Jump to content

User:J mareeswaran/The lawsuit didn't receive much coverage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The lawsuit that didn't receive much coverage

The lawsuit didn't receive much coverage / Remove Jane Doe?

[edit]

The lawsuit didn't receive much coverage:

Original RS sources

[edit]
Mentions of the lawsuit(s) Site
search
Google
search
modified Google
search
New York Times noneTrump Is an Existential Threat [1] [2] [3]
Washington Post As Trump mulls attack on Clinton scandals,
one source makes him a target
[4] [5] [6]
Chicago Tribune noneTrump rape lawsuit may have been based on a hoax [7] [8] [9]
LA Times none [10] [11] [12]
Boston Globe noneThe partisan divide in sexual politics [13] [14] [15]
ABC News none [16] [17] [18]
CBS News none [19] [20] [21]
NBC News The Allegations Women Have Made Against Donald Trump [22] [23] [24]
NPR none [25] [26] [27]
PBS All the assault allegations against
Donald Trump, recapped
[28] [29] [30]
MSNBC

none

[31] [32] [33]
CNN none [34] [35]
Fox News

none

[36] [37] [38]
BBC none [39] [40]
Newsweek noneWOMAN ACCUSING DONALD TRUMP OF CHILD RAPE CANCELS PLAN TO BREAK SILENCE [41] [42]
Time none [43] [44]
U.S. News & World Report

none

[45] [46]
Christian Science Monitor

none

[47] [48]

Comment on the nature of the case & its coverage in mainstream media

[edit]

following is the references, I have collected regarding the Media Coverage of this case. All this is pending the RfC resolution for Jane Doe...

