That's a picture of part of Ms. Erdely's declaration to the court. It's about her conversations on the night of December 4-December 5, 2014, a couple of weeks after the Rolling Stone article was published on November 19, 2014.
Had he not quit or gotten fired by then, or did the information that Jackie's friends could get about him not indicate that he had left the aquatic center?
By the time that the Charlottesville police spoke to Drew, Drew was not working at the aquatic center; isn't that what the police statement seems to be saying?
Why did the police think that they should interview him, and why did he think that he needed legal counsel for that interview? What about him made the police think that he might be a suspect, instead of one of the active male employees of the aquatic center who had not responded to phone calls or emails from the police?
Those are pictures of part of the Charlottesville Police Department's March 23, 2015 statement.
All the police did to try to talk to the active male employees of the aquatic center was send emails and make phone calls? When some of them didn't answer, the police left it at that?
What does that say about the condemnation to which Ms. Erdely was subjected by the media for the supposed failures of her investigative methods? Doesn't it mean that another standard is applied to police investigations when the police are trying to discredit a rape victim and protect rapists than the standard that is applied to a journalist who's trying to help a rape victim?
All that the active male employees who did answer the police's emails and phone calls had to do was not admit to being perpetrators? I'm not saying that they're guilty; I don't think that they are, but is that a real investigation? It doesn't seem to me that it is.
Why did the active male employees who answered not think that they needed legal counsel, while Drew did? Why does the police statement say nothing about how the police got from "identifying" him to a situation in which he "cooperated fully with investigators in the presence of legal counsel"? Why did the police meet with him in person, after he had obtained legal counsel, when the police docilely accepted not only phone calls or emails from those of the active male employees who answered the police phone calls and emails but the absence of phone calls and emails from those of the active male employees who never answered?
The contrast between how the police statement portays Jackie as uncooperative and unconvincing and how it portrays Drew as cooperative and above suspicion is deliberate, as was the police bullying to which she was subjected and the police deference with which Drew was treated. If the police failed to bully Jackie into saying what they wanted her to say, that is to her credit. If the police did everything that they could to misrepresent the evidence that Drew was guilty, that is to their shame.
The police statement says that Drew's "work schedule" when he was at the aquatic center "may have been relevant" to the investigation. Specifically, the statement says that Drew's work schedule "may have been relevant to a dinner date that 'Jackie' had with her alleged offender at the Boar's Head Inn on the evening of September 28, 2012."
The Rolling Stone article says that, after the rape, Jackie changed her work schedule so that she wouldn't have to be around Drew.
Do the records of Jackie's work schedule and Drew's work schedule corroborate that alleged change?
When you work for someone else, and when you work somewhere that has a number of employees who have to be scheduled every week according to when they can work and when the place has business hours, you usually have to ask to have your schedule changed. It's almost always a supervisor who does the schedule, who spends hours every week trying to coordinate the needs of employees with the needs of the business. It is such an important and difficult part of every business that has several employees who work by the hour that there is software and there are apps for doing it.
That's the address for the pages of results for a Google search of the term "employee schedule."
Jackie had to have talked to someone at the aquatic center about getting her schedule changed, and during that conversation she also had to have said something about why a supervisor should try to schedule her so that she was never around Drew. It wasn't just Jackie's schedule that would have to be scrutinized for a supervisor to do that; the supervisor would have to scrutinize Drew's schedule, also.
Particularly at a place where you can't have scheduling errors, like an aquatic center that has to have lifeguards or not be able to function according to its business hours because people can't be in the pool without a lifeguard around, the schedule is not something that supervisors don't notice.
Is that why the police were able quickly to identify Drew, even though he was neither an active employee on the roster nor a member of Phi Kappa Psi? Did people who worked at the aquatic center tell the police who he was, hoping that he would finally get arrested?
Copyright, with noted exceptions, L. Kochman, July 6, 2016 @ 10:14 p.m.
