Krakaeur's book "Missoula" to be released April 21

[PlayerRep]

This smells like a largely one-sided, unbalanced and biased book. Cherry-picking of everything supportive of his view/bias/agenda. Omission of other things, like the statement of the federal judge about the UM proceeding offending anyone's sense of fairness. Interviews of accusers who didn't like the process or didn't get their way, and perhaps others who also didn't like something. No interviews of people on the other side of the contacts with investigators, and no way for them to defend the situations/allegations anyway. Interviews of supporters/enablers (see JJ situation). Cherry-picking of Bartz reports, DOJ letter (which was not based on a full investigation, as they weren't given the county attorney's file), and Missoulian and other articles. No interviews, and perhaps no attempt to interview, anyone on the other side or with a different view. I can't imagine that any of them would talk to Krakauer in a situation like this, even if contacted. No mention that apparently every athlete who fought the university proceedings with a lawyer was ultimately not thrown out of school. Lots of innuendo thrown in. I suppose there will be new information from accusers whom he interviewed. I wonder how many of their names will be used. Maybe Krakauer will be more balanced, but nothing in his blurb seems to indicate that.

While UM and Missoula probably don't need any more press on this subject and time-period, I think a truly balanced book, with input from all sides and based on facts (as much as possible), would be interesting to read.

Boy, I wish I could tell what's in a book before it's published by somehow figuring out what it "smells like." What a time saver.

Just read Krakauer's long blurb/summary of the book, and then you'll know what it smells like. If that doesn't work, get further education.

 

[EverettGriz]

This smells like a largely one-sided, unbalanced and biased book. Cherry-picking of everything supportive of his view/bias/agenda. Omission of other things, like the statement of the federal judge about the UM proceeding offending anyone's sense of fairness. Interviews of accusers who didn't like the process or didn't get their way, and perhaps others who also didn't like something. No interviews of people on the other side of the contacts with investigators, and no way for them to defend the situations/allegations anyway. Interviews of supporters/enablers (see JJ situation). Cherry-picking of Bartz reports, DOJ letter (which was not based on a full investigation, as they weren't given the county attorney's file), and Missoulian and other articles. No interviews, and perhaps no attempt to interview, anyone on the other side or with a different view. I can't imagine that any of them would talk to Krakauer in a situation like this, even if contacted. No mention that apparently every athlete who fought the university proceedings with a lawyer was ultimately not thrown out of school. Lots of innuendo thrown in. I suppose there will be new information from accusers whom he interviewed. I wonder how many of their names will be used. Maybe Krakauer will be more balanced, but nothing in his blurb seems to indicate that.

While UM and Missoula probably don't need any more press on this subject and time-period, I think a truly balanced book, with input from all sides and based on facts (as much as possible), would be interesting to read.

Boy, I wish I could tell what's in a book before it's published by somehow figuring out what it "smells like." What a time saver.

HA! I could have used that skill with a few text books whose spines never got cracked....

But I was thinking the same thing. I think I'll wait until the book, you know, is actually available to read before I give my book report.

I'm far from happy the book got written. But evidently the irony of the "biased, one-sided" accusations are lost on some.

 

[mtgrizrule]

My hope is 1 of my good friends will review this book. He reviews 100's of books every year. I will let him review it. If he finds it unbiased and not 1 sided journalism, I will read it.

 

[PlayerRep]

From Krakauer's website. Read it and let us know if you think it will anything other than one-sided.

"... a stark, powerful, meticulously reported narrative about a series of sexual assaults at the University of Montana ­— stories that illuminate the human drama behind the national plague of campus rape

Missoula, Montana, is a typical college town, with a highly regarded state university, bucolic surroundings, a lively social scene, and an excellent football team — the Grizzlies — with a rabid fan base.

The Department of Justice investigated 350 sexual assaults reported to the Missoula police between January 2008 and May 2012. Few of these assaults were properly handled by either the university or local authorities. ....

.... Krakauer’s devastating narrative of what happened in Missoula makes clear why rape is so prevalent on American campuses, and why rape victims are so reluctant to report assault.