Doubts on the Veracity of the Accusations
[edit]
  • Merlan, Anna. "Here's How That Wild Lawsuit Accusing Trump of Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl Hit The Headlines". Jezebel. A few note the special peculiarities that make the case so hard to report on and the red flags it raises: Katie Johnson isn't findable, nor is Tiffany Doe, and the allegations are almost cinematic in their depravity. But even given Trump's moderately disgusting track record with women, the fact is that a cadre of men have been shopping this Katie Johnson story around for nearly a year, while repeatedly refusing requests to interview the supposed victim. The facts speak less to a scandal and more, perhaps, to an attempt at a smear—one that finally, after months of clumsy maneuvering, is gaining speed.
  • Merlan, Anna. "Woman Accusing Donald Trump of Raping Her At 13 Fails To Appear At Planned Press Conference". Jezebel. Despite planning a press conference, Bloom does not represent Doe in her current lawsuit. She is represented by Thomas Meagher, a New Jersey lawyer who usually does patent law. Casey Anthony's defense attorney J. Cheney Mason filed a motion asking to be her co-counsel, which was rejected by the court for procedural reasons but granted after he-refiled. On November 1, a lawyer named Evan L. Goldman also filed a request with the court to act as co-counsel, which was also rejected due to a filing error. Goldman is re-filing.
  • GERSTEIN, JOSH; NOAH, TIMOTHY (November 2, 2016). "Trump teen rape accuser abruptly calls off news conference". Politico. In addition to the anonymity of the accuser and the supporting witnesses, some of the circumstances under which the story of the alleged rapes emerged earlier this year have led to questions about its credibility.Several other lawyers have joined the case on Doe's behalf, but there is still no indication that Trump or Epstein have been formally served with the suit.
  • Morrow, Brendan (November 2, 2016). "Donald Trump Rape Lawsuit: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know". Heavy.com. You might be wondering how Jane Doe can actually sue Trump, seeing as in the state of New York, the statute of limitations for rape in civil cases is five years. Jane Doe's lawyers have argued that this statute should be waived because she was too afraid to file the suit during the five years following the incident because she had allegedly been threatened by both Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. Some legal experts have questioned whether Jane Doe has enough evidence to make any sort of successful case. "This woman does not indicate that she ever went to police. In addition, no other evidence like DNA or taped conversations has surfaced."
Comments defending the victim (for not coming out earlier)
[edit]
  • Wade, Kelvin (November 3, 2016). "Where's this story on Trump?". Daily Republic. It's a mystery as to why the mainstream media hasn't covered the fact that the nominee of the Republican Party is being sued for child rape. And the one question Trump apologists always ask is, why are they coming forward now? Someone who is assaulted by a famous, beloved person will be dismissed and/or attacked by their abuser's fans and followers. If you picked up the paper today and saw that a man was arrested for allegedly raping a teen girl, you'd feel contempt for that man. If that man happens to be your candidate for public office, you're immediately skeptical of the accuser. When you're a Michael Jackson, Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby or Donald Trump, you get a benefit of the doubt that no other alleged sex offender gets. "And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the . . . ." That silences victims.
Comments on the coverage of the Jane Doe case by mainstream media
[edit]
  • ZADROZNY, BRANDY (November 3, 2016). "Trump's Teen Jane Doe Rape Accuser Disappears Again". The Daily Beast. most reporters have been hesitant to report on Katie's claims. This caution is a result of a number of red flags: Katie's anonymity, some explosive claims in the original lawsuit (which were taken out in subsequent filings), and the motley crew of politically and financially motivated handlers pushing Katie's story. In one of hundreds of emails concerning Katie's case circulated by Baer, Bloom wrote (to Baer, who then forwarded the email with responses to dozens of reporters), "I am not willing to get involved in the case, not now, not in the future, not ever, not pro bono, not for any amount of money. Because Steve and Al, you have destroyed it." But things change. And with today's press conference, and Bloom's representation, the media blackout on Katie's case just might have ended. Instead, the reporters Bloom had criticized for failing to cover Katie's case were sent home.
  • Grim, Ryan (November 3, 2016). "Donald Trump Is Accused Of Raping A 13-Year-Old. Why Haven't The Media Covered It?". Huffington Post. To go forward with an anonymous source shifts responsibility for the veracity of the claims from the accuser to the reporter. If the person is named and on record, the reporter can argue that he or she is merely reporting what the person is saying, and people are free to believe her or not. But giving anonymity says something different to an audience. It suggests, I, as a journalist, have investigated this person and these charges, and find them sufficiently credible to bring them forward without a name attached. that requires an extreme amount of confidence in the source. And the way the case rolled out did not inspire that confidence. In some ways, given the role of Facebook in disseminating news, it matters less this cycle than any other previous one that the media have largely ignored the case. But as the reality of the court date increasingly dawns on the press, coupled with Trump's own admission that he sexually assaults women, the case is getting harder to ignore. With Bloom's planned press conference on Wednesday, things might have changed. But Johnson's appearance was canceled at the last minute because Bloom said her client had received threats and was afraid of appearing in public.
  • Cameron, Dell (November 3, 2016). "Unpacking the twisted child-rape allegation against Donald Trump". The Daily Dot. Doe hasn't trusted any reporters with her identity. For better or worse, Doe's anonymity is the primary reason her story hasn't gained much traction: Being forced to retract an anonymously sourced story, in the event the allegations of a serious crime are disproven, can swiftly end the career of a reporter if not permanently tarnish the reputation of his or her publisher. Compounding the problem, reporters who have started to investigate the veracity of Doe's claims encountered a cast of characters who appear financially and politically motivated to get the story out. Despite the lack of context surrounding the allegation, it is nevertheless newsworthy given its proximity to the presidential election.
  • Noyes, Jenny (November 3, 2016). "'She is in terrible fear': Woman accusing Donald Trump of child rape backs out of public press conference". The Age. The allegations have been largely ignored in mainstream media due to a perception that there is a high likelihood they may be politically motivated; but just days out from the election that was set to change. The woman was scheduled to speak publicly for the first time on Wednesday, and the press were ready to listen. However, at the last minute she backed down, saying she had received death threats and was in "terrible fear."
Criticisms on the coverage of the Jane Doe case by mainstream media
[edit]
  • Savan, Leslie (November 2, 2016). " The Rape Allegations Against Trump: If Jane Doe Breaks Her Silence, Will the Media Break Theirs? - Until the Access Hollywood video broke, TV news mostly ignored accusations against Trump". The Nation.  a number of sites, including LawNewz, The Daily Beast, Buzzfeed, Vice News, and Fusion, have pointed out the various cautionary if, ands, and buts, and have nevertheless managed to report the story with neither knee-jerk credulity nor dismissiveness. Turn on or stream TV news, however, and there's nary a mention of the mere fact that this case exists.  Maybe television news has avoided the case because the accuser and her two witnesses are anonymous and, at least for now, won't do press interviews. The press can't question them directly, as they did with the named women who've accused Trump of sexual misconduct. before the Access Hollywood video broke, on October 7, it(TV Media) had a lousy record on reporting or even acknowledging the many sexual assault allegations against Trump. Through October 6, media in general ignored the well-established case of a woman (Jill Harth) who was not anonymous, who had filed a lawsuit, and who was willing to be interviewed. That mere risk (of being sued) can be enough to silence his critics, even the lawyered-up ones. The American Bar Association recently stifled its own study finding that Trump was a "libel bully," the ABA admitted, for fear of being sued.
  • Bloom, Lisa (June 29, 2016). "Why The New Child Rape Case Filed Against Donald Trump Should Not Be Ignored". Huffington Post. In covering a story, a media outlet is not finding guilt. It is simply reporting the news that a lawsuit has been filed against Mr. Trump, and ideally putting the complaint in context. Unproven allegations are just that - unproven, and should be identified that way. Proof comes later, at trial. But the November election will come well before any trial. And while Mr. Trump is presumed innocent, we are permitted -- no, we are obligated -- to analyze the case's viability now.
  • ROSE, JENN (November 4, 2016). "Since When Are Mishandled Emails Worse Than Rape Allegations? It's A Scary Double Standard". www.romper.com. If talking politics means bringing up unproven allegations against the candidates, so be it. But let's be fair. If we give merit to the claims that Clinton illegally deleted emails, the same weight must be given to scores of women who's accused Trump of predatory behavior.

References

[edit]
[edit]