The news story below from India is a garden variety false rape claim except note the breathtaking inanity in this quotation: "In its ruling, the apex court said it was a 'settled position in law' that so far as sexual offences were concerned, 'sanctity is attached' to a victim’s statement."
The story itself proves the error in that "settled position." The woman lied. The "settled position" is absurd, preposterous, an affront to common sense and fairness. It insults innocent men falsely accused. Why would no other subject matter warrant such a finding of "sanctity"? Why wouldn't the man's denials warrant a similar presumption of "sanctity"?
Fortunately, our American jurisprudence does not attach such magical qualities to a woman's sworn assertion that she was raped. And for good reason. For rape, the FBI reports a false reporting rate fourfold greater than for other crimes. B. Dank, The Politics of Sexuality (Sexuality and Culture), Vol. 3 at 36, n. 8 (2000).
As we've said before, people of both genders lie about everything under the sun for all manner of reasons, good, bad and indifferent -- except, according to some radical feminists, when it comes to rape. In that singular instance, mirabile dictu, one gender essentially is incapable of telling a lie while the other is comprised of pathological liars. The very discussion of rape becomes a sort of truth serum for women, a magic elixir that forces anyone not possessing a Y-chromosome to utter incontrovertible fact. (And note this is true only for claims of rape, not recantations of rape claims, according to the radical feminists.) Is this in any sense plausible to a fair-minded person?
Women lie more about rape than other crimes because the crime is so easy to lie about. The very physical act that constitutes the alleged crime is precisely the same act that has been performed countless times every minute of every day of every year since the beginning of time the world over -- as an act of love, an act of procreation. To transmogrify this most fundamental human act into rape, all a woman needs to do is recharacterize it as nonconsensual. That's it. Most women would never do that (just as most men would never rape), but some women risk the potential hardships of falsely crying rape (just as some men risk the far more serious potential hardships of raping). The remarkable thing is that there are not many more false claims, given the ease with which they are made.
In short, sworn testimony of rape is like any other testimony that must be considered on its own merits, in the context of all the surrounding circumstances, including the man's denials. Period. And the ease with which a false claim can be made should be taken into consideration.
HERE IS THE NEWS STORY:
No mercy for girl who feigned rape
OUR LEGAL CORRESPONDENT
New Delhi, July 12: Lying about rape has boomeranged on a girl for taking the law for a ride.
The Supreme Court has refused to grant relief to the girl, who was jailed for three months by a Madhya Pradesh court for falsely accusing two men of raping her.
Mahila Vinod Kumar had filed an FIR in January 1993, saying the two had waylaid and raped her. She said she told her father and uncle about the assault and then lodged the first information report.
The accused were arrested and chargesheeted but, during the trial, the girl went back on her statement and claimed she hadn’t been raped. She even denied filing the FIR.
The trial court acquitted the two men on November 28, 2001, but ordered action against the girl for giving false evidence.
She was showcaused and a case was registered against her. The girl defended herself saying she was illiterate and had made a mistake. But the trial court sentenced her to three months in jail.
She then moved the high court and again took the stand that she was illiterate, didn’t understand law and that the particulars of the offence had not been explained to her.
The high court went through the case records and found that in her reply to the show-cause notice she had admitted that she had lied all through.
The court also found untenable her stand that the particulars of the offence were not explained to her, and dismissed her appeal.
The girl then appealed in the apex court.
Her counsel said her mother and uncle forced her to file a false report, although the FIR and the statement recorded by police clearly said she had been raped.
In its ruling, the apex court said it was a “settled position in law” that so far as sexual offences were concerned, “sanctity is attached” to a victim’s statement.
“This court has, in several cases, held that the evidence of the prosecutrix alone is sufficient for the purpose of conviction if it is found to be reliable, cogent and credible.”
But in the “present case”, on the basis of the allegations made by the petitioner, two persons were arrested and had to face “trial and suffered the ignominy” of being involved in a serious offence like rape.
“Their acquittal may, to a certain extent, have washed away the stigma, but that is not enough,” the court said.
The court said the “evil of perjury” had assumed alarming proportions and action must be taken against the girl for maliciously setting the law in motion.