Clarence, a thoughtful commenter who understands what he is writing about, responds to my contention that the high wrongful conviction rate in rape and sexual assault proves that false accusations are higher in rape than any other crime. While he doesn’t dispute this, he says that the study doesn’t necessarily demonstrate a link between wrongful conviction and false accusation.
It’s an interesting and important point, and I think it’s worth some extra attention.
I know what Clarence is getting at, and agree that it’s important to make a distinction between mistakes and willful fabrication, but along with raising the question of what we should call innocent defendants if not “falsely accused,” I maintain that there is no other reasonable explanation for the high rate of wrongful convictions besides false accusations.
Clarence:
Whilst this study does a good job of showing (what has been repeatedly stressed by organizations such as the innocence project) that the US has a problem with a very significant amount of false convictions, I fail to see how this shows the number of false accusations. You see, just like you can convict a murder defendant wrongly due to a lying witness – and yet there was still a murder victim, even though you got the wrong person – so with rape and things such as bad police lineup procedures etc, you can get a rape victim who helps convict the wrong person.
This study is useful in demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt, that “Houston, we have a problem with large amounts of bad convictions”, but it doesn’t necessarily say the same thing about the amount of false accusations, alas…
Let me be clear: I’ve always said myself that based on the average of the various studies of false accusations I think a minimum of 15 to a maximum of around 25 percent of all rape (sexual assault NOT included) accusations are false.
Problem is, this study doesn’t seem to prove what you think it does. There are studies that deal with false accusations (and they have various descriptions of what the various studies authors consider a false accusation, some won’t count it unless the police determine it to be false or the accuser recants) and they typically mention all types of other confounding variables such as police investigative procedures, bad forensics or late evidence collection, etc.
I don’t know how you’d legally or ethically get a guaranteed untainted population sample to check out the actual amount of false accusations. If you could put large amounts of people under secret surveillance (say at a college) for a year or so you might get an inkling of the rates, but I’m sure that many here including myself would have an ethical issue with such covert surveillance as well as the lack of what is called ‘informed consent’ for the students who would be the subjects.
My Response:
But the point still stands: whether or not it was a “mistake,” when someone is wrongly convicted they were falsely accused by definition — the injustice is no less to the victim. I think we should avoid getting bogged down in semantics over what constitutes a false accusation in rape and sexual assault. Instead, we should use the same standard we would in other crimes: if the accused party is factually innocent, then he has been “falsely accused.”
Perhaps in some cases women feel that they were raped when they were not. Say they didn’t want to have sex, but never resisted, and perhaps never said anything, and then claimed to have been raped. They may “feel” it was rape, but it would be a false accusation because it wasn’t.
As far as identifying the wrong person, that’s been proven to be intentional in many wrongful convictions. Many of the men picked up and then identified were totally unknown to the accuser, but she had to point the finger at someone because she’d already made up a story about being raped for one reason or another. These are the most alarming stories of all; of men simply walking down the street minding their own business, and then suddenly thrown in an interrogation room with no idea at all of what was happening, and ultimately convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms, then exonerated decades later by DNA evidence.
Finally, if false identification can happen in murder as well, why is the rate so much higher in rape? In rape prosecutions, the victim is still alive; if they weren’t it would become a murder case. This being the case, you’d expect that a surviving witness would contribute to accuracy rather than raising the rate of misidentification.
What is it about rape, as opposed to other crimes, that leads to such a high rate of wrongful conviction? There is only one reasonable conclusion: it is a crime that is uniquely susceptible to fabrication.
{ 49 comments… read them below or add one }
I couldn’t agree with you more, Welmer.
However, there should be draconian penalties (including but not limited to lengthy incarceration) for making a false rape accusation as well as imprisoning the wrong person by mistake.
While people may get financial compensation for a wrongful incarceration, they do not get the time spent behind bars back, they do not get the biological ages that they spent behind bars back, and I have never heard of a woman spending time in prison for making a false rape accusation or any prosecutor (or any other actor in criminal justice) spending time behind bars for prosecuting the wrong person.
