Tuesday, March 31, 2009

A young life destroyed by a rape allegation: An absolute 'must-read' post

'At one point I thought I'd go to prison,' says Peter. 'When I first saw a lawyer, I said: "How bad could this get?" And he said: "You could be looking at 25 years." 'I just cried in the police cell, and that isn't me. I don't cry. But I pulled a blanket over my head, turned away from the security cameras to face the wall and just sobbed my eyes out.

Are there worse things for a man to be called than a rapist? If so, Peter Bacon - who still has the word ringing in his head and surely will for the rest of his life - struggles to think of them.

'Rapist. It's up there with paedophile, isn't it?' he says. 'Rape is one of those things for which there are no excuses. Socially, it's one of the worst crimes because no one can ever justify rape.

'I'd say it is worse even than murder, because there can be circumstances where you can attempt to justify murder. Personally, I'd have preferred to be in that dock accused of murder than rape.'

Of course, Peter isn't a rapist. This week a court said so. A jury declared he was nothing more than an ordinary young man who once had a drunken one-night stand - albeit one which went horribly, terrifyingly wrong.

And yet the 26-year-old found himself accused: first, by the woman he slept with - a respected lawyer no less - who opened her eyes the morning after and screamed. Then by the authorities, who agreed that charges should be pressed.

It took more than a year for the case to come to court, and that has meant 13 months of whispers, finger-pointing and the assumption that everyone you encounter is thinking just one word.

'I can't even begin to describe how horrible that is,' he says, in his first interview since walking free from court on Thursday.

'Everywhere you go, you feel there are eyes boring into you. It was there in court, obviously, with the jury, the judge and people in the public gallery. I was thinking: "These people think I am a rapist. My God, they think I am capable of that."

'Outside court, too. People in the street. I was even paranoid of the builders in the car park. My friend would say "They are not looking at you", but in my eyes they were. Everyone was.'

And still are? He nods. The worst thing about a rape accusation, he points out and rightly so, is that it isn't shaken off easily.

'I'm an innocent man, but those charges are out there, for ever, on the internet. And these things stick. Some people will remember that I was actually acquitted, proved innocent. But for others, I'll just be yet another man who got away with rape, and that is devastating.

'What makes it worse is that she was the person she was. Imagine being accused of rape by a lawyer, for goodness sake? She knew the courts system.

'I was just this nobody - the accused. I was the lowest of the low.'

Peter admits that he harboured his own preconceptions about rape charges before 'all this'. Only a certain type of man would even find himself on a rape charge in the first place, wouldn't he?

'Exactly. And that man wasn't me. I'm not aggressive. I don't treat women badly. In fact, 80 per cent of my friends are women. It had never occurred to me that I needed to be worried about a one-night stand. I just never thought in a million years that I would be anywhere near a rape case. And yet I was, right in the middle of it.'

And how. His account of his ordeal should be read by every unattached young man heading for a night out.

And every woman who might be tempted to mix alcohol and sex, then think of the consequences too late.

'At one point I thought I'd go to prison,' says Peter. 'When I first saw a lawyer, I said: "How bad could this get?" And he said: "You could be looking at 25 years."

'I just cried in the police cell, and that isn't me. I don't cry. But I pulled a blanket over my head, turned away from the security cameras to face the wall and just sobbed my eyes out.

'I cried again a year later, in the toilets of the courtroom, on the third day of the trial. My face had been all over the papers that morning. I couldn't get a grip. The security guard was just standing there as I cried myself stupid.'

In between those two sobbing fits, there were plenty more anguished moments. Peter was the first member of his social group to go to university, but he dropped out of his sociology course because he couldn't bear facing his fellow students after the charges were brought

'I was at university in Kent, but got on the bus back home to Coventry the day after I was charged. I wanted to run away because I was so ashamed. Not because I'd done anything wrong, but because I knew people wouldn't see it like that.'

He still wonders if his life, as he had planned it, might be over, even though it took a jury only 45 minutes to return with an emphatic 'not guilty' verdict.

He may be back at university, but his romantic life has pretty much ground to a halt since that February night of last year.

'I'd like to have a girlfriend, but it's been impossible. You get chatting to a girl in a bar and you have to tell them sooner rather than later, don't you? How the hell do you start that conversation?'

The career he had planned is pretty much in tatters, too. 'I'd been thinking of teaching, but that's out the window.

'My DNA is on a database. There are records. I don't know if this case would be brought up on an initial search, but if they go digging it will be there. And who would let me work with children?

'If it was a choice between someone with a rape charge lingering in the past or someone without, which one would you choose? I'd do exactly the same.'

So how on earth did an obviously bright young man, with impeccable manners, find himself in this situation? The first thing he seems desperate - perhaps understandably so - to stress is that he is no womaniser.

Before the romantic encounter in question, he'd had three serious relationships, each lasting between a yearand two-and-a-half years.

'I do get female attention, yes, but I'd say I am the sort of bloke who is happier in a relationship, but I'd split up with a long-term girlfriend just before that night, and, yes, I was single.

'People have assumed I was out there looking for sex. I wasn't; I was just having a good night out. But when things happen, well, I wasn't going to say no.'

His accuser was not a stranger. They had met twice before that night, having been introduced by a mutual friend. In her 40s, she was several years his senior, and from the off he had been intrigued by her.

One night, having a few drinks after work, he received a text from his friend, inviting him to the woman's house. He, of course, was only too happy to go along.

'I was fascinated by her, yes, of course. She was a lawyer. Successful. Attractive. She had great taste, liked good music.

'But I didn't go there thinking it was going to end in sex with her. It was a social thing, really. I thought I'd like to try moving in those circles, meeting important people. I wanted to get on.'

That the attention he received from this woman had a sexual edge was flattering, though.

'Of course. She's an attractive woman. What young man wouldn't be flattered by that?'

When he arrived at the house, he'd already had three beers. He can't remember how much wine he went on to consume, but the woman told the court that she had something approaching four bottles of wine.

In a sober courtroom, these sorts of events can sound like hedonistic orgies, but Peter says it was nothing of the sort.

'It was just your typical get-together. Music. Dancing. Everyone a bit merry. That's how I would describe her. She was on great form, chatty. She'd obviously been drinking, but was she paralytic? Absolutely not.'

There was flirting, and lots of it, he says. When the other friend left, leaving Peter and the woman alone, things got physical. They went upstairs. She performed a sex act on him. Then there was full sex.

He is embarrassed about going into the nitty gritty. For good reason, too. However nice a guy he seems, there is something repellent about the idea of a man pursuing sex with a woman who has consumed four bottles of wine. It isn't gentlemanly, is it?

'But she didn't seem drunk to me. Merry, yes. Off her face, no. If she'd been all over the place, falling, not making any sense, I wouldn't even have thought about sleeping with her, of course I wouldn't. It would have been disrespectful to her, and to me.'

Instead, he says she was 'fully cooperative' and the liaison was ' reciprocal'. 'Yes, she enjoyed it as much as I did, or she seemed to.'

Did she do the seducing? 'I'd say it was a mutual thing. We were adults. It was two adults doing what two adults do.'

Was it always going to be a regrettable sort of one-night stand, though? He says, not necessarily.

'I'd say I regarded it as a one-night stand with potential. I don't know if it would have led anywhere, but the possibility was there.'

He certainly wasn't planning to bolt out of the house at the crack of dawn, though. 'Absolutely not. There was the expectation that I'd have a coffee, chat a bit, help her tidy up the house, which was in a mess after the night before. Instead, it just became . . . madness.'

What he means is that the woman opened her eyes, took one look at him and became hysterical.

'She was just screaming at me, saying that because she didn't remember anything I must have raped her. She was going on about how the law had been changed to protect women from people like me. I was completely thrown, just bewildered.

'She was screaming at me to get out, and I was running round trying to find my clothes. I got my trousers and shoes, but I couldn't find my socks. They tried to make something about that in court, but my God, what did socks matter in all of that?

'I remember her going on about how she needed her phone, so I went to the kitchen and got it for her. I knew I was going to leave, but I thought she would be safe if she had her phone and could call for help.

'I just wanted a minute to think.' On the doorstep, he says he needed only ten seconds to realise how serious things were.

'I did the only thing I could think of doing, which was to call 999. Afterwards, I did think: "Was it an emergency?" Well, yes, at that moment I thought it was. I just wanted the police to come and, I don't know, sort it out. I remember saying: "You have to get here."'

