Susan Shannon, a 52-year-old blogger from Everett, Washington, published an essay in which she leveled severe allegations against a US Army colonel. According to Shannon’s blog, she was sexually raped in 1986 by Army Colonel David “Wil” Riggins when they were both cadets at West Point, the United States Military Academy in New York.
Shannon claimed that Riggins raped her while driving her home from a party in 1986. Riggins provided her a ride, and after she fell out in the car, he allegedly had intercourse with her comatose body. She dropped out of West Point soon after, whereas Riggins went on to enjoy a distinguished military career, reaching the rank of colonel.
Shannon claims she remained silent due to the army’s “code of silence” instead of reporting the event at the time. Shannon believes that the army’s pressure to remain silent and not report her peers prohibited her from disclosing the alleged rape even during her leaving interview. Nonetheless, some three decades later, she chose to reveal her apparently agonizing secret.
Shannon claims she was moved to speak up about her claimed incident after reading about many high-profile military sexual assault cases. She did not, however, go to the officials. Rather, she wrote about it on her blog Short Little Rebel, naming Riggins as her rapist. The timing was also strange.
Susan Shannon made the strong claims against Riggins shortly after the colonel was nominated for a substantial promotion. Shannon, obviously, denied knowing about Riggins’ candidacy at the time she wrote her blog, claiming she was ignorant of it until she was approached by Army personnel investigating her post.
The accusations threw Riggins’ successful military career on its head almost instantly. The combat veteran from Alexandria, whose career includes tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, was on the verge of being promoted to brigadier general when Army commanders discovered Shannon’s rape accusation on her blog. As his name was dragged through the mud, Riggins’ promotion was immediately stolen away.
The renowned colonel categorically refuted all of the allegations. The military began an inquiry and discovered insufficient evidence to prosecute Riggins with rape, but the harm had already been done. The probe basically ended his military career, compelling him to retire.
He chose to fight back after the charges lost him his job. Shannon, as per Riggins, decided to play judge and jury on her own when she made the false charges on her blog, and he wasn’t going to let her get away with destroying his life. As a result, Army Colonel Wil Riggins filed a defamation suit against Susan Shannon, claiming that her statements lost him his promotion.
The jury ruled in favor of the colonel, ordering the blogger to pay Riggins $8.4 million in damages: $3.4 million in compensatory damages for harm to his reputation and lost wages, and $5 million in punitive damages to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. Shannon, of course, is dissatisfied with the result.
The jury, which was made up of four women and three men, had a different opinion. They deemed the case to be quite straightforward, with no doubt in anyone’s mind that the colonel had made his case. He was credible, said the jury, who believed the blogger was not as trustworthy. To be truthful, they believed it was too clear to debate who was speaking the truth. They had a vote, and everyone trusted the colonel, revealed one juror. The sole point of contention was the size of the damages.
Although Riggins claims the jury took the necessary steps to restore his life, the pain he endured cannot be quantified. Riggins described his family’s years-long struggle as a “horror,” adding, the enormous financial amount is useless. All he desired was the chance to be justified, to clear the record, and to take whatever steps were necessary to restore his name.
Individuals actually grasp the significance of a reputation, said Tom Clare, a defamation lawyer with comparable experience. This is especially true in today’s Internet climate, when even a blog post or a tweet may have such a wide reach. It has the ability to travel throughout the planet. And, if something out there is untrue, jurors are ready to pay substantial sums, he continued. They have a lot of clients that want their reputation restored, Clare said. What they truly want is public confirmation of the deception.
