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.
HERE IS THE NEWS STORY:
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
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
25 comments:
This and other false rape/sexual assault cases should be amongst the other things people think about when they take that perilous drive to work to pay taxes. This and all other false rape/sexual assault cases are a blatant look at our tax dollars at work. I have to ask, how many men who are falsely accused would agree with how their tax dollars are being spent by a system that seems hellbent on imprisoning every man it can?
The more I read about cases like these, the more I feeel disgusted and angry at how gender biased/sexist the systen, of what is called justice, is becoming everyday
I do not support or condone any sexual or indecent contact or behavior between minors and adults. I should ask, are law enforcement as dilligent and aggressive in the pursuit of female pedophiles and female child rapists/molesters?
Sexual problems are common now a days in both men as well as women. In a survey, 43 percent of women and 31 percent man reported some sexual problem. Sexual problems are many hence treatment depends upon the cause of the problem. Its best to see a doctor if one is suffering from any type of sexual problem. http://www.viagrathunder.com
Dr Bella, are you suggesting that, men that are concerned about the amount of false rape accusations and innocent men/boys being harmed by these false rape accussations.. Have sexual problems???
Thats a typical matriarchal raunch culture rebuttal, say they are sexually impotent.
WTF people. The article says that the witness changed his statement, not the victim.
There's no evidence this was a false rape charge. Larsen (the Deputy Attorney) specifically said "we're not saying the sex was consensual", they just don't have the evidence to prove that it wasn't.
The victim's statement is not indicated to have changed. They just can't prove it. So your suggestion that the conviction rested on her 'characterisation' is completely wrong. In fact, her 'characterisation' wasn't enough for them to even go ahead prosecuting them.
Rather undermines your entire post.
And any subsequent posts claiming that all a woman has to do is 'characterise' sex as rape to get a man prosecuted.
You've got as much evidence here that this rape accusation was false, as many gender feminists had when they assumed that the Duke rape accusation was true. i.e. none.
A witness didn't testify. That's all. You can't draw any firm conclusions from that.
p.s. Anonymous, that's a spam bot. Are you pretending to be thick to be funny?
Cpl. blackadder, no need to get you're panties all in a bunch here, and start swearing at us.
you go 0n to say
"Rather undermines your entire post.And any subsequent posts claiming that all a woman has to do is 'characterise' sex as rape to get a man prosecuted."
It happens all the time, and I will say it..."All a women has to do is characterize sex as rape to get a man prosecuted."
WTF is an exclamation. It's not directed at anyone, don't get paranoid.
You can say what you like. Doesn't make it true, it wasn't in this case. Bet you don't have any statistical evidence of how often they prosecute on the simple say so of the victim.
cpl, I'll start by reiterating, all a women has to do, is for her to characterize sex as rape, to get a man prosecuted.
You can get hysterical if you would like, but that does not change this reality. With that being said, you are correct by saying we cannot give statistics of how many cases are like this, because gender feminist dominated academia will not allow any academic studies of false rape accusations.
Again, you can get hysterical if you would like, but that does not change the fact that gender feminist controlled academia will not allow any academic studies of false rape accusations.
"You've got as much evidence here that this rape accusation was false, as many gender feminists had when they assumed that the Duke rape accusation was true. i.e. none."
One of the reasons we need anonymity until conviction is that once a rape claim is made, it is almost impossible to undo in the minds of some. It's because of the very nature of this crime.
Lol, you're tripping if you think I'm getting hysterical.
It's nice that you're willing to admit that you don't actually have any reason to believe that 'all a women has to do, is for her to characterize sex as rape, to get a man prosecuted', as opposed to 'sometimes they'll prosecute with just an accusation'.
It's a pity that the feminist etc has prevented all the research. It's a pity that until someone does something about that and performs the research all you have is an article of faith.
If you don't have any evidence you don't have any basis to make such a sweeping statement. It's pretty simple.
Archivist - you're absolutely right, unfortunately the the accusation sticks around in people's minds even after cases are dropped or they are found innocent. It's a natural consequence of having a fallible justice system that does let guilty people go free a certain percentage of the time, and is why anonymity is an absolute necessity in this kind of case.
Nice one amending the article.
Cpl ??? Lt. ??
"It's nice that you're willing to admit that you don't actually have any reason to believe that 'all a women has to do, is for her to characterize sex as rape, to get a man prosecuted'"
Read through the site here, and you will see that, what gender feminist controlled academia chooses to neglect, gets picked up on in real life. And yes one could reasonably argue that..
All a women has to do to prosecute a man is for her to characterize sex as rape.
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
This is all completely true. And vice versa, all a rapist needs to do to claim innocence is to recharacterize a non-violent rape as consensual.
Legally in the absence of evidence and with only conflicting stories we should err on the side of caution, innocent until proven guilty, better ten guilty go free than one innocent convicted etc.