Did he call the police for the woman's sake, or his? 'I don't know. A bit of both, I guess. She was in a terrible state and I didn't know what else to do.'

The 999 operator told him it was not an emergency and he needed to contact his local police station. He walked straight there - only to find it closed.

'It was all a bit farcical, looking back. I couldn't even find the door, then realised it was a glass thing that was locked.

'There was an emergency buzzer, which I called, and a voice came on. I said I'd been accused of rape and needed to report it. The guy took some details, but told me he couldn't really do anything until a formal allegation was made. He told me to go home.

'I was in a daze. I tried to call my friend, but he wasn't answering his mobile, so I went home and got straight on the internet. I was looking for some advice line or something.

'What do you do when you are accused of rape? There were all these rape helplines, but they were for women. Victims.

'What struck me as odd was that they were all 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday numbers. Aren't rapes more likely to happen at the weekend? Eventually, I called the Samaritans. I didn't know where else to turn.'

That afternoon, the police did turn up and arrested Peter. He was allowed to make his one call from the police cell before he was questioned.

'I called my dad and said: "Dad, I've been arrested for rape." I tried to explain more, but they said: "No, that's it." My poor dad. For four hours that was all he knew. He was going out of his mind.'

And so began what he can only describe as 'this unimaginable nightmare, from which there was no waking up'.

'At every step, I thought: "Someone will realise how mad this all is and stop it." But that never happened, until, thank God, the jury came back.'

Peter was persuaded to go back to his studies last September and will sit his Finals in a few months' time.

Ironically, his experiences have given him new insight into some of his subject matter.

'All the stuff that has been thrown up because of this - rape, crime, male/female dynamics - is in my subject area,' he says with a wry smile. 'When I was back home, running away from all this, I actually started my dissertation and picked rape as my topic.

'I couldn't complete it, though. I spent so long researching and got completely depressed by what I found, which was that men who are falsely accused never really escape.'

Clearly, the events of the past year have turned vague academic issues into something much more urgent.

'The thing I've come to feel angry about is how powerless men like me are. Traditionally, there have been very strong feminist voices lobbying about rape issues, but there is no male equivalent, and maybe that is needed.'

He is passionate about the anonymity issue, although, interestingly, doesn't believe his accuser should be named and shamed.

'I think there needs to be anonymity for both parties. It's a very dangerous road to go down, forcing women who make accusations to be identified. But, equally, it's not fair to have men like me face ruin because of the slurs made against them.

'I don't agree that I should have faced a trial in the first place, but the real damage was done by the surrounding publicity.'

For someone who has been through the wringer, he is remarkably devoid of malice. Indeed, what is extraordinary about our interview are his repeated attempts to protect his accuser. At one point he says: 'If she genuinely didn't remember what happened, then she was very brave to report it in the first place.'

He nods when I say he sounds almost sorry for her.

'I only found out yesterday that she had suffered from depression. To be honest, I don't know what to think.

Part of me is angry with her for putting me through this, but another part of me feels sorry for her because of all the aggro she is getting now.

'There was a moment in court where I was incredibly angry with her. My world had been torn apart and she was standing there - on her turf, remember - accusing me of not even being able to look at her. So I did. I looked her in the eye.'

What did he see? 'I don't know. That's the awful part. I still don't understand why she did this.'

There may be many more awkward encounters. Peter works part-time as a chef and his workplace is in the same town as his accuser's home.

He confesses that he was in Tesco before our interview and thought he saw her. Perversely, he says he is afraid of her now.

'I'm scared of her, to be honest. I have seen her at a distance in the street and I was just desperate to get past her without confrontation. Was she going to make a scene? Start screaming again? If she did want to talk, what on earth would I say?'

It wouldn't be sorry, presumably? 'No, I did nothing wrong. If anything, she's the one who should be saying sorry - but I don't even need to hear that. Now I need to move on.'

Shocker: Even Peter Bacon's accuser calls for anonymity for men until conviction

Comment: The following quotes appear in an interview with Peter Bacon's accuser, who whose name is not splashed all over the Internet -- unlike the man she accused. Two points are of interest.

First, she feels that men accused of rape should be anonymous until conviction:

"I do feel sorry for Peter Bacon that his picture was all over the papers before the verdict. Whatever has happened, I don't feel that is right. Why should people, until they are convicted, be named and shamed?

"Men accused of sexual violence can be vilified and subjected to vigilante attacks-and I don't condone that sort of behaviour at all."

Second, she recounts with compassion the time she defended an innocent young man of rape:

While talking about the law, she recalled a time she herself defended a rapist.

She said: "I had to deal with a young man who was convicted of rape in circumstances that beggared belief. He said he'd had consensual sex with a girl he'd met in a club. They'd kissed, cuddled and even had sex in public.

"She'd gone home, never said anything for a month and it was only when she discovered she was pregnant that she told her deeply religious parents that she'd been raped.

"He ended up being convicted. He got nine years. When I encountered him, he had already appealed once but we were told there weren't any grounds for a further appeal.

"It was heartbreaking."

Link: http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/242428/Id-never-report-rape-again.html

Monday, March 30, 2009

Chef accused of rape of drunken lawyer acquitted in 45 minutes

Comment: The woman in this case describes herself as a "recreational binge drinker," and upon waking up next to Peter Bacon, immediately called him a rapist, because she couldn't remember anything from the night before.

What is interesting to note, is that the jury that acquitted Mr. Bacon, was predominantly made up of women. So while the accuser's use of the "too drunk to consent" follows the standard "victim" battlecry, it appears that more and more women are starting to say

I especially liked the judges statement:

Sober, drunk or very drunk, he said, "if a choice is exercised freely, then it is consent."

So, as long as you make the choices, you need to be able to live with the consequences of those actions. In short, responsibility.

Chef accused by lawyer, acquitted in 45 minutes

A jury took just 45 minutes to acquit a chef wrongly accused of raping a lawyer who claimed she was took drunk to give her consent.

The jury of seven women and four men unanimously decided that Peter Bacon, 26, had not raped the middle aged solicitor after the two spent the evening drinking together.

Their swift verdict came after a three-day trial at Winchester Crown Court estimated to have cost the taxpayer at least £80,000.

Speaking after the verdict, Mr Bacon's solicitor said the case "seriously called into question" the lack of anonymity for those wrongfully accused of rape.

The female complainant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had alleged that Mr Bacon, a university student who worked as a pub chef, had taken advantage of her while she was very drunk.

Upon waking to find them both naked in her bed, she had shouted at him: "It's because of ******** like you that the law has been changed."

She was referring to a 2007 Appeal Court ruling that a person who has drunk excessive alcohol might not be capable of giving informed consent to sex.

Mr Bacon had been invited over to the woman's house by a mutual male friend late one night in February last year. Before he arrived she had shared up to four bottles of wine with the friend, before ordering three more from a take-away service.

After the friend left, the woman and Mr Bacon continued to drink together before going up to her bedroom and having sexual intercourse.

The woman, who described herself as a "recreational binge drinker", said she had no memory of having sex and claimed she was incapable of giving consent.

After leaving her house in Kent Mr Bacon immediately contacted police to say he had been accused of rape.

He was arrested and later charged.

Thirteen months after being accused, Mr Bacon whispered "thank you" to the jury after the foreman delivered the verdict.

Outside court, his solicitor Nicola O'Connor said: "There are no winners in this case. Peter has had this awful allegation hanging over his head for just over a year now.

"It has been enormously upsetting and stressful to have an allegation of this nature made against him.

"As soon as he was aware that the complainant was alleging rape, he voluntarily contacted the police and told them what happened. He told police as much as he could. He has maintained his innocence throughout."

She added: "Peter is enormously grateful to the jury for carefully considering the evidence in this case and returning a verdict of not guilty.

"This case seriously calls into question the lack of anonymity for people like Peter who have been wrongfully accused of rape and who ultimately are acquitted."

Summing up, Judge Patrick Hooton told the jury that to convict they had to be absolutely sure that the woman had been incapable of giving consent.

Describing the legal issue of drunken consent as a "vexed question", he said: "If the complainant thought that the change in the law meant that the law no longer recognises that a drunken woman can give consent, she was completely wrong."

Sober, drunk or very drunk, he said, "if a choice is exercised freely, then it is consent."