Acquaintance rape is a crime like no other. ... the victim often comes under more suspicion than the alleged perpetrator. This is especially true if the victim is sexually active; if she had been drinking prior to the assault — and if the man she accuses plays on a popular sports team. For a woman in this situation, the pain of being forced into sex against her will is only the beginning of her ordeal. If she decides to go to the police, undertrained officers sometimes ask if she has a boyfriend, implying that she is covering up infidelity. She is told rape is extremely difficult to prove, and repeatedly asked if she really wants to press charges.... If the assailant is indicted, even though victim’s name is supposed to be kept confidential, rumors start in the community and on social media, labeling her a slut, unbalanced, an attention-seeker. The vanishingly-small but highly-publicized incidents of false accusations are used to dismiss her claims in the press. If the case goes to trial, the woman’s entire personal life often becomes fair game for the defense attorneys.

This brutal reality goes a long way towards explaining why acquaintance rape is the most underreported crime in America. In addition to physical trauma, its victims often suffer devastating psychological damage that leads to feelings of shame, emotional paralysis and stigmatization. PTSD rates for rape victims are estimated to be 50%, higher than soldiers returning from war.

In Missoula, Krakauer chronicles the searing experiences of several women in Missoula — the nights when they were raped; their fear and self-doubt in the aftermath; the way they were treated by the police, prosecutors, defense attorneys; the public vilification and private anguish; their bravery in pushing forward and what it cost them.

Some of them went to the police. Some declined to go to the police, or to press charges, but sought redress from the university, which has its own, non-criminal judicial process when a student is accused of rape. In two cases the police agreed to press charges and the district attorney agreed to prosecute. One case led to a conviction; one to an acquittal. Those women courageous enough to press charges or to speak publicly about their experiences were attacked in the media, on Grizzly football fan sites, and/or to their faces. The university expelled three of the accused rapists, but one was reinstated by state officials in a secret proceeding. One district attorney testified for an alleged rapist at his university hearing. She later left the prosecutor’s office and successfully defended the Grizzlies’ star quarterback in his rape trial. The horror of being raped, in each woman’s case, was magnified by the mechanics of the justice system and the reaction of the community.

Krakauer’s dispassionate, carefully documented account of what these women endured cuts through the abstract ideological debate about campus rape. College-age women are not raped because they are promiscuous, or drunk, or send mixed signals, or feel guilty about casual sex, or seek attention. They are the victims of a terrible crime and deserving of compassion from society and fairness from a justice system that is clearly broken."

http://www.jonkrakauer.com/missoula" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[PlayerRep]

My hope is 1 of my good friends will review this book. He reviews 100's of books every year. I will let him review it. If he finds it unbiased and not 1 sided journalism, I will read it.

Read the blurb above and let us know whether you think it will be fair and balanced.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

My hope is 1 of my good friends will review this book. He reviews 100's of books every year. I will let him review it. If he finds it unbiased and not 1 sided journalism, I will read it.

Did he write this review?

 

[mtgrizrule]

From Krakauer's website. Read it and let us know if you think it will anything other than one-sided.

"... a stark, powerful, meticulously reported narrative about a series of sexual assaults at the University of Montana ­— stories that illuminate the human drama behind the national plague of campus rape

Missoula, Montana, is a typical college town, with a highly regarded state university, bucolic surroundings, a lively social scene, and an excellent football team — the Grizzlies — with a rabid fan base.

The Department of Justice investigated 350 sexual assaults reported to the Missoula police between January 2008 and May 2012. Few of these assaults were properly handled by either the university or local authorities. ....

.... Krakauer’s devastating narrative of what happened in Missoula makes clear why rape is so prevalent on American campuses, and why rape victims are so reluctant to report assault.

