer about sexual misconduct by a supervisor that did not result in his firing seems to suggest an "old boys" network. With respect to these claims, I am not sure there would have been any need for her to raise them in her complaint or amended complaint, unless that individual had been involved in alleged rape.
Posted by: Penfold at December 12, 2007 12:48 PM (lF2Kk)
Regards, C
Posted by: Cernig at December 12, 2007 12:51 PM (1Tw+U)
Posted by: Cernig at December 12, 2007 12:55 PM (1Tw+U)
But I still say you should have added that 'graph to your PJM post from word one.
We wanted to provide just the facts of this case at PJM, with no editorializing. In short, real reporting, not an op-ed, or an op-ed disguised as news.
My personal thoughts and opinions relating to what I think of this case are frankly irrelevant in a news story, and so I wrote my post to exclude them.
Nice personal attack on me at your site.
I'm impressed that you seem to have the ability to read my mind.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at December 12, 2007 01:05 PM (vxbTC)
Posted by: DA at December 12, 2007 01:51 PM (RsSg/)
You wrote in the PJM post:
There is also the issue of a serious discrepancy between The Blotter story, the civil case documents, and Jones’ own account on The Jamie Leigh Foundation’s web site as to what happened to the rape kit collected by U.S. Army medical personnel in the wake of her assault.
And:
There are significant variances between the versions of events—and even the mention of key events—told in The Blotter, the civil court documents of Jones et al. v. Halliburton Company et al., and the now-deleted chronological events page known as “Jamie’s Journal.”
These are both untrue, the inconsistencies your PJM post mentions are all between ABC's reporting and the other two accounts, which are consistent on the points you mention between themselves.
You wrote the graph I quoted on your own blog but didn't, for your own reasons, decide to be as forthright as to include anything even remotely like it in the PJM post.
I'm not the one lacking in integrity here.
Posted by: Cernig at December 12, 2007 01:58 PM (1Tw+U)
Posted by: Ray Robison at December 12, 2007 02:31 PM (kZ5Z5)
Per Penfold "The fact that she has prior claims to her employer about sexual misconduct by a supervisor that did not result in his firing seems"
I didn't realize that a sacrificial man had to be fired for every woman's unproven allegation.
Posted by: RFYoung at December 12, 2007 04:47 PM (WqZCc)
Posted by: dmb829 at December 12, 2007 07:48 PM (KQu2H)
It is a strange story. The fact that it involves Halliburton and or other contractors, the Army, and the GWOT, does not per se make such bad news suspicious. The Duke case was suspicious, and I have no feelings for Duke or lacrosse or college sports at all.
The fact that it may slant antiwar may add fuel to the fire, but from the sound of your ranting there, you seem to be the one ablaze. Perhaps if it were an American girl accusing citizens of your country of rape, or maybe members of your favorite footy club, you too would like to understand what was going on.
dmb829: do you know what the word "irrelevant" means? I'm sorry but this is pure vapor, IMHO, driven by I know not what, probably your ideology. And whenever I hear such as you whining about your tax dollars, I have to wonder: do you have a real job or do you live at home?
Posted by: nichevo at December 13, 2007 03:21 AM (Ak+g8)
Holy crap, this is absolutely disgusting what happened to this young woman. There is no excuse for it whatsoever.
After all this time, nothing has happened. Time for some vigilante justice to be applied I think.
Posted by: capt joe at December 13, 2007 11:00 AM (wjbe+)
I like your answer to dmb829. What kind of person doesn't believe in the goodness of taxes? Taxes are the reason we live in a society and not like animals.
Tax revenue is used to help those who don't have the capacity to help themselves. They pay for things like the National Endowment for the Arts and other cultural groups, which show we are a nation that holds culture important.
Like you, every time I hear someone whining about their tax dollars, I have to wonder if they are smart enough to know where the money comes from to support this nation and it's defense (Yes, I'm looking at you Dick Cheney--who made your money through government contracts paid through tax dollars).
capt joe,
The NRA will get right on this. Just as they did in protecting the rights of blacks to vote in the 1950s and 60s.
(LOL)
Posted by: Robert at December 13, 2007 02:40 PM (bj3d2)
Posted by: nichevo at December 14, 2007 01:29 PM (Ak+g8)
On one key point, Halliburton/KBR and Jones agree: the Army doctor who administered a rape evidence kit to Jamie after her alleged assault handed the kit to Halliburton/KBR security personnel. Halliburton/KBR's account did not mention the fate of the rape kit. It noted the company "did not interfere with the State Department's criminal investigation."
Posted by: TK Nagano at December 14, 2007 03:47 PM (Y5vHa)
Posted by: HESTRUTH at December 14, 2007 06:50 PM (fJQJS)
Posted by: Mad Monkey at December 17, 2007 09:26 AM (lFvYB)
Posted by: Mad Monkey at December 17, 2007 09:27 AM (lFvYB)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0117 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0073 seconds, 31 records returned.
Page size 24 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.