He continued: "The fact that she doesn't remember what happened, doesn't prove that she didn't give consent, however bitterly she may have regretted it the next day."

The Crown Prosecution Service defended its decision to bring the case.

A spokesman said two CPS rape specialists "decided there was sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction".

She continued: "The ability of the complainant to consent was clearly an issue in this case.

"A submission by the defence that there was no case to answer was rejected by the judge, who allowed the case to be considered by the jury."


Why so little coverage of the case of woman on trial for knifing ex-boyfriend's penis?

Comment: Before discussing the news story about a woman who attacked her ex-boyfriend's penis with a knife and then accused him of sexually assaulting her (news story posted below this comment and linked here) it needs to be put into context.

When I read that story, I was amazed it had not received far greater news coverage, given the grisly nature of the attack. I mean, the current news stories about Rihanna and Austria's Josef Fritzl are huge, international stories involving violence against a loved one. Why hasn't this story attracted such attention? Then it dawned on me why: the woman is charged with trying to cut an innocent man's penis because she felt he had jilted her. It plays into the whole "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" stereotype. The man seems obviously innocent and unjustly maimed. The story has been given little coverage because it's the man who's the apparent victim of domestic violence here, not the woman.

To really understand the import of this story, you need to compare it with a similar case -- a case that was given very dissimilar news coverage. Almost 16 years ago, John Bobbitt was mutilated by his wife as he lay sleeping. The story is well known and, in fact, became a cause célèbre. Lorena Bobbitt said her husband raped her, and in a moment of temporary insanity, she took a knife from the kitchen of their apartment and cut off her sleeping husband's penis.
"[D]uring her arrest Lorena commented to police that 'He always have orgasm and he doesn't wait for me to have orgasm. He's selfish.' That was the reason she gave for severing his penis."
Later in 1993, John Bobbitt was acquitted of marital sexual abuse.

For her part, Lorena Bobbitt was charged with malicious wounding. On January 21, 1994, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity and was committed to a mental health facility for 45 days for observation.

Here's the important part:
"Lorena was treated as a feminist hero."

You read that right: a feminist hero. In fact, before a single fact was adjudicated, before a scrap of evidence was admitted at trial, serious publications covered the story as if the dismemberment was in some manner justified. It was called "a cautionary tale" for men.

The lesson wasn't that mutilating another human being is never justified, it was that men had better wise up when it comes to how they treat women. Never mind that none of those publications, and no feminist leaders, would embrace any other type of bodily mutilation for any other type of crime. No one would applaud an aggrieved husband's mutilation of his wife's vagina. Yet vigilante justice directed at penises was celebrated with glee. The fact that purportedly enlightened publications were implicitly rooting for Mrs. Bobbitt even before any facts were adjudicated is nothing short of frightening.

Fast forward to 2009 and the case of another knife-wielding woman. This time, there is no indication that the man wronged her. The man was not charged with sexually abusing her, as Mr. Bobbitt was. Her apparently criminal overreaction to her ex-boyfriend's rebuffs is not embraced by feminists or the news media. In fact, she's probably an embarrassment to the feminists.

In short, the case doesn't represent some larger "truth" about male predatory behavior or female victimization. In fact, never are the words "domestic violence" used in the news reports, as they surely would be if the genders were reversed.

It's just a story about a man apparently falsely accused of sexual assault whose penis was attacked by a knife-wielding woman.

Nothing to get excited about.


Man 'knifed in penis after sex rebuff'

A spurned woman plunged a knife into her ex-boyfriend's penis after he spurned her efforts at reconciliation, a Lincoln court heard.

Tatiana Bastos (28) pulled a six-inch knife from her handbag and attacked Ricardo Morais without warning while he was driving, Lincoln Crown Court heard.

Caroline Bradley, prosecuting, said Bastos, of High Street, Lincoln, turned up unexpectedly at Mr Morais' workplace.

She attempted to make sexual advances towards him, but was rebuffed.

"He got into his car to go back to do his shift but Bastos followed him. She jumped in the car and refused to get out," Miss Bradley said.

"Miss Bastos then leant over and bit him on the arm. He could feel the pain of the bite.

"She then produced from her handbag a kitchen knife with a blade in the region of 15cms long."

Miss Bradley said that when Mr Morais asked what she was going to do Bastos replied "I'm going to kill you and then I'm going to kill myself."

"Within seconds she stabbed the knife into his groin," said Miss Bradley.

"It went in through his jeans, his thermals and his boxer shorts.

"He could immediately feel the pain and the cold of the knife on his penis."

Bastos denies wounding Mr Morais with intent to cause him grievous bodily harm and possession of an offensive weapon in Newark Road, Lincoln, on 21 May 2008.

She also denies perverting the course of justice by making a false allegation of sexual assault on 23 May 2008.

The trial continues.

Link: http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/news/Man-knifed-penis-sex-rebuff/article-852029-detail/article.html


Lover 'knifed in manhood as he drove'

A jilted lover stabbed her boyfriend in the penis as he was driving, a court heard.

Horrified Ricardo Morais was in agony as he struggled to keep control.

He was given emergency surgery after flagging down a passing motorist.

Prosecutor Caroline Bradley told Lincoln crown court: "The blade went through his jeans, his thermals and his boxer shorts.

"He could immediately feel the pain and the cold of the knife on his penis."

Tatiana Bastos, 28, of Lincoln, denies wounding Ricardo after he refused to have sex with her.

She also pleads not guilty to having an offensive weapon - a six-inch kitchen knife - and making a false allegation of sexual assault.

Link: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/03/30/lover-knifed-in-manhood-as-he-drove-115875-21238940/

Witness recants claim that sex was not consensual

Comment: In the news story below, the difference between life in prison and a much-reduced sentence for two men hinged on whether an alleged witness to a sex act characterized it consensual or non-consensual. The witness decided to recant the claim that it was non-consensual, so the prosecution was left without a case for that crime. (Whether they should have received any sentence at all, given that they were 18 and the girl was 15 is another matter altogether. It seems absurd, given the relatively insignificant age difference and the emotional and physical maturity of girls that age.)

This case illustrates a point we make here quite frequently: it is extremely easy to lie about consent. The very physical act that constitutes rape 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 a claim of rape, all a woman needs to do is recharacterize it as non-consensual. That's it. Some women lie about this -- it happens with alarming frequency, and it can and does destroy the lives of its male victims.


Pair charged with felony rape plead guilty to reduced charges

By LORETTA PARKFARMINGTON — Two men who could have faced a life sentence for first-degree felony rape have pleaded guilty to a lesser charge.

Terry Jeremias Basada, 21, and Joel Jesus Arteaga, 20, each pleaded guilty to class C misdemeanor unlawful sex activity with a minor and a class A misdemeanor unlawful supply of alcohol to a minor.

A sentencing hearing is set for March 23 with 2nd District Judge Michael Allphin.Arteaga was in 2nd District Court Monday in front of Judge Jon M. Memmott for a sentencing hearing with his attorney, Todd Sessions.

The sentencing was originally scheduled before Allphin, but he was out sick.Because the charges were misdemeanors, not felonies, the judge only needed a police data report to review before sentencing, but Memmott had not received it.

Basada’s attorney on Friday requested the sentencing hearing be moved to March 23.

Deputy Attorney Richard Larsen said, “This case is unique enough you need to read through the police data report. I think it is in the best interest of the defendants if the case is continued.”

The Davis County Attorney’s Office had filed felony charges against the two men in June of 2008 following a lengthy investigation.

According to court documents, the incident occurred in July 2006 when the victim was 15 and the two men were 18.“A key witness recanted a good portion of his statements,” Larsen said.

The witness saw the victim shortly after the incident occurred, he said. In his original statements to police, the witness “had said very clearly it was non-consensual sex,” Larsen said.

Without the witness’s statement Larsen said it would be difficult to prove the sex was non-consensual.

The men pleaded guilty on Feb. 9 to the reduced charges based on the age difference.Larsen said the victim understands why his office offered the plea deal.

“We’re not claiming it was consensual sex, but we’re not able to meet the burden of proof for a first-degree felony,” he said.