Acquaintance rape is a crime like no other. ... the victim often comes under more suspicion than the alleged perpetrator. This is especially true if the victim is sexually active; if she had been drinking prior to the assault — and if the man she accuses plays on a popular sports team. For a woman in this situation, the pain of being forced into sex against her will is only the beginning of her ordeal. If she decides to go to the police, undertrained officers sometimes ask if she has a boyfriend, implying that she is covering up infidelity. She is told rape is extremely difficult to prove, and repeatedly asked if she really wants to press charges.... If the assailant is indicted, even though victim’s name is supposed to be kept confidential, rumors start in the community and on social media, labeling her a slut, unbalanced, an attention-seeker. The vanishingly-small but highly-publicized incidents of false accusations are used to dismiss her claims in the press. If the case goes to trial, the woman’s entire personal life often becomes fair game for the defense attorneys.

This brutal reality goes a long way towards explaining why acquaintance rape is the most underreported crime in America. In addition to physical trauma, its victims often suffer devastating psychological damage that leads to feelings of shame, emotional paralysis and stigmatization. PTSD rates for rape victims are estimated to be 50%, higher than soldiers returning from war.

In Missoula, Krakauer chronicles the searing experiences of several women in Missoula — the nights when they were raped; their fear and self-doubt in the aftermath; the way they were treated by the police, prosecutors, defense attorneys; the public vilification and private anguish; their bravery in pushing forward and what it cost them.

Some of them went to the police. Some declined to go to the police, or to press charges, but sought redress from the university, which has its own, non-criminal judicial process when a student is accused of rape. In two cases the police agreed to press charges and the district attorney agreed to prosecute. One case led to a conviction; one to an acquittal. Those women courageous enough to press charges or to speak publicly about their experiences were attacked in the media, on Grizzly football fan sites, and/or to their faces. The university expelled three of the accused rapists, but one was reinstated by state officials in a secret proceeding. One district attorney testified for an alleged rapist at his university hearing. She later left the prosecutor’s office and successfully defended the Grizzlies’ star quarterback in his rape trial. The horror of being raped, in each woman’s case, was magnified by the mechanics of the justice system and the reaction of the community.

Krakauer’s dispassionate, carefully documented account of what these women endured cuts through the abstract ideological debate about campus rape. College-age women are not raped because they are promiscuous, or drunk, or send mixed signals, or feel guilty about casual sex, or seek attention. They are the victims of a terrible crime and deserving of compassion from society and fairness from a justice system that is clearly broken."

http://www.jonkrakauer.com/missoula" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the info, PR. Sounds to me this will be one sided from that. Despite JJ being found not guilty and very little evidence to lead to conviction, he sill paints JJ into being a rapist by the next sentence of "The horror of being raped, in each woman’s case, was magnified by the mechanics of the justice system and the reaction of the community."

To me that statement is inappropriate being JJ was found not guilty, he still lumps that case in with his last sentence there. How did he rape someone when he was found not guilty and there was no evidence indicating he raped her?

 

[PlayerRep]

Krakauer seems to have some critics, at least of him following several of his books.

"Criticisms[edit]

While at a Sundance screening of the documentary film The Tillman Story (2010), Tillman's youngest brother Richard was asked about Krakauer's book. His response was "that guy's a piece of ..." [1]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Men_Win_Glory" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[grizbrokebacker1]

About all I can add is don't buy his book if you don't want to promote his spin.:

I preordered 100 copies. One copy will be personalized, signed, and delivered to none other than Playarape himself.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

About all I can add is don't buy his book if you don't want to promote his spin.:

I preordered 100 copies. One copy will be personalized, signed, and delivered to none other than Playarape himself.

Can I please get one? I wasn't planning on buying it, but if you have 99 leftover . . .

 

[AZGrizFan]

Used to like him as a writer.....after his abortion of a book about Tillman, not so much. Now? He'll never get another dime from me.

 

[jodcon]

I'm suspicious of anybody who pronounces his name "crack-whore".

 

[Grizzlies1982]

About all I can add is don't buy his book if you don't want to promote his spin.:

I preordered 100 copies. One copy will be personalized, signed, and delivered to none other than Playarape himself.

Can I please get one? I wasn't planning on buying it, but if you have 99 leftover . . .