Clarence is himself underestimating just how much all sex between men and women has successfully been redefined as rape both before and after the fact.
Clarence doesn’t seem to register that the grounds of reasonable consent on which he bases his contentions are only an illusion constructed for the male partners confidence to go ahead.
Clarence doesn’t understand that in this upside down society as social justice privilege, all sex is rape sex, if the woman partner decides that it is so.
OT:
First woman to try out for the NFL fails, badly, and then cries.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/leg-injury-cuts-short-female-083647084–nfl.html
You go GRRL!
@ Keyster
This woman said,
”You know, the distance wasn’t there, but hopefully the scouts will notice my technique,” she said. ”It’s not always length.”
What??????? Do we score points on how good it looks? She is missing the whole point.
The women’s way of thinking is very different than man’s. That is why so many of women’s sports and activities deal with how good they look, i.e. modelling, figure skating, gymnastics, etc. They don’t actually cross a finish line nor have a real measuring stick to determine who wins. It is all how they “look” which is very subjective.
1 in 4 rape accusations are lies.
What is it about rape, as opposed to other crimes, that leads to such a high rate of wrongful conviction?
It’s a woman’s perogative to change her mind. It’s one of those adorable peculiarities we’ve been taught to accept. Her desires are fleeting; her emotions rule, she’s unsure, she’s confused, she’s afraid.
They’ve developed ways to determine whether sex was forced by examining the vaginal wall after rape. Doesn’t matter. If she changes her mind post-coitus, it’s rape.
Rape hysteria is an unintended consequence of women’s sexual liberation, alcohol intake equality and slut culture.
Long prison sentences for the “victims” who make false accusations, and medium prison sentences for “victims” whose accusations don’t result in convictions would be a good place to start.
anonymous: March 4, 2013 at 08:32
“1 in 4 rape accusations are lies !”
No.
3 in 4 rape accusations are he/she said he/she did a majority of which are out right lies covering after the fact regret, revenge, blackmail, misrepresentation, getting back attempts, manipulation, entrapment useful-oopos-cover or cuckolding camouflage.
100% of men and boys claiming to have been raped in or out of jail/prison have indeed been held down and forcibly raped though.
VAWA corruption exposed by evil “SoCon” women’s group.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/aliciapowe/2013/03/04/independent-womens-forum-reports-on-the-corruption-of-vawa-n1525516
They’re actually worse than liberal feminists because they want men to be wage slaves and chattel and cannon fodder and “disposable utilities” and stuff like that.
Off-topic but Hoax Alert :
Oberlin Cancels Classes After Series of ‘Hate-Related Incidents’
In other news, Elmer wins coveted “Comment of the Week” at Heartiste
I like to watch Vietnamese travelogues with ForeignBride…
You Might Also Like :
5 Signs You Should Marry Her
But I think part of your problem is that the justice system was, in fact, flawed. It still is. Let’s just agree woman was actually raped by a stranger 30 years ago. She gave a description of a man. The police nabbed someone they thought was the man from the description-they had probable cause. The woman identified the man in a lineup because he looked enough like the man and the cops may have fixed the lineup. The accused couldn’t come up with a reasonable alibi. He may have had another conviction. It looks bad. And DAs are hot to prosecute-it’s in their blood. Enter the unwitting public defender attorney who knows you just can’t fight this and has seen this time and again. He gets the best deal possible and recommends that the uneducated person plead out. He does. There was no DNA test at the time. Nowadays there is. It’s a different playing field. Let’s talk about the woman who was actually raped 30 years ago. They never got the right guy. Justice wasn’t served for ANYONE.
And the problem is that some men actually do rape women. Some do so repeatedly because they get away with for quite some time- starting with Kenneth Bianchi and Angelo Buono and Ted Bundy. Some men rape men-John Wayne Gacy. And some men are vile enough to rape their daughters. So let’s just agree that sometimes it actually does happen. And often it is covered up until some little girl shows up at the hospital having a baby when she should be thinking about playing with dolls and dreaming of riding ponies.
