CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. -- The fraternity at the center of a shocking Rolling Stone article that alleged a gang rape took place inside the house raised questions Friday about some of the details in the story.
In a statement, Phi Kappa Psi's Virginia Chapter said it did not have a social event the night of the alleged rape, that no fraternity brothers worked as a lifeguard at the time, and pledging takes place in the spring not the fall.
Those points contradicted allegations in the article made by the alleged rape victim.
The fraternity's statement was released after the managing editor of Rolling Stone wrote a letter to the public, in which he said "there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced."
Outside the Phi Kappa Psi house on Friday, a fraternity said everything is "not back to normal [at the house]. There's a lot of things to be done here at UVa."
Other Virginia students said the revelations about the article have hurt efforts to change an alleged rape culture on campus.
"It took a really important issue and made it convoluted with disingenuous journalism," first year student Arvin Daneschmand said.
"It doesn't matter if her story is accurate because it's the story of so many people on this campus," fourth year student Natasha Scott said.
Sexual assault advocate Rebecca Weybright, with Charlottesville's Sexual Assault Resource Agency, said she worried the story would discourage people from believing survivors.
"It has the potential to make more rape survivors feel like they shouldn't come forward," Weybright said.
Rolling Stone apologizes over account of UVA gang rape
Rolling Stone magazine apologized Friday for discrepancies in an article about the alleged gang rape of a University of Virginia student, after friends of the victim expressed doubts about the woman's account and the accused fraternity chapter denied key details.
Rolling Stone editors made the choice not to contact the man who allegedly "orchestrated the attack on "Jackie"(the woman who was the subject of the article) nor any of the men she claimed participated in the attack for fear of retaliation against her," a decision the magazine says it now regrets.
"In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced," Rolling Stone said.
Rolling Stone Managing Editor Will Dana later tweeted that "the truth would have been better served by getting the other side of the story."