Link: http://www.standard.net/live/news/166554

Sunday, March 29, 2009

A life on hold for two years finally breathes easy -- man cleared of sexual assault amid "clear" evidence of "imagined events"

Ex-Argo acquitted of sexual assault
'Nerve-racking' experience, says Williams

Shannon Kari, National Post Published:

A relieved former Toronto Argonaut hopes to move forward with a coaching career after he was acquitted yesterday of sexual assault by an Ontario Superior Court judge.

"It has been nerve-racking," said Bernard Williams, 36, outside a Toronto courthouse following his acquittal. "This has been hanging over my head."

Williams, a former first-round NFL draft pick, played on Toronto's offensive line from 2003 to 2006.

Superior Court Justice John Macdonald issued a strongly worded decision that referred to Williams as an "impressive" witness and suggested the alleged victim fabricated some of her testimony.

"There is clear evidence of invention or imagined events," said Judge Macdonald.

In contrast, the denials by Williams of any wrongdoing were "unshaken" by the evidence, said the judge.

The 23-year-old woman testified . . . that she was woken out of a drunken stupor in August, 2006, to discover Williams engaged with her in sexual intercourse.

"She was not delusional," insisted prosecutor Patrick Travers in his closing arguments. "It is ridiculous to say she imagined a phantom penis inside of her."

There was no forensic evidence to back up the woman's claim of being sexually assaulted and the judge agreed with the suggestion by defence lawyer John Struthers there was a "boatload" of reasonable doubt.

"In her drunken semi-conscious state, she formed false conclusions of very doubtful reliability," said the judge, who presided over the trial without a jury.

The judge heard that Williams and then-teammate Jonathan Brown went to the home of the woman's friend Ashley Bonar, who was an Argos cheerleader, after drinking at a downtown Toronto bar.

The Argos went to the bar following their annual "Stop the Violence" charity golf tournament.
The woman admitted she had at least 20 drinks that night, including Martinis, tequila and several "Sex on the Beach" shots.

Much of her testimony was contradicted by Bonar, who said the woman was flirtatious at the bar and asked male customers to touch her breasts to see if they are "real."

Bonar testified that she had consensual sex with Mr. Williams that night. Her friend was ill from drinking so much and tried to throw up before going to bed.

Williams testified that he heard a noise while going to the bathroom and went to the woman's room. He saw that she had fallen on the floor and went to put her on her bed.

The woman admitted that when she awoke in a startled state to see Williams, she started shouting racial epithets and called him a "disgusting n----r" on two occasions.

Williams, who lives in Georgia with his wife, who is a lawyer and a prosecutor, is presently coaching high school football. He stated that his coaching career has been hampered over the past two years while he was awaiting his criminal trial.

Link: http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/story.html?id=1329631

Saturday, March 28, 2009

With a rape allegation, it's not a question of 'if' it will destroy a man's life but 'how'

The motivation was money, and they destroyed a small businessman.

Motorcycle dealer acquitted of rape

Thursday, March 26, 2009
By Daniel Malloy, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Frank Terry Sanford let out a sigh of relief yesterday as the jury foreman read the words "not guilty."

Mr. Sanford, 65, is not going to prison, but the damage to his reputation and livelihood, he said, cannot be undone.

Mr. Sanford was the owner of the Spirit Harley-Davidson dealership in Shaler in 2006 when two employees leveled accusations of rape and sexual assault, and he was arrested.

A little more than a year later, the dealership was forced into bankruptcy after Harley-Davidson Co. announced it would cut ties with the dealership, in part because of the allegations against Mr. Sanford. (In a separate case, Mr. Sanford was convicted of simple assault in 2007.)

The shop was eventually sold to Gatto Cycle Shop at a significant discount.

Mr. Sanford said, in addition, the charges and resulting news media attention did untold damage to his family.

This week, before Common Pleas Judge David R. Cashman, one of the accusers testified that Mr. Sanford groped her even though she told him no. The other said Mr. Sanford raped her.

Defense attorney John Elash tried to cast doubt on the case presented by Assistant District Attorney Ed Scheid by bringing up the checkered pasts of the accusers, who Mr. Elash said had worked as exotic dancers and used drugs.

The motivation, Mr. Elash said, was money. Both accusers, who are friends, filed civil claims seeking monetary damages.

After the verdict, Mr. Sanford, sporting a Harley-Davidson tie, gave a wistful smile and said he's not sure what his future holds.

"I have to start over," he said.

Link: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09085/958474-54.stm

Friday, March 27, 2009

Two weeks of hell for man falsely accused, no jail time for rape liar

Comment: In the news story below, a woman falsely accused a man with whom she had consensual relations of raping her because she supposedly was afraid of what her boyfriend might do if he found out.

The man was arrested and subjected to a humiliating interrogation and medical examination.

Approximately two weeks later, the liar recanted. She apologized to the man, and the Sheriff chided her: "By your behaviour, you rendered a completely innocent member of the public to a lengthy and humiliating process."

Her sentence? 200 hours of community service.

Did you get that? No jail time whatsoever.

Let's put that in perspective: if a man or boy continued having sex with a woman for several seconds after she told him to stop, he could go to prison for rape for years.

Did you get that? Several seconds.

This woman put a man through hell not for several seconds but for two weeks. And she gets essentially nothing.

Let's put this in terms no one can misunderstand:

Rape: Male fails to withdraw for several seconds after being told to "stop" = male gets several years in prison.

False rape claim: Female's lie leads to male's detention and two weeks of humiliation and incalculable fear of not knowing if he would serve decades in prison = female gets 200 hours of community service.

By any measure, is that fair? Is that just?

And is there any question why false rape claims are not deterred?


False rape claim girl 'panicked'

A WOMAN who falsely cried rape was sentenced to 200 hours community service at Inverness Sheriff Court this week.

Louise Bain (25) met a man she knew in Inverness and had consensual sexual conduct with him, before panicking and running away, the court heard.

Bain was afraid what would happen to her if her boyfriend found out she had been with another man, according to her defence solicitor John McColl.

She pled guilty to telling two police constables at Northern Constabulary medical suite in Dalneigh that she had been sexually assaulted and raped on September 16 last year by the man and caused officers to devote their time and effort into an investigation which she knew to be false.

The court heard that the police detained the falsely accused man and he was placed in a detention room before a lengthy taped interview took place.

Fiscal Sandy Collie explained that the man was then subjected to a full medical examination before being released.

He said that the man would have had a very worrying couple of weeks until September 29, when Bain, of Yuill Avenue, Buckie, retracted her statement.

Mr McColl explained the man who was falsely accused had acted in the proper manner and stopped sexual conduct when Bain indicated that she no longer wanted to go on.

He said that some of Bain's behaviour could be down to her past, but she accepted that this was a very serious charge and wished to make apologies to the man she falsely accused.

Sheriff Robert Fleetwood warned Bain he could have jailed her but deemed community service appropriate in this case.

He said: "By your behaviour, you rendered a completely innocent member of the public to a lengthy and humiliating process."

Link: http://www.highland-news.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/5368/False_rape_claim_girl__panicked_.html

False accuser violates probation, sentenced to 45 days in jail

COMMENT: It's open season on "scary" black men in the story below. Blacks and Hispanics are frequent targets of false rape claims. Note that the false accuser was originally sentenced to probation and that it was only after she violated her probation that she was jailed. It was nice of the prosecuting attorney not to blame her for the beating of a black man referenced in the story (which may have been unrelated to her false claim); he blamed it on the "rumour mill" in town. More like the hysteria mill, if you ask us. And for the feminists who think men are rape apologists because -- you know -- we all like to rape and everything (that was sarcasm), note that virtually every time a man is beaten or killed after a false rape claim, the perpetrators are angry males. Men, in general, react with greater anger about a rape charge than women do (and no, it's not because men think they "own" women -- it is often brothers and sons who react the most vehemently).

Woman gets 45 days for not following probation order

A 19-year-old woman recently placed on probation for misleading Owen Sound police into investigating her bogus rape allegations was sentenced to 45 days in jail for twice failing to comply with her probation order.

April Ibbotson, of no fixed address, pleaded guilty Thursday in the Ontario Court of Justice to failing to report to her probation officer between Jan. 8 and Jan. 23, then to breaching the order again Jan. 15 to Jan. 23 by living somewhere without first obtaining approval from her probation officer.

Ibbotson also spent 14 days in presentence custody.

In January she pleaded guilty to mischief by making false allegations that she'd twice been raped by a black man. She also pleaded guilty to failing to attend court.