If a woman were to invent a tale she would have to have some motive. Motive is absent when the person is a complete stranger. If the man is falsely accused and wrongfully identified, nowadays a DNA test does exonerate. Certainly you must have heard the term “spit and acquit” However, when the person is known that doesn’t mean that motive exists. And if no sexual contact occurred, then a DNA test would also be exonerative.
If a woman does not say anything, a man should never equate this with consent. If woman is drunk, a man should wait until she is sober – especially if he has been drinking also. Men and women should never assume anything of each other and always make sure consent is expressly stated.
Savvy wrote: “If woman is drunk, a man should wait until she is sober – especially if he has been drinking also.”
Right, because women aren’t responsible for their own actions/choices and a man is not only responsibile for his own conduct, but apparently ALSO for the actions/choices of the woman – even if he is just as drunk as she is.
This is blatantly hypocritical unless she also believes that women are not more than overgrown children, and therefore shouldn’t vote, for example.
Furthermore, Savvy’s attempt at being a rape industry apologist does not address the men suspended and/or expelled due to rape accusations from universities, where the standards for evidence are much lower – no DNA tests there!
Men and women should never assume anything of each other and always make sure consent is expressly stated.
Define “expressly stated consent”.
Is being willfully naked in bed together “consent” enough?
Or should he have to clearly state he is about to penetrate her vagina with his erect penis, and if he receives nothing less than an enthusiastically affirmative, “Yes, you may insert your erect penis in my vagina at this time!”, he needs to cease and desist or otherwise it is deemed rape?
Rape culture hysterics want to ruin romance and passion between men and women. The end-game is for men and women to stop having sex, because sex is the only thing keeping them from completely seperating the genders into a unisex/androgynous egalitarian utopia.
Sex between men and women is male power incarnate over the female. This needs to stop, with only artificial insemination using the highest quality genetic sperm used to procreate. There will be no fathers, only mothers with government funded child-care, like Julia.
Sperm farming and and egg harvesting will be common before the end of the century. Designer children will be all the rage. Women will be able to conceive and give birth to George Clooney and Kate Upton’s love child for a fee, subsidized by the government of course. Pre-natal sex selection will be normalized.
No, you are not seeing the entire picture. The motive need not be animus against that particular man. It could be for an alibi, such as cover for spending the night with a lover. It could be for sympathy. It could be simply a desire to get attention and assistance.
The man was just the guy the police picked up based on her story. He fit the description she gave, and theres no going back on the story now, so she says “that was him.”
This is how a lot of the guys freed by the Innocence Project ended up behind bars.
And yes, of course rape exists. But there’s no good reason that rapists, of all people, should be so much more prone to misidentification than murderers, armed robbers, etc. In fact, you’d expect armed robbery to have a much higher wrongful conviction rate (robbers often disguise themselves and don’t tend to leave DNA evidence), but it doesn’t.
The problem here is that that rape is generally a he said/she said crime (except in Muslim countries where the woman must produce witnesses). The fact that the past sexual history of the victim cannot be used (except if it is with the man who is accused) to rebut consent has gone a long way to making it harder to defend men in such cases.
Where there is no corroborating evidence (i.e. DNA from the defendant in the girl, etc.), the case will boil down to who do you believe. Absent past sexual intercourse between the so-called victim and the accused, it’s a lot easier to believe a woman who comes in and is an emotional wreck.
This is the reason for wrongful convictions. Require corroboration, and you will likely have a lot less wrongful convictions. And when you look at the number of the wrongful convictions, most involve the use of DNA to “prove” that the convicted could not have been “the one” with the accuser at the time in questions.
Savvy: March 4, 2013 at 10:45
“If woman is drunk, a man should wait until she is sober.”
GOT YA SUCKER.
Gents, when you have experience in this game, you can tell them from them, no matter how well disguised they appear to present.
@welmer
“In fact, you’d expect armed robbery to have a much higher wrongful conviction rate (robbers often disguise themselves and don’t tend to leave DNA evidence), but it doesn’t.”