I was going to ask for one too.
However, reading "Where is Baby's Belly Button" will probably be more illuminating. :ugeek:

 

[AllWeatherFan]

AllWeather, why do you think UM didn't expel JJ after the university proceeding and after he had been charged by the county? Did it ever occur to you that higher-ups at MT Higher Education had by then looked at the university process, and realized that Paoli and the federal judge were correct in asserting that the process had been flawed, unfair and in fact essentially a sham (and might result in significant exposure for the university)?

I have no idea what you're blathering on about.

In my opinion, the University of Montana should have deferred this matter entirely to the criminal justice system where it belongs. Colleges and universities are not equipped to "prosecute" felony charges.

Any other questions?

Yes, here's another question. Are you not aware that federal law, via the Dear Colleague letter from the Asst Secretary-Office of Civil Rights of the federal gov't, requires universities to proceed without regard to the criminal justice system. It specifically says that universities may not wait for the criminal justice system. Here's a question from the related Q&A. See bullets 1 and 2.

"What are a school’s obligations under Title IX regarding sexual violence?

•Once a school knows or reasonably should know of possible sexual violence, it must take immediate and appropriate action to investigate or otherwise determine what occurred.
•If sexual violence has occurred, a school must take prompt and effective steps to end the sexual violence, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects, whether or not the sexual violence is the subject of a criminal investigation.
•A school must take steps to protect the complainant as necessary, including interim steps taken prior to the final outcome of the investigation.
•A school must provide a grievance procedure for students to file complaints of sex discrimination, including complaints of sexual violence. These procedures must include an equal opportunity for both parties to present witnesses and other evidence and the same appeal rights.
•A school’s grievance procedures must use the preponderance of the evidence standard to resolve complaints of sex discrimination."

From the actual DC letter:

"Schools should not wait for the conclusion of a criminal investigation or criminal proceeding to begin their own Title IX investigation and, if needed, must take immediate steps to protect the student in the educational setting. For example, a school should not delay conducting its own investigation or taking steps to protect the complainant because it wants to see whether the alleged perpetrator will be found guilty of a crime."

The difference is that you are talking about "sexual harassment" investigations, for which the burden of proof is different than in felony criminal cases, to which Jerry Punch specifically referred in his post, and to which I specifically responded.

 

[UMGriz75]

The book is sounding as factually useful as "How to Avoid Large Ships."

http://www.amazon.com/Avoid-Huge-Ships-John-Trimmer/dp/0870334336" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[PlayerRep]

AllWeather, why do you think UM didn't expel JJ after the university proceeding and after he had been charged by the county? Did it ever occur to you that higher-ups at MT Higher Education had by then looked at the university process, and realized that Paoli and the federal judge were correct in asserting that the process had been flawed, unfair and in fact essentially a sham (and might result in significant exposure for the university)?

I have no idea what you're blathering on about.

In my opinion, the University of Montana should have deferred this matter entirely to the criminal justice system where it belongs. Colleges and universities are not equipped to "prosecute" felony charges.

Any other questions?

Yes, here's another question. Are you not aware that federal law, via the Dear Colleague letter from the Asst Secretary-Office of Civil Rights of the federal gov't, requires universities to proceed without regard to the criminal justice system. It specifically says that universities may not wait for the criminal justice system. Here's a question from the related Q&A. See bullets 1 and 2.

"What are a school’s obligations under Title IX regarding sexual violence?

•Once a school knows or reasonably should know of possible sexual violence, it must take immediate and appropriate action to investigate or otherwise determine what occurred.
•If sexual violence has occurred, a school must take prompt and effective steps to end the sexual violence, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects, whether or not the sexual violence is the subject of a criminal investigation.
•A school must take steps to protect the complainant as necessary, including interim steps taken prior to the final outcome of the investigation.
•A school must provide a grievance procedure for students to file complaints of sex discrimination, including complaints of sexual violence. These procedures must include an equal opportunity for both parties to present witnesses and other evidence and the same appeal rights.
•A school’s grievance procedures must use the preponderance of the evidence standard to resolve complaints of sex discrimination."

