Discrepancies in Jane Doe’s account
Photo by Gage Skidmore
Introduction:
Accusations of inappropriate behavior and sexual assault are serious and require careful examination. This article delves into the discrepancies between Jane Doe’s account, witness testimonies, and surveillance footage, highlighting significant gaps and raising essential questions about the validity of her claims against Pete Hegseth.
The Alleged Incident and Jane Doe’s Account:
“10-8-17 DOE was at the Hyatt consuming alcohol with coworkers.
said DOE was not sure, but believes that something may have been slipped into her drink, as she cannot remember most of the nights events. said that DOE remembers being in one of her coworker’s hotel rooms and remembers being ejaculated on. said DOE could not remember whether or not any sexual penetration occurred, but believes that she was sexually assaulted at that time.”
“DOE was at the Hyatt Hotel in Monterey, California on 10/7/17 attending a Republican women’s conference. On 10/7/17 she was drinking at the hotel afterthe conference and remembers approaching PETER HEGSETH, who was a speaker at the convention, and commented on how she did not appreciate how he treated women. DOE then remembers leaving the hospitality room and going to a hotel room. She sees the suspect, HEGSETH, and remembers his dog tag necklace. DOE then remembers HEGSETH ejaculating on her stomach. HEGSETH told DOE “clean it up”. Doe than found her way back to her own hotel room.“
Discrepancy in the Account:
Witness Testimonies: According to witnesses, including Jane Doe’s colleague, two women, including Doe, were flirting with Pete. The colleague left, noting that Doe was sober and Pete was drunk. The colleague did not think much of it, believing that a sober Doe could handle the situation.
“On 10-20-17, I contact provided me with […]? at the bar with JANE DOE.
, via telephone. JANE DOE had contact in formation and had advised
gave me the following information:
stated she knew JANEDOE from […]? JANE DOE is a member of the
was at the Hyatt Regency Hotel on 10-7-17. was an attendee of a conference the federation was holding. The key speaker was HEGSETH.
stated the conference had an after party. remembered witnessing JANE DOE consume a glass of champagne and some vodka at the after party. stated JANE DOE did not seem intoxicated,
stated a group of people went to Knuckles Bar after the after party. Part of the group was JANE DOE […]? and HEGSETH.
[…]? stated JANE DOE, […]? and HEGSETH were in their own group of conversation, while at Knuckles Bar. witnessed JANE DOE a n d […]? flirt with HEGSETH.
The flirting consisted of touching of the body or arm.
stated she was sitting at the bar and did not hear JANE DOE, and HEGSETH’S conversation.
[…]? stated she wore […]? and walked into the hotel lobby with HEGSETH and JANE DOE,
prior to entering Knuckle’s bar. was the female seen on the video with JANE DOE and HEGSETH.
While at the bar, HEGSETH sat next to […]? They had drinks at the bar and conversed.
During the conversation,
[…]? stated HEGSETH placed his hand on knee made it clear that his hand on her knee was not acceptable. Despite the touching,
stated she was not uncomfortable.
[…]? stated HEGSETH had invited h e r back to his hotel room. stated she politely declined the invitation.
[…]? stated she gained the attention of JANE DOE and had JANE DOE
become a “crotch blocker.” A crotch blocker is a street term used to describe someone’s actions used to prevent someone from having sex. By having JANE DOE join and HEGSETH’S conversation, was hoping that JANE DOE’S presence would detour HEGSETH’S attempt to have sex with
The bar began to close and left the bar. stated a group of people left the bar together. did not know it JANE DOE and HEGSETH were amongst the group of people. Stated she did not pay attention to HEGSETH and JANE DOE, when she left the bar.
stated JANE DOE did not look or act intoxicated when she last had contact with JANE DOE.walked back to her room and talked to her roommate. Told her roommate, later identified as, […]? how HEGSETH touched her knee and asked her to go back to his room.
Later that morning of 10-8-17, attended the conference and saw JANE DOE. JANE DOE did not seem any different and was her normal self. JANE DOE did not act like someone who was hung over.”
“provided me with a phone number to her roommate
On 10-26-17, I contacted via telephone.
stated she was at theHyattRegencySpa&Hotel on 10-7-17 and 10-8-17.She shared a room with
On the early morning of 10-8-17, arrived at their hotel room and told her that a group of people from the conference went to the bar.
At the bar, and HEGSETH engaged in conversation. told that HEGSETH asked
something to the effect of wanting to go back to his room.denied. There was also mention of HEGSETH placing his hand on her knee.”
The colleague’s statement shows Pete Hegseth was not interested in Jane Doe, but in her colleague. It may have been a blow to her ego?
Confrontation by Employee: An employee confronted the pair after receiving complaints from guests. Unable to find security, the employee personally intervened. Pete, who was drunk, started cursing, but Doe, who was sober, intervened and offered apologies on Pete’s behalf, mentioning they were Republicans. Pete was uttering “freedom of speech” while Doe laid her hand and arm on him, and they left together towards Pete’s room.
Surveillance Footage: CCTV footage shows Pete and Jane Doe walking in the corridor with arms locked and heads together, with Doe smiling. This contradicts her claim of not remembering anything from the pool to Pete’s bed.”
“At approximately 0030 hours, JANE DOE stopped texting […]? […]? was worried about JANE DOE. […]? was reading the news and made him even more worried for JANE DOE’S safety.
At approximately 0200 hours, […]? stated he had left the room and went to look for JANE DOE at KnucklesBar. […]? stated there was no one at the bar when he arrived on scene. […]? went back to his room.
At approximately 0400 hours, JANE DOE arrived at their hotel room, accessed
the room on her own and had used the key card reader to get in. JANE DOE told […]?that she” Must have fallen asleep.” JANE DOE was apologetic. […]?
noticed that JANE DOE did not have a hard time walking and was not slurring her words.”
Questions Raised:
Inconsistency in the Narrative: Jane Doe’s claim of not remembering anything from the pool to Pete’s bed is directly contradicted by the surveillance footage showing her voluntarily and happily accompanying Pete to his room.
Witness Accounts: The testimonies of witnesses, including her colleague and the employee, indicate that Doe was sober and in control of the situation, further challenging her narrative of being a victim. Next day when the witness
“attended the conference and saw JANE DOE. JANE DOE did not seem any different and was her normal self. JANE DOE did not act like someone who was hung over.”
The husband’s statement says she was sober.
Voluntary Actions: The footage and witness accounts suggest that Doe’s actions were voluntary and consensual, raising questions about the validity of her claims.
Implications:
Credibility of the Accusation: The discrepancy between Jane Doe’s account, witness testimonies, and the surveillance footage is a critical inconsistency. It suggests that there may be more to the story than what has been reported.
Conclusion:
The details of Jane Doe’s account, witness testimonies, and the surveillance footage raise important questions about the validity of her claims against Pete Hegseth. The inconsistency between her narrative and the video evidence, along with the witness accounts, is significant and warrants further scrutiny. It’s crucial to approach such cases with a critical eye, ensuring that all parties receive fair treatment and that the investigation is thorough and unbiased.