A few weeks after her false accusations, a black man was beaten and stabbed downtown after being falsely accused of rape hours earlier.

The Crown attorney said at Ibbotson's original sentencing Jan. 8 that he wasn't blaming Ibbotson for anyone getting hurt. Instead, he blamed "the rumour mill in downtown Owen Sound." She also spent 58 days in pre-plea custody on those charges.

Link: http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1468876

Thursday, March 26, 2009

From a feminist blog: 'All women are . . . always in danger' of rape. Sigh

Someone sent me a link to yet another feminist blog I'd never heard of and don't ever plan to look at again. Here is all you need to know about it (the punctuation is as it appears in the original).

"rape is a weapon of war. even in places that aren't at war- ALL women are always at war. always on the defense. always in danger."

Sigh. I wonder if the writer really believes that?

I wonder if the writer realizes that innocent young men are in much greater danger of being assaulted than women -- in fact, they are assaulted twice as much? See here. For some reason I suspect they will find a reason to dispute or minimize this because it doesn't fit their victim metanarrative. The fact is, it is truer to say, "Men are always in danger" than "Women are always in danger."

We've said this repeatedly, because it's true: hysteria is the engine that drives the so-called "rape culture," and false rape claims are its noxious emissions. With all the fear-mongering, Chicken Littles running about warning women not that "the sky is falling!" but that "young men can't be trusted!" the slightest whiff of a rape allegation is automatically believed. The hysteria gives plausibility to every rape claim, even the ones that are false. And when a rape accuser is automatically believed, the man or boy she accuses is automatically branded a rapist in the court of last resort, the court of public opinion. And that is intolerable on a multitude of levels.

In any event, I suspect that much of this fear mongering is the result of naivete. We need to combat it, and that's why we're constantly reminding people about it. See here and here and here.

The leading men's site chimes in on the 'Nicole' recantation in the Philippines

As reported on Glenn Sacks' blog:

Filipino Woman Recants Rape Claim Against U.S. Serviceman

March 26th, 2009 by Robert Franklin, Esq.

Perhaps Pierce can help me with this one. In this article, a high-profile case in the Philippines has just been turned on its head (Yahoo, 3/18/09). Three years ago, U.S. Lance Corporal Daniel Smith was convicted of raping a Filipino woman. She claimed, and apparently testified, that the two of them were dancing at a club on Subic Bay Naval Base went out to his van and, while she was passed out, he had sex with her. Smith has always maintained the sex was consensual. He was convicted and sentenced to 40 years in prison.

On Tuesday, March 17, the woman submitted a five-page affidavit to the appellate court saying that she doubts her own version of events. She says the two may have just gotten carried away and, apparently, her behavior was such that Smith could have interpreted it as consent. She has also fired her attorney, moved to the United States and apparently stopped talking.

What I hope Pierce can help me with is the statement by Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez who said that the woman's affidavit "may not be admitted as new evidence because it should have been introduced during the 2006 trial." Given that the affidavit apparently didn't exist until recently and no court knew of its existence until Tuesday March 17, 2009, how would it have been possible to introduce it into evidence three years ago?

It seems clear to me that with such ambiguous evidence by the complaining witness, Smith could never have been convicted, and since no amount of due diligence by the defense could have turned up an affidavit that didn't exist, he should at least get a new trial.

I suppose we and he will find out in due course.

Since Robert asked me for my opinion, here is the comment I left beneath his post -- I agree with him completely:

Robert, thanks for highlighting this case -- I am watching this closely and likely will be submitting something for your review as soon as we find out what the appellate does with this affidavit.

You are exactly correct that the recantation evidence should not be dismissed out of hand due to the fact that it wasn't introduced into evidence at the trial in 2006. It didn't exist in 2006. Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez's logic would only reward false accusers whose prevarications at trial have their intended effect of convicting innocent men. Such a view does not comport with any civilized notions of justice; civilized courts do not countenance keeping men in prison when it turns out they were convicted based on a lie. Recantations generally are looked upon with a jaundiced eye due to the ease with which they can overturn a carefully conducted trial, but where a recantation is found to be credible, and where it would have mandated a different result at trial, courts do toss out convictions. And Governors also intercede and pardon men based on recantations. Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez's sentiments are barbaric in their implications.

I can't recall being so frustrated over any other possible false rape case, because the entire public discourse in the Philippines has been about everything but the possible injustice to a man sentenced to 40 years imprisonment for an alleged acquaintance rape he likely did not commit. Sadly the entire issue has been politicized to the point where Cpl. Smith is just an afterthought, and his continued imprisonment is seen to represent a "greater truth" far more important than whether he actually raped the accuser. His conviction has come to represent the frustration of the people over the US-Philippines "Visiting Forces Agreement." Many are also concerned that upsetting the rape conviction could have the possible "effect" of discouraging actual rape victims from reporting their victimization.

What is lost in all these debates is whether an innocent man will serve out essentially the rest of his life for a crime he did not commit.

The recantation needs to be examined seriously, and if, after fair consideration, it casts reasonable doubt on the guilt of this young man (and I agree with you, Robert -- it certainly appear that it does), then justice dictates that he be freed. But it is most unjust to reject the recantation out of hand simply due to a belief that this young man's conviction advances some political agenda.

I have written letters of protest to church leaders and a prominent Philippines woman's group who have been quoted as expressing concern about the effect of the recantation on women but not about whether the recantation is true. I hope the Obama administration will involve itlself in this atrocity.

The "Rachell Report".

The following link is to the final report after the exoneration of Richardo Rachell. The mistakes made by law enforcement, in the pursuit of catching a child molester/rapist, led to the imprisonment of Mr. Rachell for over 6 years. The injustice that occurred here, all in the name of getting the conviction, should merit serious review by the bar association, as well as investigation as to how police handle sexual assault reports.

I will let the report say the rest:


Courtnay Honafius Arrested In False Rape Case

Very little detail to the following story, however, Courtnay Honafius faces charges for filing a false rape claim.

Courtnay Honafius Told Officers Man Broke Into Home

PALMYRA, Pa. - A Lebanon County woman has been arrested and charged with making a false rape claim.

Courtnay Honafius told officers a man broke into her home and sexually assaulted her last month, Palmyra police said.

She made up the attack, officers said.

Honafius faces charges of unsworn falsifications and false reports to law enforcement.


Wednesday, March 25, 2009

'I remember sitting in jail, thinking to myself that I may never get out of here,' said falsely accused man

Comment: A man is firing back and suing his false accuser. He claims they had consensual sex but that when her mother discovered a bounced check to Planned Parenthood (where the young woman had obtained a morning-after pill), she concocted the lie about the sexual assault. If he's correct, let's hope he wins -- and chases after her assets with the tenacity of Fred Goldman going after O.J. Simpson.

Lawsuit over false rape accusation

A man says the woman who incriminated him destroyed his reputation at UNC.

By Monte WhaleyThe Denver Post

GREELEY — A former University of Northern Colorado student who was banned from campus because of a false accusation of rape is now suing his accuser.

Paul Seabrooks, 23, now a psychology student at Winthrop University in Rock Hill, S.C., filed suit in Weld County District Court, claiming a woman with whom he had sex in fall of 2006 owes him at least $30,000 for lost income and destroying his reputation at the school.

"I remember sitting in jail, thinking to myself that I may never get out of here," Seabrooks said.

"And she was outside, living her life, not really thinking about what she put me through."

Seabrooks' accuser declined to comment Friday. Although her name appears in the civil filing, The Denver Post does not publish the names of alleged victims in sexual assault cases.

The woman claimed Seabrooks raped her in the fall of 2006 after her mother discovered a check to Planned Parenthood had bounced, according to the lawsuit.

Seabrooks was charged with sexual assault, but Weld prosecutors dropped the case in February 2007, before his preliminary hearing.

Still, Seabrooks was expelled from school, and his picture was displayed on UNC's website as one of 14 people banned from campus. His photo was also distributed in the local media, according to the lawsuit.

Seabrooks claims he lost his student loans — including funds from his GI Bill — and was evicted from his apartment.

Seabrooks said while a student at UNC he worked at the school's Marcus Garvey Center, trying to unify the black students on campus. He met the woman at the Garvey Center and on Sept. 16, 2006, she invited him to her room at Belford Hall.