From the actual DC letter:

"Schools should not wait for the conclusion of a criminal investigation or criminal proceeding to begin their own Title IX investigation and, if needed, must take immediate steps to protect the student in the educational setting. For example, a school should not delay conducting its own investigation or taking steps to protect the complainant because it wants to see whether the alleged perpetrator will be found guilty of a crime."

The difference is that you are talking about "sexual harassment" investigations, for which the burden of proof is different than in felony criminal cases, to which Jerry Punch specifically referred in his post, and to which I specifically responded.

Nope, you are wrong again. The definition of sexual harassment in Title IX includes sexual assault. See the 2d para of the Dear Colleague Letter:

"Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq., and its implementing regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 106, prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. Sexual harassment of students, which includes acts of sexual violence, is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title IX. In order to assist recipients, which include school districts, colleges, and universities (hereinafter “schools” or “recipients”) in meeting these obligations, this letter1 explains that the requirements of Title IX pertaining to sexual harassment also cover sexual violence, and lays out the specific Title IX requirements applicable to sexual violence.2 Sexual violence, as that term is used in this letter, refers to physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person’s will or where a person is incapable of giving consent due to the victim’s use of drugs or alcohol. An individual also may be unable to give consent due to an intellectual or other disability. A number of different acts fall into the category of sexual violence, including rape,
....

2 Use of the term “sexual harassment” throughout this document includes sexual violence unless otherwise noted. Sexual harassment also may violate Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000c), which prohibits public school districts and colleges from discriminating against students on the basis of sex, among other bases. The U.S. Department of Justice enforces Title IV."

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Give it up, AllWeather. You don't know what you're talking about and you're making a fool of yourself.

 

[rimrockgriz]

About all I can add is don't buy his book if you don't want to promote his spin.:

I preordered 100 copies. One copy will be personalized, signed, and delivered to none other than Playarape himself.

I haven't noticed any of your posts for a while. Were you released from the detention center recently? Did you find a new friend?... :egriz:

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

I have no idea what you're blathering on about.

In my opinion, the University of Montana should have deferred this matter entirely to the criminal justice system where it belongs. Colleges and universities are not equipped to "prosecute" felony charges.

Any other questions?

Yes, here's another question. Are you not aware that federal law, via the Dear Colleague letter from the Asst Secretary-Office of Civil Rights of the federal gov't, requires universities to proceed without regard to the criminal justice system. It specifically says that universities may not wait for the criminal justice system. Here's a question from the related Q&A. See bullets 1 and 2.

"What are a school’s obligations under Title IX regarding sexual violence?

•Once a school knows or reasonably should know of possible sexual violence, it must take immediate and appropriate action to investigate or otherwise determine what occurred.
•If sexual violence has occurred, a school must take prompt and effective steps to end the sexual violence, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects, whether or not the sexual violence is the subject of a criminal investigation.
•A school must take steps to protect the complainant as necessary, including interim steps taken prior to the final outcome of the investigation.
•A school must provide a grievance procedure for students to file complaints of sex discrimination, including complaints of sexual violence. These procedures must include an equal opportunity for both parties to present witnesses and other evidence and the same appeal rights.
•A school’s grievance procedures must use the preponderance of the evidence standard to resolve complaints of sex discrimination."

From the actual DC letter:

"Schools should not wait for the conclusion of a criminal investigation or criminal proceeding to begin their own Title IX investigation and, if needed, must take immediate steps to protect the student in the educational setting. For example, a school should not delay conducting its own investigation or taking steps to protect the complainant because it wants to see whether the alleged perpetrator will be found guilty of a crime."

The difference is that you are talking about "sexual harassment" investigations, for which the burden of proof is different than in felony criminal cases, to which Jerry Punch specifically referred in his post, and to which I specifically responded.