I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate, Bill. To me, the study just shows that it’s harder to go back and use DNA to prove innocence in armed robbery than rape. But that seems entirely predictable to me given that essentially 100% of rapes in that era left a nice DNA deposit with which to work (presumably bona fide rapists now would be more likely to use condoms to avoid DNA identification). Other crimes, not so much. So the wrongful conviction in armed robberies may be even higher for all we know, but you just wouldn’t have as much opportunity to show it with DNA evidence.
Actually, I’m going to withdraw that last comment. Looking at the linked article from your prior post, it appears that they might have factored that in. It’s not entirely clear.
Keep working beta fools! Alpha bastards need your money!
Sisters make $540,000 babysitting their own kids from welfare
FWIW:
False rape accusation = the person making the accusation KNOWS that it’s false at the time she’s making it (at least 65% of rape accusations)
unfounded rape accusation = no rape occurred, but the woman feeeeeeels she’s been raped, and that’s all that really counts, isn’t it? (appx. 15=20% of rape accusations)
Add to those the times a rape occurred, but the woman has wrongly identified the suspect. If Welmer wants to wrap them all up under the banner of “false accusation”, that’s fine with me, I just wanted to point out how vile and common women making knowingly false rape accusations are. It’s pretty easy to see that we don’t live in a rape culture, but a false rape accusation culture.
The top five reasons for making false accusations (knowingly false at the time . . .) are constant across age cohorts, but the ranking changes. For example, younger women are most likely to level a false accusation for revenge, whereas an older married woman is more likely to do so for an excuse or alibi (e.g., to explain an STD). “Desire for attention” is one of the top five, which rather deflates the feminist zombie lie that women underreport rape due to social censure.
The whole bit by Clarence is deceptive cogwash. You need a body to have a murder so yes, even if someone is falsely accused a murder there is still a guilty party who did produce this body. A rape can be completely invented because you do not need this body to prove the veracity to your claim.
In other words its a lot simpler to make up a rape than a murder. You don’t need the physical evidence of a corpse. For this reason its an apple Vs. oranges argument and the usual deception and duplicity from those that oppose mens rights. The more things change the more they stay the same…..
Building on what Tom Smith said, the real problem with rape is how do you know a crime even took place? A dead body with seventeen knife wounds in the back is pretty good evidence of an intentional killing. What objective evidence exists to support most alleged rapes? (I am not talking about rapes involving torn clothes, stab wounds, blackened eyes, eye-witnesses, etc.)
The difference between a “rape” and a perfectly ordinary, consensual sex act often exists solely in the mind of the victim. What are we to do if the only “evidence” of rape is a woman’s after the fact claim as to subjective feelings?
The ladies are not doing their credibility any favors by making flat-out wrong, totally baseless accusations and getting caught on them. Sort of like the boy who cried wolf, and all.
Furthermore there is none of the garbage with murder like rape. You cant euthanise somebody at their request and then have them change their mind and call it murder. This is the murder equivalent of the ridiculous back dated “changed her mind” rape BS.
“I maintain that there is no other reasonable explanation for the high rate of wrongful convictions besides false accusations. ”
The conviction of an inocent man is a long process. In a long chain of dependent links, *each* link is *fully* to blame for the whole.
First comes the false accustion. That’s been covered here.
Then comes the police, who are only too happy to investigate a “crime” where the victim can not only identify the accused, but knows where he lives. Try calling the cops because someone broke into your car – all they can do is shrug.
The police are motivated by a quota culture, which is the result of stupid trends and management by metrics, which is the result og managers that can’t do their damn jobs and actually manage.
Next comes a court system so overloaded that almost all “crimes” are convicted by plea bargain. Your lawyer is part of this system. He doesn’t want the case to go to court, he wants some money and to move onto the next case, so he will persuade the client to plead to ‘sexual assault’.
Finally, if it does go to trial then there is a mountain of case law stacked against the accused – the accreted scum of six decades of white-knighting.
Trying to assign blame to any one part of this complex, or to proportion blame, is just bad math. Blame doesn’t split up in chunks like that. It is *entirely* the fault of each.
@ Savvy
“If a woman were to invent a tale she would have to have some motive. Motive is absent when the person is a complete stranger.”