The two had consensual sex, followed by Seabrooks' leaving to get a sandwich. The woman buzzed Seabrooks back into the dorm and let him back into her room, where they had sex for a second time, according to the suit.

They discussed her getting the morning-after pill and two days later, the woman messaged Seabrooks telling him she had obtained the pill.

But when her mother discovered the bounced check, the woman "concocted a story of sexual assault," the suit said.

"This girl with her story did a lot of damage to legitimate rape victims," said Seabrooks' attorney, Shannon Lyons.

Link: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_11973765

'It's a big wake-up call. If you have casual sex and you are a male and a police officer, you are a target.'

COMMENT: The news story posted below underscores why we have this website. Yesterday we reported that a police recruit was cleared of rape charges because the serial false accuser who brought charges against him did not present credible evidence. Now news comes that the innocent man may not be welcomed back on the police force, according to this story posted in its entirety below this comment. The young man is now warning other men about the risks males face of having casual sex, and about the need to have a good lawyer and private investigator if they are ever falsely accused. He is stunned by the stigma attached to a false claim, as are most falsely accused men. On this website, we have often made the point that once unleashed, a rape lie -- unlike any other lie -- can destroy lives with a stunning, tragic completeness. Men and boys falsely accused of rape have been beaten and killed and have killed themselves; they've been fired from their jobs and lost their businesses; they've lost their wives, their girlfriends and their long-time buddies. Rarely do they ever come out of it whole, and for many, the ghost of a false rape claim trails them for the rest of their lives. Let us hope that the police do the right thing here and welcome the recruit back.


Police recruit faces uncertain future

A police recruit, who had a rape charge against him thrown out by a court today, faces an uncertain future as police decide whether to keep him on.

In the High Court at Wellington Justice Ronald Young dismissed a charge of rape against Mark James Tulloch, 31.

Justice Young ruled the complainant's evidence was not credible to instruct a jury.

After the charge was dismissed, Mr Tulloch told NZPA he was considering his plans for the future and was waiting to hear the outcome of his employment evaluation by the New Zealand Police.

A police media spokeswoman declined to comment on what future Mr Tulloch faced with the police, saying it was now an employment issue.

Mr Tulloch said the allegation had stained his reputation and would continue to affect his life and work.

"It's a big wake-up call. If you have casual sex and you are a male and a police officer, you are a target," he said.

"I believe that if a guy gets into this situation, if you are not lucky enough to have a good lawyer and a good private investigator, there's a good chance you'll be found guilty."

Tulloch said having to repeatedly explain he didn't do it to friends and family was "absolutely shocking".

His name had not been suppressed and he was suspended from police college after the allegation was made.

He was also suspended from the territorial army.

In court yesterday, defence lawyer Mike Antunovic said the solo mother of three had an extensive history of making false complaints.

They included one against her current partner of assaulting her and molesting her daughter, two other rape complaints and a $14,000 jewellery theft by a former flatmate.

The woman had also previously been committed to hospital for mental illness and had boasted to a flatmate she was going to be "bigger than Louise Nicholas" and would "have the jury eating out of the palm of her hand".

Mr Tulloch and the complainant met on the website www.NZDating.co.nz, moving from chatting online, to cellphone messages, finally having sex at the woman's house.

Mr Tulloch said today he was now looking to police to follow up on the woman's false complaints that turned the last year of his life into hell.

Link: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2290272/Police-recruit-faces-uncertain-future

Stacey Jane Morgan Hit With $3000 Bill for False Rape Claim.

This seems a fair and fitting punishment, since no one was arrested or otherwise punished for the false claim. Maybe, just maybe, we are beginning to see the end of the free pass for those who seed to levy false charges, and ruin peoples lives. Time will tell.

Reparations levied for false rape claim.

Wellington, March 6 NZPA - A teenager lied about being raped by two men at a Hamilton park in an attempt to get attention, a court has been told.

Stacey Jane Morgan, a 19-year-old student, was convicted and ordered to pay police more than $3000 reparation in Hamilton District Court this week after earlier admitting making a false statement to police, The Waikato Times reported.

Morgan told police two men raped her at Hamilton's Ward Park in the early hours of October 12 last year.

She was medically examined and later gave a detailed account of the alleged attack.

Police appealed for public help to catch the two men.

But Morgan contacted police two weeks later saying she wanted the investigation stopped.

In a subsequent interview, Morgan admitted the claim was false.

She said she devised the story to get attention from her father and an ex-boyfriend.


Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Man cleared: Older woman cruised on-line for younger man for sex, then accused her prey of rape

Comment: H/T to Rob Case. This is a bizarre and incredible case -- incredible because it's difficult to understand how it ever could have gone to trial. The case was rife with credibility problems for the accuser, but at least the judge did the right thing in dismissing it before it got to the jury. The accuser and the man she accused were in a consensual sexual relationship and then -- from out of nowhere -- the man supposedly raped her. The woman had previously accused another man of rape, a claim that was unsubstantiated. Read the story below and, if you are male, ask yourself if it doesn't alarm you a bit that this was permitted to get to trial.

Rape charge against police recruit dismissed

Police recruit Mark James Tulloch has had a rape charge against him thrown out.

Justice Ron Young dismissed the charge in the High Court at Wellington this morning, saying he felt a properly-directed jury could not convict Tulloch.

The dismissal came after two days of evidence.

A woman said Tulloch, 31, raped her at her Whitby home in April last year after they met via an online dating service.

He said her claim was false and they had consensual sex but that he ended the encounter before she wanted to. He left saying he could not stand the sound of her voice anymore.

Link: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2290272/Rape-charge-against-police-recruit-dismissed


Woman denies false rape claim against police recruit

There have been heated exchanges at a rape trial at the High Court in Wellington, where police recruit Mark James Tulloch, 31, is accused of raping a woman he met on an internet dating site.

The complainant has denied a claim by Tulloch's lawyer that she made up the complaint to win back a former lover who is also a police officer.

She is also denying she told a friend the case would be bigger than that of Louise Nicholas and Clint Rickards.

The defence lawyer has accused her of being a dangerous woman who has made false complaints in the past. But she says the rape did happen, and she has gone through a huge amount of suffering.

Yesterday the solo-mother of three told the court of her alleged rape by a police recruit she described as a "gigolo".

The two met on website www.NZDating.co.nz, sending numerous messages to each other, first online, then via cellphone. After getting to know each other, the text messages became increasingly sexual, the woman told the court today.

The pair met face-to-face at a bar in Whitby, Porirua. They talked about previous encounters had through the site.

"He said he had met a woman who asked him to move into her flat, where he was used as a gigolo," the woman said.

"He wanted to be a toy-boy [to] a mature woman with money."

She said they had about four drinks each, his earlier lack of confidence dissolved and he began making eye contact with her.

"I asked him if he would like to come back to my house for a shag."

Tulloch and the woman drove back to her house, each in their own cars.

She sent the baby-sitter home and put her children to bed.

She then gave Tulloch oral sex in the lounge, went outside for a cigarette and talked to a neighbour with whom she was friendly. The pair then went over to her neighbour's house for more drinks .

After she drank about four more drinks and he about two, the pair returned to her place, where he allegedly hit her in the head, took her to her room and raped her.

Then he left, telling her he couldn't stand the sound of her voice.

However, she was accused of making it all up when defence counsel Mike Antunovic pointed out numerous discrepancies between the 48-page police brief of evidence and the accuser's account as told to the court.

She said the differences in her stories were due to post traumatic stress disorder and shock due to the rape.

Under questioning, she admitted to taking two Prozac per day, except when she went out drinking.

"But who isn't on antidepressants nowadays?" she asked the court.

During the alleged rape, she just wanted him out of the house her two sons and daughter were in.

"I didn't know at that time there was a peephole in her bedroom and she (her daughter) was listening to it all," she told the court.

Mr Antunovic also pointed out a previous complaint laid by the woman against another man, whose name and occupation is suppressed. That claim had not been substantiated.

She found the unnamed man on findsomeone.co.nz, of which she said "it's part of Trade Me - very nice site".

NZDating.co.nz, by comparison, was "just a shagging site", she said.

She said the man had sent her naked photographs of himself wearing only a hat, and other photographs of him masturbating.

She had sent him naked pictures of herself in an effort to attract him back, Mr Antunovic said, linking her spurned attentions to the rape allegations against Tulloch.

"You turned his life upside down. You don't care who you harm when you get angry, do you?" Mr Antunovic asked her.