Nope, you are wrong again. The definition of sexual harassment in Title IX includes sexual assault. See the 2d para of the Dear Colleague Letter:

"Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq., and its implementing regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 106, prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. Sexual harassment of students, which includes acts of sexual violence, is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title IX. In order to assist recipients, which include school districts, colleges, and universities (hereinafter “schools” or “recipients”) in meeting these obligations, this letter1 explains that the requirements of Title IX pertaining to sexual harassment also cover sexual violence, and lays out the specific Title IX requirements applicable to sexual violence.2 Sexual violence, as that term is used in this letter, refers to physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person’s will or where a person is incapable of giving consent due to the victim’s use of drugs or alcohol. An individual also may be unable to give consent due to an intellectual or other disability. A number of different acts fall into the category of sexual violence, including rape,
....

2 Use of the term “sexual harassment” throughout this document includes sexual violence unless otherwise noted. Sexual harassment also may violate Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000c), which prohibits public school districts and colleges from discriminating against students on the basis of sex, among other bases. The U.S. Department of Justice enforces Title IV."

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Give it up, AllWeather. You don't know what you're talking about and you're making a fool of yourself.

Isnt there a court room you two could meet to continue this circle jerk....anywhere other than here???

 

[Griz2k]

Maybe his follow-up book should be titled.... "Women who falsely accuse athletes of rape to get attention." I'm sure JJ and USC's Brian Banks would be interested in contributing to that.

 

[AZGrizFan]

This smells like a largely one-sided, unbalanced and biased book. Cherry-picking of everything supportive of his view/bias/agenda. Omission of other things, like the statement of the federal judge about the UM proceeding offending anyone's sense of fairness. Interviews of accusers who didn't like the process or didn't get their way, and perhaps others who also didn't like something. No interviews of people on the other side of the contacts with investigators, and no way for them to defend the situations/allegations anyway. Interviews of supporters/enablers (see JJ situation). Cherry-picking of Bartz reports, DOJ letter (which was not based on a full investigation, as they weren't given the county attorney's file), and Missoulian and other articles. No interviews, and perhaps no attempt to interview, anyone on the other side or with a different view. I can't imagine that any of them would talk to Krakauer in a situation like this, even if contacted. No mention that apparently every athlete who fought the university proceedings with a lawyer was ultimately not thrown out of school. Lots of innuendo thrown in. I suppose there will be new information from accusers whom he interviewed. I wonder how many of their names will be used. Maybe Krakauer will be more balanced, but nothing in his blurb seems to indicate that.

While UM and Missoula probably don't need any more press on this subject and time-period, I think a truly balanced book, with input from all sides and based on facts (as much as possible), would be interesting to read.

Boy, I wish I could tell what's in a book before it's published by somehow figuring out what it "smells like." What a time saver.

It's not that difficult. Just read the jacket and the press notes. :roll: :roll:

In Missoula, Krakauer chronicles the searing experiences of several women in Missoula — the nights when they were raped; their fear and self-doubt in the aftermath; the way they were treated by the police, prosecutors, defense attorneys; the public vilification and private anguish; their bravery in pushing forward and what it cost them.

Some of them went to the police. Some declined to go to the police, or to press charges, but sought redress from the university, which has its own, non-criminal judicial process when a student is accused of rape. In two cases the police agreed to press charges and the district attorney agreed to prosecute. One case led to a conviction; one to an acquittal. Those women courageous enough to press charges or to speak publicly about their experiences were attacked in the media, on Grizzly football fan sites, and/or to their faces. The university expelled three of the accused rapists, but one was reinstated by state officials in a secret proceeding. One district attorney testified for an alleged rapist at his university hearing. She later left the prosecutor’s office and successfully defended the Grizzlies’ star quarterback in his rape trial. The horror of being raped, in each woman’s case, was magnified by the mechanics of the justice system and the reaction of the community.

Krakauer’s dispassionate, carefully documented account of what these women endured cuts through the abstract ideological debate about campus rape. College-age women are not raped because they are promiscuous, or drunk, or send mixed signals, or feel guilty about casual sex, or seek attention. They are the victims of a terrible crime and deserving of compassion from society and fairness from a justice system that is clearly broken.

So, because a "justice system" didn't automatically find for the plaintiff in a rape trial, the system is CLEARLY broken. WAFJ.