That is complete false. A female can lie for the attention and sympathy she will receive. Sure, not every female is so selfish that she would do this, but some are. I personally witnessed a female relative lie to a bunch of her friends from her church about how she needed money. I contradicted her (in front of her friends) by stating she had $27,000 in the bank. (Yes, I did happen to know.) She gave no response. To my knowledge, she did not admit her lie to her friends.
As with some men, some females absolutely cannot be trusted.
I did read an article on Glen Sacks blog that had some drunk women in a cab try to light up and smoke. The cab driver told them no smoking so the women called the cops and said he did some sexual stuff to them. The cops snatched up the guy but he had video due to him running a recorder in his cab that showed the women were lieing. Nothing happened to the women no arrest nothing. The Last case I can recall in Dallas of an innocence project release was a man convicted of rape that the woman yerars later confenssed to making up due to a fight she had with the man and she was using the cops to get him. he died poor and the state never found him innocent so they never paid him.
Crank is full of shit fellas, she is as Dalrock as said quickly trying to rebuild the anthill. It is amazing how women see discussing completely innocent men in prison for rape is such a threat to women.
As racist and sexist as this sounds, sexual accusations and accusations of rape are one of the main reasons that segregation existed. Nowadays it is not by any means clear how one would legally obtain consent.
OT as regards to false rape accusations but on topic as regards to Crank being full of shit
Crank is in fact full of shit and misinformed about other subjects, as Crank thought on a previous thread that Islam did not welcome voluntary converts to Islam, while Judaism gives the welcome to converts to Judaism that would be near equal to that given to a black at a Ku Klux Klan rally or a non-white at a white supremacist rally.
Here’s the link to prove that Crank is misinformed about Islam being more welcoming of voluntary converts than Judaism, the latter religion of which gives voluntary converts the same welcome that greets labor organizers in right-to-work states:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/01/09/israeli-feminists-attack-pro-life-jews/
Oh and BTW, Crank, you do know that your namesake is a slang term for crystal meth, right?
Snoop: ““If woman is drunk, a man should wait until she is sober.”
No one has answered the following question: If both the man and the woman are drunk, why is only the man responsible?
Under the above circumstance, women are treated as children and less than adult. What happened to the “empowered”, “strong”, “I am woman”
etc, etc person who is suddenly much less than “equal”. Only the male has to face penalties even if he is more drunk than the female.
Zimmy, see my comment above; we are of like mind.
@Geographybeefinalist
You may be a geographybeefinalist, but you are a reading comprehension failure. My comment regarding islam was that I found the phrase “more welcoming of converts” to be a funny understatement, when their stated goal is to have the entire world convert to Islam, whether voluntarily or by force. Obviously, they welcome voluntary converts. They also welcome involuntary converts. That was the joke – sorry it went over your head.
As to my being uninformed, I dug up the study, and it confirmed my and Clarence’s suspicion that the overwhelming majority of these cases were cases of alleged stranger rape where the victim identified the wrong guy as the perp. That was intuitively obvious to us because of the nature of DNA evidence and what it’s useful for. DNA won’t help a guy if he had sex with a woman and she later claimed he raped her.
If you want to treat that the same as women falsely alleging that they didn’t consent to sex or just fabricating a rape, feel free. But, to me it’s a different problem. It’s a problem, but a different problem.
Some of you guys are as bad as the feminist shrikes on their sites – you go absolutely nuts when someone points out something that doesn’t support your rant.
@Paul Murray and Clydesdale: The “conviction” is not a “long process.” This is because any victim- whether cooroborating evidence or not- will get the state past probable cause. And then it’s onward to trial. The “delay” will be for the defense to collect contradictory statements from observers PRIOR to when the “act” took place.
With regard to the drunken hook-up, this is the ultimate he said/she said. It’s why you want a jury with women on it. There will be no corroborating evidence, and women are always harder on their own. What needs to happen in these “no corroboration” cases is that the prosecutor needs to “do the right thing” by dumping the case. Problem is that to stay in office, the prosecutor is “held hostage” by the very women’s groups who think these cases should all go to trial.
After all, to some women, no sexual act with them can be consensual unless the man asks for permission first. That’s sort of hard to do when her tongue is in your throat and her hands are in your pants, isn’t it??
