<p>An attorney for the former University of Virginia dean suing Rolling Stone for defamation alleged during closing arguments that the magazine&#8217;s campus rape story was reported with a &#8220;reckless disregard for the truth.&#8221;</p> 
<p>Attorney Tom Clare charged that Rolling Stone &#8220;needed a villain&#8221; for the Nov. 2014 feature piece &#8212; and the story&#8217;s author, Sabrina Erdely, decided former associate dean of students Nicole Eramo fit the bill.</p> 
<p>&#8220;Every one of her stories has a victim, a villain and a vindicator &#8230; Ms. Erdely and Rolling Stone were intent on imposing that on this story,&#8221; Clare said.</p> 
<p>&#8220;It had all of the elements of a perfect story, but when something sounds too perfect to be true, it probably is.&#8221;</p> 
<p>Eramo, who is seeking $7.5 million, claims the since-discredited story portrayed her as turning a blind eye to gang rape claims made by a former student identified as &#8220;Jackie.&#8221;</p> 
<p>Clare argued that the defamation case is not about rape, but about journalistic failure.</p> 
<p>The lawyer said Erdely left out important details in her piece on purpose, like the fact that Eramo took Jackie to the police on two separate occasions.</p> 
<q> <p>&#8216;Every one of her stories has a victim, a villain and a vindicator&#8230;&#8217;</p> </q> 
<p>&#8220;They made a decision to remove [from the article] every reference to the police and that&#8217;s actual malice,&#8221; he said.</p> 
<p>Clare also blasted Erdely for ignoring red flags, such as Jackie&#8217;s refusal to put her in touch with sources who could corroborate her alleged gang rape account.</p> 
<p>&#8220;Jackie&#8217;s refusal to put Ms. Erdely in touch with people who could confirm or deny her story was a giant, waving red flag,&#8221; he insisted.</p> 
<p>&#8220;Once they decided what the article was going to be, it didn&#8217;t matter what the facts were,&#8221; Clare added.</p> 
<p>Rolling Stone&#8217;s attorney Scott Sexton countered that Erdely put a &#8220;tremendous amount of work&#8221; into the article, but was ultimately fooled by Jackie.</p> 
<a type="internal" /> 
<p>&#8220;Sabrina was acting in good faith when she wrote the article with the information she had,&#8221; he insisted. &#8220;Our world would shut down if we walked out that court room door and expected everyone to lie to us.&#8221;</p> 
<p>Sexton also said that because Eramo is a public figure, Erdely had every right to criticize her.</p> 
<p>&#8220;She is a highly compensated public servant&#8230; we are entitled as citizens to criticize a public figure,&#8221; he explained.</p> 
<p>Sexton argued that Eramo&#8217;s attorneys are intent on proving that the story was republished in Dec. 2014 &#8212; when the magazine added an editor&#8217;s note to the piece after Jackie&#8217;s rape account had been called into question &#8212; because they, &#8220;have no case for actual malice&#8221; before then.</p> 
<p>One of the questions jurors will be asked is whether they believe that Rolling Stone &#8220;affirmatively reiterated the content of any false and defamatory statements.&#8221;</p>
Ex-UVA dean’s lawyer blasts Rolling Stone editor’s ‘reckless’ rape story