The trial continues.

Link: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10563309

Random thoughts

  • Purported "experts" lecturing military leaders on rape: "Even the victims are caught up in patriarchal myths that allow men to exploit women, the experts said. Was she raped, or was that something else? Wasn’t that guy her friend? Didn’t she make out with him? And why did she drink so much? These widely shared attitudes obscure rapists’ culpability." Amazing how women who cry 'rape' must always be believed (which means that the men they accuse are deemed to be rapists), but beyond that, if women don't cry rape, we must also assume vast numbers are in denial about being raped. This begs the question: if the women don't know they've been raped, why must we assume their "rapists" knew they were raping them? (Or is rape some sort of "secret" crime they never taught us about in law school that the victim and perpetrator don't even know is happening -- where the only ones who know about it are the radical feminists?) It is all such nonsense, but this proves, once again, that the gospel of rampant male predatory misconduct is alive and well among paid purveyors of this vile hysteria. This quotation accomplishes the seemingly impossible task of insulting two genders at once: it says that vast numbers of men are rapists-in-waiting, and that vast numbers of women are too stupid to know that they've been raped. Thankfully we have the radical feminists to elucidate male depravity for everyone.
  • H/T to CJ for the links on the "studies": I am aware of the "studies" from Britain putting the rate of "false" rape claims in single digits and will be writing something in detail on this. Note that these are, of course, nothing but politicized screeds promulgated by persons financially interested in spreading the gospel of rampant male predatory misconduct. They are intended to furnish a "scientific" basis to effect changes in the law and police practices for the sole purpose of jacking up rape conviction rates. For now I'd say this: there are, in the UK, a small percentage of rape claims -- perhaps 8% -- that are very quickly dismissed, due usually to recantations. These are easily classified as "false" by any objective measure. On the other extreme, there are a small percentage of rape claims that are prosecuted and that lead to convictions. In between, the vast majority of rape claims are dismissed somewhere along the way because of insufficient evidence (which means there was not enough evidence to make out one or more elements of the crime, even if a trier of fact believed the evidence) or the accuser decides not to pursue the claim or the jury just doesn't buy it. To suggest that all of these rape claims that fall between the obviously false (due primarily to recantation) and those that end in conviction are, by necessity, "rapes," is dishonest in the extreme. For example, is it fair, or honest, to assume that every man exonerated of a rape charge by a jury is, by necessity, a rapist just because the charge wasn't classified as "false" early on? The question scarcely survives its statement. And what of the claims that never even actually got to a jury -- the vast majority that are dismissed earlier, often due to fatal infirmities in the case -- how on earth can we say that these should be considered "rapes"? The fact is, these studies assume rampant police incompetence, sexism and misogyny, which is absurd on its face and insulting to hard working law enforcement officers. Why is it not just as logical -- in fact more logical -- to assume that most of the dismissed rape claims in this vast middle ground were not actual rapes? And when you consider the interested and biased promulgators of these studies who have zero concern for the presumed innocent -- many of whom were, in fact, wrongly accused -- it is not very difficult to dismiss these vile studies out of hand.
  • Good opinion: Alcohol should not be considered a date rape drug, but it plays a definite role in date rape. "But the problem isn’t with the alcohol itself, [professor of psychology Amanda] Price said. When it comes to the combination of sex and alcohol, the problem lies in communication between the partners involved. Understanding the nuances of nonverbal communication between the sexes is difficult enough sober, but when inhibitions are lowered with alcohol those lines become increasingly more blurred." This is the point for which our young people are in need of much better education. We have written here previously about the fact that women have greater regret following one-night stands. It would be helpful for both sexes to know that at the outset, and to understand that alcohol might numb or obscure these feelings of regret when the couple engage in sex, it will return after-the-fact. And such feelings account for a certain percentage of false rape claims. In addition, note this: "According to the Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, a UK study showed that in a pool of 1,014 date rape situations involving alcohol, less than 2 percent of them involved any sedative meant to incapacitate a victim. That means that 98 percent of those cases could have been avoided had the people involved been more aware of both their levels of alcohol intake and of appropriate social interaction."
  • Has anyone ever dared to contemplate how many young men would be in prison if the radical gender feminists were right about the prevalence of rape? It would be positively staggering, even assuming a fair number of serial rapists. Every family would be affected; every high school and every college would see male enrollments do a free fall. We should do a study on this, if only to illustrate the absurdity of the radical gender feminist position. Incredible numbers of young men and boys in prison, and the vast majority of the women they supposedly "raped" not even sure they were raped. Let's put it this way: the fact that incredible numbers of young men would be behind bars if the radical feminists were correct illustrates that there is something wrong with the radical feminists' thinking. As Heather MacDonald put it with regard to the alleged prevalence of college rape: "If the one-in-four statistic is correct—it is sometimes modified to “one-in-five to one-in-four”—campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants—a rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergency—Take Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely."
  • Another naive college student (a male) blames men, in general, for rape: "Rape prevention has been a 'women's issue' for too long. It is not a woman's responsibility to prevent rape. Men are generally the attackers, men are responsible . . . ." Surely, young man, you are not suggesting that all men are rapists? If you are suggesting that the innocent bear a responsibility to stop rape, fair enough, and we agree; but why do you limit the innocent who must be part of the solution to males? This sort of asymmetrical gender blaming is a manifestation of a young man learning too well the radical left doctrine that he is supposed to feel guilty for his supposed white male "privilege." Now this might strike some as politically incorrect (this entire blog strikes some as politically incorrect) but to suggest that innocent men, the vast majority of whom are not rapists, thank you very much, have any greater responsibility to prevent rape than innocent women is absurdly sexist and seeks to hold males as a gender responsible for a crime that only a tiny percentage of men commit (and, yes, even some women rape, too). It is condemning an entire gender based on the malefactions of a few. The fact of the matter is that women can prevent rape a hell of a lot easier than innocent men by taking steps to avoid putting themselves in danger with the bad guys; especially, stop the damn underage drinking and sex play with men you don't know. (And, yeah, we agree -- the bad guys are the ones at fault -- but that's not anything innocent men can stop.) But you see, it's much easier to scream "victim blaming" and to shame young college men into thinking they must be "part of the solution" than to actually work to reduce rape. (And by the way, it's no more "victim blaming" than when my grandmother used to warn me not to walk through certain "bad" neighborhoods at night. If I got beat up because I disobeyed her, she'd be the first to crow, "See? I told you!")
  • It's happening: UK prosecutors are being urged via revised policy guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service to "robustly" challenge myths concerning rape victims in court. While some of the myths are appropriate to challenge, others are not; specifically, these: ". . . victims cry rape if they regret having sex or want revenge . . . ." While it is inappropriate to prosecute a particular case based on a generalized statement, it is quite another thing to label fact as a "myth." Women do lie about rape for both of these reasons, as explored in more detail elsewhere on this site.
  • Another strident UK woman wants the war on rape beefed up: Among many other things, she writes: "Any complaint of rape should be aggressively pursued, and each victim given a case officer . . . ." Thus, she transmogrifies every accuser into a "victim." Which, of course, means that every male accused of rape is a presumed rapist, due process be damned. Ladies and gentlemen, we have returned to Salem, Massachusetts at the time of the witch hunts. Respectable newspapers print these grossly unfair statements, and the lies have acquired the aura of political correctness. What on earth have we come to?

Janae McMahon sentenced for false sex-assault report

COLUMBUS, Neb. (AP) - A Columbus woman who recanted her story of being sexually assaulted by a man she met over the Internet has been fined and told to pay restitution.

Janae McMahon pleaded no contest to attempted false reporting. Last week she was fined $150 and ordered to pay the court $1,671 in restitution.

The 27-year-old had reported in May last year that a 38-year-old man from Meadow Grove sexually assaulted her after they watched a movie at her home.

He told police the sex was consensual.

McMahon recanted during questioning after the man took a lie-detector test following his arrest. Charges against him were dismissed in June.

Court documents say the two met over the Internet and exchanged e-mails for three weeks before the incident.

Link: http://www.nebraska.tv/Global/story.asp?S=10053741


Lauren Chaffey causes nightmare of false rape claim

COMMENT: The young man has been asked not to be named, and that request has been honored so far. Lauren Chaffey, the false accuser, has been sentenced to 5 months in jail. In this case, she sent text messages to friends and even to the young man, talking about the consensual sex, after it had happened.