You’re right meistergedanken. I skimmed the first time I went thru the
posts and missed yours.
I have asked women this question (if both parties are drunk than why is only the male responsible?). Not once, damn it, not once was there a logical retort from them. In fact many attempts were made to change the question or move on to something they wanted to talk about. One woman even said, “…just because”.
Right now at Northern Univ. in DeKalb, Illinois, one young man is being charged with “rape”. Seems he slept with 2 women one day apart and they found out about it. Days later they both decided they were raped. In between the alleged “rape” and their discovery of it, they hung around with him.
Women who don’[t understand how serious this is are women who don’t care. They are the true sexists.
@ Crank
It sounds like you have a problem with Muslims. Might want to get your Islamophobia checked out.
They are not the only religious affiliation throughout history to resort to coercion to obtain followers.
I was raised Roman Catholic and in the past Roman Catholics also used force to gain converts. It is possible that they will start up again in the future.
True, Tom. I was talking more about how things ought to be rather than how they are.
I was taught a long time ago that proving the “corpus delicti,” i.e., proving that a crime has even taken place, is necessary before anyone can be convicted. Sadly, this long-standing protection against injustice has largely been set aside in rape cases.
Currently under the gun is the right to confront your accuser, and I’ve read stories –no, not in “The Onion” — of apparently serious proposals to eliminate the presumption of innocence in rape cases.
Funny thing is, fifty or more years ago, the moral outrage was against white women sending black men to the gallows on the flimsiest of rape charges. (Google the Scottsboro Boys case for grins.) Seems we may be heading back to old times again.
“It sounds like you have a problem with Muslims.”
No, not really. I do have a problem with what I perceive to be Islamic theology, particularly as it relates to non-Muslims. I don’t have a problem with individual Muslims.
Either way, we’re getting off topic for the site, so I’ll leave it at that.
Geez, Welmer.
I didn’t know you did this, so it’s kind of an honor to have a post devoted to a concern of mine.
I passed this information to Feminist Critics and Toysoldiers blog did a post on it when they saw my FC link as well.
I still disagree with your interpretation, BUT:
this study is still useful. Showing there is lots of false convictions (for whatever reason) is a tremendous blow against the feminist narrative.
Sometimes, sure. I think opinions from reasonable people like you are valuable and ought to be highlighted, even if (and sometimes especially if) I disagree.
I think Clarence does have a valid point. There is a big difference between someone who is mistakenly accused of a rape and someone who is falsely accused of a rape. You can’t really confound the two.
My guess is that a large part of the problem is that that data set being used is simply too coarse to tell which explanation is more likely.
First problem, what is counted as a rape? I would wager you would find much much higher rates of false accusations of rape in cases of things like “date rape” or where a guy has sex with a girl who is inebriated and the like. Whereas you are going to have much higher rates of mistaken identification in the “raped at knife point by a guy in a ski mask” type rape cases. That is a guess, I have no idea if it is true, but it seems like a reasonably hypothesis that would probably be worth testing.
It would be interesting to find out what sort of rapes tend to be discarded or dismissed as false allegations versus what sort turn out to be an actual attack but fingering the wrong suspect. It would certainly shed light on things rather than continuing to obscure things as much as possible as the feminists seem to prefer.
@meistergedanken
“Right, because women aren’t responsible for their own actions/choices and a man is not only responsibile for his own conduct, but apparently ALSO for the actions/choices of the woman – even if he is just as drunk as she is.”
“Furthermore, Savvy’s attempt at being a rape industry apologist”
I don’t think Savvy is being a “rape industry apologist” he is just being realistic based on the current legal climate.
Incidentally I agree with you on this. If a woman can’t consent to sex when she has been drinking (as opposed to passed out unconscious) then it should immediately become a really serious crime to supply any woman with alcohol under any circumstances as it is essentially “facilitating her rape”.
I also agree with you, that if a woman can’t be trusted with drinking responsibly and taking the consequences then they shouldn’t be allowed to vote either. We don’t let children vote or drink for basically the same reason.
