[Imc-web] concern about names on the IMC website
Danielle Chynoweth
chyn at ojctech.com
Tue Jul 11 12:43:13 CDT 2006
I speak as a member of the IMC web editing team regarding the request that
we remove Stacy Rahn's name from the story written by Brian Dolinar about
the recent trial against Patrick Thompson.
I am posting a response to all those cced, but I suggest that the
appropriate place to discuss editorial decisions about our website be done
on web at ucimc.org. Anyone is welcome to join at lists.groogroo.com (select
"IMC-web"). That said, I think non-members of this list who have raised
concerns should be cced on all discussion of this issue - I just urge the
sparing of other listservs.
Another process note: the IMC web editing team coordinates the posting of
features by e-mail. Any IMC member or member of the public can call an
IMC web meeting to discuss and issue in person by e-mailing web at ucimc.org
with a proposed meeting time. I strongly suggest face-to-face discussion
with contentious issues. So consider this an invitation to call a meeting
if you feel your concerns are not being addressed adequately over e-mail.
Wendy, a web editor, has asked permission to edit out Stacy's name.
Brian, the author, has said he does not consent to this request.
Since the website is currently down, I can't review the story and its
comments, but based on what I saw of it before I left, here are my
responses to Wendy's request.
I do not support the editing out of Stacy's name at this point in the case
(the public i and IMC web have elected to keep her name out of some past
stories on this case).
Stacy Rahn's accusations against Patrick Thompson are a matter of public
record. Her name has appeared at least 4 times in the News-Gazette with a
circulation of 50,000 in 2006 alone and many more times in 2004 and 2005.
Posting her name in relation to the trial is not "bullying a rape victim."
I know from the experience of many friends how hard it is to decide to
press charges because your name will be part of a public record, but they
do know that going in that decision - as did Stacy.
Because I have seen many primary documents in this case, I do know that
the statements that Stacy has accused other men of color with similar acts
is very probable, that Stacy has a history of drug and alcohol problems
has evidence, that Stacy had pending charges of child endangerment during
the last trial that were never disclosed and then mysteriously dropped
after she testifies is substantiated.
This is a useful conversation to have about how to balance the need for
victim privacy with the necessity of public disclosure of cases. I do not
think this is a clear-cut issue - and we have dealt with this before with
the Ahmed Bensouda case where a member of the editorial collective ended
up editing out his name at the request of the family. So I don't think
this is a one size fits all issue.
In this case, I think stating the alleged victim's name is justified. I
sat through most of the trial. The prosecution made it very clear that
the case came down to the credibility of the accuser since there is no
evidence or witnesses. The State, working with Stacy, has shined a
spotlight on her credibility. Investigative journalism in this case is
justified in researching her credibility for this reason . especially
given how many facts surrounding the case did not come to light during the
trial. If her name is not mentioned, then readers of the IMC articles
have no way of verifying the assertions - which are part of the public
record listed under her name.
Responsible journalism would not speculate, bring in irrelevant
information such as level of sexual activity, what she was wearing,
whether she is flirtatious, etc. It would not make demeaning commentary.
It would stick to only that which can be well documented. I measure the
work posted by IMC writers with this criteria.
- Danielle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 09:27:22 -0500
From: "Brian Dolinar" <briandolinar at gmail.com>
Subject: [Imc] Re: [UCIMC-print] Thompson's accuser
To: "Wendy Edwards" <wedwards at uiuc.edu>
Cc: imc-web at ucimc.org, peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net,
imc at ucimc.org, imc-print at ucimc.org
Message-ID:
<cbbb12c20607090727j1298adcbx3255b2dcd864ba88 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Good morning all.
Being the author of the Thompson story on the web page, I wanted to respond.
In publicizing the Thompson case in the last 6 months, we have
discussed the complexities of this issue. We have supporters who have
been sexually assaulted and seen their friends raped. It took
Danielle Chenowyth, for example, a long time to come around on the PT
case. Maybe she can weigh in on this.
We took up the Hjort case, in part, because we wanted to emphasize our
support of rape victims. The accuser in this case alleged she was
raped by Urbana officer Kurt Hjort. There's evidence, he used public
property to stalk the woman. He then said it was consensual. Got
off scott free. Not arrested, no nada.
Our group alone stood on the side of the woman in this case.
Key information about the accuser in the PT case never went before a jury.
We have record that the accuser has made previous charges against
three different men of color. Therefore, her credibility is on the
line here. Defense failed to subpoena the names of these 3 men.
While we are aware of the issues rape victims face, please keep in
mind the deep racial implications of the case:
A white woman accusing a Black man has political consequenses in America.
I will in the future not refer to use the accuser's name.
But I ask that it be left on the web pg as is.
Thanks for your consideration.
In solidarity, BD
On 7/8/06, Wendy Edwards <wedwards at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> Many of us have been greatly concerned about the Patrick Thompson trial.
> There have been valid questions about the accusations, and it's quite
> possible that Patrick was convicted unfairly. There have also been
> legitimate questions raised about the motives and credibility of the
> accuser.
>
> However, a number of people are also concerned about the IMC's decision
> to publicize the name of the alleged victim. They've made some valid
> points. Even if Thompson's accuser was lying, this kind of action could
> still have a chilling effect on other sexual assault victims. Reporting
> the attack and pressing charges would be extremely difficult; perhaps
> the idea of their name on a high traffic website could make it
> unthinkable.
>
> This also has the potential to alienate many members of the
> Champaign-Urbana community. From the perspective of Thompson's
> supporters, the alleged victim is a serial accuser who may be sending an
> innocent man to prison. From the public's perspective, IMC members are
> bullying a rape victim.
>
> If nobody objects, I would like to edit the entries on the website so
> that the accuser's name is removed. I'd also respectfully suggest that
> the IMC avoid publishing personal information about the accuser, because
> it's likely to backfire.
>
> Thanks,
> Wendy Edwards
> _______________________________________________
> Imc-print mailing list
> Imc-print at lists.ucimc.org
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-print
>
--
Brian Dolinar, Ph.D.
204 S. Lynn St.
Champaign, IL 61820
briandolinar at gmail.com
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 11:14:49 -0500
From: Karen Medina <kmedina at uiuc.edu>
Subject: [Imc] Thompson's accuser
To: Brian Dolinar <briandolinar at gmail.com>, Wendy Edwards
<wedwards at uiuc.edu>
Cc: imc-web at ucimc.org, peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net,
imc at ucimc.org, imc-print at ucimc.org
Message-ID: <55bcf2ed.d5349360.8250300 at expms4.cites.uiuc.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Brian,
I'd be in more solidarity with you if you would take her name
off.
-karen medina
Brian D. wrote:
>I will in the future not refer to use the accuser's name.
>But I ask that it be left on the web pg as is.
>
>In solidarity, BD
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
IMC mailing list
IMC at lists.ucimc.org
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc
End of IMC Digest, Vol 30, Issue 6
**********************************
More information about the IMC-Web
mailing list