An interesting thought occurs....If this young man was "blind drunk,"doesn't that mean that he was too inebriated to give consent to sex, and doesn't that make Lauren Chaffey is a rapist? Based on the outcry that occurs when the genders are reversed, shouldn't that be the case?

Police Det Con Janice Cruttwell said it best: "...I would also like to take this opportunity to point out to anyone who believes that they can waste police time and resources by making a false report of crime, that we can and will take action against them."


Woman sentenced to 5 months for false rape claim

A MAN who was falsely accused of rape by a woman he met on a night out celebrating his birthday has spoken of his ordeal.

The innocent man spent 24 hours in a police cell after 21-year-old Lauren Chaffey told detectives he had sexually assaulted her.

But Chaffey, of Huddersfield Road, Rochdale, was exposed as a liar by text messages found on her mobile phone suggesting the couple had consensual sex. She was jailed for five months after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice.

Her 24-year-old victim, who asked not to be named, told the MEN he feared his life would be destroyed by the false accusations and words could not describe his feelings towards Chaffey.


"I still don't know why she did it. It's a nasty crime. People who have been assaulted find it difficult to report and making up something like that is just crazy.

"I thought she had destroyed my life but getting through this has made me a better person and I'm happy in my life now. "She got what she deserved and I hope she learns from this that she shouldn't tell such horrible lies."

The man said he was 'blind drunk' while celebrating his 24th birthday in a Rochdale club where he met Chaffey. The following day he was sent a text message telling him he was being accused of rape.

He described being arrested as a complete shock. He said: "I've never been in trouble with the police before and it was a horrible experience which I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. "I just kept thinking what would my parents and friends think.

"I knew I had done nothing wrong but I worried it was my word against hers. I'm a truthful person and I thought if I told the truth I would be OK.

"When the police told me I wouldn't be charged I didn't celebrate, it was a relief because I knew all along I'd done nothing wrong.

"I'd like to thank all the people and my family who have stuck by me and supported me throughout this."


He said before the allegation he was a happy-go-lucky young man who worked hard. Now he says he's uncomfortable in female company and has lost confidence.

Bolton Crown Court heard Chaffey was out with two female friends when she met the man in a nightclub. She later claimed that she had been raped after she and the man were dropped off in a taxi near her home.

But officers were suspicious and examined mobile phones belonging to Chaffey, her two friends and her alleged attacker.

They found that Chaffey had discussed having consensual sex with the man in text messages to one of her friends. She also had a text conversation with the alleged rapist, despite telling detectives she had had no contact with him after the alleged assault.

She was jailed for five months at Bolton Crown Court.


Det Con Janice Cruttwell, of Rochdale CID, said: "Lauren Chaffey has not only wasted police time, but also caused a great deal of trouble for a completely innocent man.

"The man she accused of raping her was arrested and kept in police custody. He now feels he has been stigmatised as a rapist despite being completely innocent. "

Rape is an incredibly serious crime that can ruin the lives of genuine victims and their families.

"For somebody to make up a story and falsely claim they have been raped is despicable and completely undermines those people whose lives have been devastated by genuine crimes of this nature. "

I am glad that justice has been done.

"I would like to reassure genuine victims of crime that we take all reports of rape extremely seriously and each and every case will be dealt with in a sensitive manner by specially trained police officers.

"However, I would also like to take this opportunity to point out to anyone who believes that they can waste police time and resources by making a false report of crime, that we can and will take action against them."


Monday, March 23, 2009

Second local teen concocts rape lie for sympathy: town reacts less leniently this time

Comment: A false rape accuser is charged for her crime, in contrast to a widely publicized rape hoax that occurred in the same locale last autumn. In that previous case, the false accuser was not charged.

You may recall that the previous rape (where the girl was not charged) elicited some heated posts on this website critical of the reporting of it. A local newspaper resorted to quoting the opinions of sexual assault "experts" who insisted that rape accusers "almost always" tell the truth about sexual assault. What was interesting about that article was that it cited Professor Eugene Kanin's landmark study on false sexual assault claims as authoritative. But guess what? The article somehow forgot to mention that Kanin's study found that fully 41% of the rape claims in his study were false -- in fact, not just false but actually recanted. The number of claims that were actually false might have been higher. I suppose the 41% didn't fit the story the newspaper set out to tell. See, e.g., this post about the news coverage of the prior false rape claim.

This time around, though, that same newspaper is telling a different story. We reported yesterday that a columnist for that same newspaper who previously thought that the police were right not to charge the young woman in the first rape hoax has changed her mind this time around. Bravo for her.

Clearly police and the news media are saying "enough is enough." Perhaps exposure to this vile crime allows one to see its destructiveness. They should consult this website on a daily basis to truly get a sense of the harm this crime causes -- and to understand how disingenuous rape advocates can be when they insist that this crime is a "myth."


Tinley woman may be charged for fake rape claim

BY KIM JANSSEN Staff writer

A Tinley Park woman who allegedly falsely claimed she’d been raped on her way home from the South Side Irish St. Patrick’s Day parade is set to be charged, police said Tuesday morning.

The 19-year-old invented a story about a sex attack to evoke sympathy from her parents — and distract them from the fact that she’d been drinking — Tinley Park Police Cmdr. Pat McCain said.

“We interviewed her on Sunday, but she was tired and so we let her go home because we didn’t want to be like the CIA with her,” McCain said.

“We interviewed her friends and there were just too many inconsistencies; when we interviewed her again yesterday initially she was holding to her story, but the inconsistencies kept growing and growing and in the end she admitted she’d made it up.

“She’d been drinking and she was afraid to go home to her parents.”

The woman will be charged Tuesday with misdemeanor disorderly conduct, McCain said.

She had claimed she was sexually assaulted about 5 p.m. Sunday in the west end of the Metra parking lot at 18001 S. 80th Ave., Tinley Park.

The woman alleged she was taking the train to her Tinley Park home from the parade in Chicago’s Beverly community when the attack occurred, McCain said.

The woman was taken to an area hospital for treatment.

She was not in police custody as of 11 a.m. Tuesday.

The decision to charge her stands in contrast to that taken by Palos Heights police in the case of a 17-year-old girl who in September falsely claimed she was kidnapped from the sandwich shop where she worked and raped.

Though that earlier hoax prompted an investigation that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, the girl was not charged with any crime.

Link: http://www.southtownstar.com/neighborhoodstar/tinleypark/1480252,031709TPrape.article

Man imprisoned falsely for rape set for settlement

Convicted at the age of 17, and released at age 36, Dennis Patrick Brown spent over half of his life in prison for a crime he didn't commit. He is being compensated, but how can you compensate someone for nineteen years? How can you compensation someone for the lost possibilities that life would have offered?

19 years in prison for committing no crime.

COVINGTON — A man who spent 19 years in prison for a rape he did not commit is set to receive $1.4 million in the settlement of a federal lawsuit filed against the city.

The Covington City Council approved a $300,000 promissory note to Dennis Patrick Brown, whose 1985 conviction for aggravated rape was overturned in 2004 after DNA evidence conclusively showed he could not have committed the crime.

The $300,000, which will be paid to Brown in 10 annual installments of $30,000, plus $1.1 million from the city's insurers, will be used to settle the suit Brown filed in October 2005, City Council members said Friday.

Brown sued the city and former city police officers, alleging civil rights violations, after his release from Louisiana State Penitentiary and the dismissal of the charges against him by the district attorney's office.

One of Brown's attorneys, William E. Rittenberg of New Orleans, declined to discuss details of the pending settlement.

"Anything he gets will not be too much for spending 20 years in prison for a crime he did not commit," Rittenberg said.

Brown, now 41 and living in near Covington, was in prison from age 17 until his release at age 36.
Covington police arrested Brown in September 1984 after a woman reported being raped at knifepoint in her home. Based on her description, police sketched an image of a suspect with a bandanna covering all but his eyes. She later picked Brown out of a lineup and identified him at trial as her attacker.

Brown denied the attack, testifying that police had threatened him with a knife to gain a confession.

He was sentenced to life in prison.

The Innocence Project of New Orleans secured a court order to test blood, semen and clothing found at the scene of the rape.

Two tests of the evidence excluded Brown as the rapist.

Link: http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20090301/NEWS03/903010312/1062