Women have been lying about rape for as long as humanity has had culture. This is nothing new, and no amount of litigation is going to change it. The cultural ostracism that the feminists whine about being assigned to victims is one of the only possible limiting factors.
I think that we need to refer back to last year’s topic of ‘Is Rape really a crime anymore?’. At worst it is involuntary detention or kidnapping if force were involved. Perhaps a lawsuit if the girl was a virgin.
For an article written in a formal publication, I find this to be completely uninformative, biased, wrong in every case. Not defining what is ‘wrongly accused’ does matter to a discussion of THE wrongly accused. Otherwise, you are just minimizing the crime and, as such, taking the side of the person accused of rape regardless of guilt/non-guiltiness. Which is disgusting.
I had a lot of a clearer, less discriminatory outlook on this issue by reading the blog Pervocracy in its entry of “Ten Shades of False Rape Accusations”, with the following follow-up: “Ultimately, all too often, it ends with a huge number of rapes going unreported, because sometimes it’s easier for a survivor to live with the knowledge that their rapist is free than it is for them to go through years of being under constant suspicion of being an evil false accuser. It ends with misogyny justifying and reinforcing itself, as the concept “women lie about rape” becomes both proof of and proven by “women are untrustworthy, manipulative, and malicious.” It ends with rapists who tell their victims “no one will ever believe you” being right, with society standing behind them (…) Every time we reinforce the common wisdom that “women lie about rape all the time,” rape gets a little easier to commit.”
This article, on the other hand, was… just disappointing and absolutely unprofessional for a serious magazine or newspaper, because you can’t automatically assume the rape reported is false without victimizing the victim, in this and future cases involving other victims, even further.
NO mention of the Innocence Project?
Barry Scheck testified before Congress that “more than 50%” of the DNA testing had proven they had the wrong guy. A defense attorney friend said that their professional journals note that “more than 50%” actually means “more than 75%”.
Whew!
“This article, on the other hand, was… just disappointing and absolutely unprofessional for a serious magazine or newspaper, because you can’t automatically assume the rape reported is false without victimizing the victim, in this and future cases involving other victims, even further.”
If you really want to be taken seriously, Nadine, then you MUST demand that women who lie, particularly the ones involved in more than 350 FALSE CONVICTIONS discovered by the Innocence Project (NOT the justice system itself), be given the MAXIMUM sentence humanly possible.
My suggestion is the following:
Daniel 13
61 And they rose up against the two elders, (for Daniel had convicted them of false witness by their own mouth,) and they did to them as they had maliciously dealt against their neighbour,
62 To fulfill the law of Moses: and they put them to death, and innocent blood was saved in that day.
63 But Helcias and his wife praised God, for their daughter Susanna, with Joakim her husband, and all her kindred, because there was no dishonesty found in her.
“For an article written in a formal publication, I find this to be completely uninformative, biased, wrong in every case. Not defining what is ‘wrongly accused’ does matter to a discussion of THE wrongly accused. Otherwise, you are just minimizing the crime and, as such, taking the side of the person accused of rape regardless of guilt/non-guiltiness. Which is disgusting.”
What could be more “disgusting”, Nadia, than to have three quarters to 90% (or more) of American prison and jail inmates having been convicted because of FALSE claims, particularly FALSE claims of rape?
What role do YOU think victim Assistance Awards, which can exceed $10,000 in some states, played in all this?
Even though TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS have been paid to victims of false allegations thanks ONLY to the Innocence Project, that is just NOT enough.
Except that it should not be the taxpayers who pay all this: it MUST be the false accusers of ALL kinds (false accusers, crooked cops, misguided public servants like Pamela Fish) who pay for ALL of this.
“I had a lot of a clearer, less discriminatory outlook on this issue by reading the blog Pervocracy in its entry of “Ten Shades of False Rape Accusations”, with the following follow-up: “Ultimately, all too often, it ends with a huge number of rapes going unreported, because sometimes it’s easier for a survivor to live with the knowledge that their rapist is free than it is for them to go through years of being under constant suspicion of being an evil false accuser”
You bitches must DIE!!
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50143485n