Logically in the same situation we should not decide to believe that it was either consensual or non-consensual, sex or rape. There is no evidence either way, either is possible - to make that decision is to make a guess.
That's why gender feminists are wrong if they decide that a situation like that was rape, as happens more than a bit.
And that's why it's also wrong to be sure that there was no rape, in that situation.
And you can't even be sure after someone is found non-guilty, by lack of evidence or is not prosecuted - as that is not the same thing as being exonerated by evidence. That, obviously can only happen if there is evidence.
Miscarriages of justice happen, in all ways. As I'm sure you know, innocent men are found guilty of rape. Guilty men as also found not guilty.
And if you have an opinion on how much each of those happens without having seen any statistical evidence - then you're acting out of faith or ideology not a logical commitment to the truth. And that's as bad as the Rad Fems.*
* (If you have evidence or stats, then this paragraph is not about you. Also, you're going to have to be specific about what country/legal system you're talking about, what applies to your country does not necessarily apply to the whole world.)
Yes, it's been a hectic day in the army. Promoted when given command of one Private Baldrick, felt that my time had come to rise in the ranks. Busted down through the ranks for following Baldrick's "cunning plan", which managed to get him killed. :(
"Read through the site here, and you will see that, what gender feminist controlled academia chooses to neglect, gets picked up on in real life. And yes one could reasonably argue that..
All a women has to do to prosecute a man is for her to characterize sex as rape."
Yes. Anecdotal evidence is good for proving that something happens ever. So you've proven what I've already agreed is true - sometimes a prosecution will go forward on just the claim of the victim.
Anecdotal evidence is not proof that this happens in many, lots or the majority of cases (or all, but I'm sure even you wouldn't make that claim, since a single counter-example would prove that wrong).
If you don't understand the difference between statistical evidence and anecdotal evidence, and the different conclusions you can safely draw from each of them, then there's not much point having this conversation, as you will continue to draw faulty conclusions from the evidence that we both agree is there.
I see what he's saying -- the Cpl. or Private makes a good point:
"This is all completely true. And vice versa, all a rapist needs to do to claim innocence is to recharacterize a non-violent rape as consensual.
Legally in the absence of evidence and with only conflicting stories we should err on the side of caution, innocent until proven guilty, better ten guilty go free than one innocent convicted etc.
Logically in the same situation we should not decide to believe that it was either consensual or non-consensual, sex or rape. There is no evidence either way, either is possible - to make that decision is to make a guess."
And a lot of these cases reside in the gray area, which makes it even more difficult. Here, the state clearly made its decision not to press the rape charge on the basis of the witness recantation. Recantations are not always reliable, but it is frightening that someone's liberty might depend on the word of a person who is a liar -- either originally or in the recantation.
I don't want any rapist walking the street but I'd rather be sure that innocent men are free than to have a rapist convicted. That's why when there's any reasonable (not imaginary of concocted out of whole cloth) doubt, the guy needs to be released.
Cpl/Private: As for the prevalence of false rape claims, I am certain you've read the stuff on our site about that. Every unbiased study shows it's significant -- ranging from 9 to 18 to 20-something to 41 and even more than fifty percent. It's impossible to know for certain but all evidence tells us it's significant. The exact number is not especially important if it's significant. Our point here is that the falsely accused are treated as flotsam, collateral damage in the war on rape -- a lot of double standards have been enacted into law or as policy of the media to help jack up rape convictions, but in the process we ignore this particular class of victim (the falsely accused) and make it easier to convict -- they are caught in the cross fire in the war on rape. It's all become too politicized, and we are tired of being accused of being rape apologists. We are not, any more than Dershowitz was when he brought up false rape claims in class and was accused of sexual harassment.
I suspect you are a feminist trolling here from Reddit -- and that's OK, but I'll repeat this offer I make all the time. If some big feminist sites would treat the falsely accused fairly and give them a voice, and not answer every false rape story with a claim that "rape is far more prevalent," I will drop this site and work with them. Take that offer back to the enemy. I'm serious about it -- I know we only tell part of the story here, and that's because there are a multitude of other sites that tell the rape side of it. For false rape claims, there are hardly any other sites -- that's because you all assert that false claims are a "myth."
Thanks but if you knew the feminist blogs I've been banned from for politely disputing their baseless evidence-less claims you wouldn't claim I was a feminist troll.
They called me a troll too.
I don't think either of you are deliberately using that to shut up someone who disagrees with you. But since I wasn't a troll, when they banned me they did indeed just silence a person for disagreeing with them.
Anywho - as you've seen I agree with you on many points - if I can't disagree with any of what's being said without being thought a trouble maker, you'll only get discussion among people who totally agree already.
Your final post is confusing. I suspect you have misunderstood me. Nowhere did I mention the prevalence of false rape claims.
My previous post was about the prevalence of prosecution based on only the alleged victims' word against the accused's word.
Your points about the way the falsely accused are treated are true. That doesn't have any bearing on whether prosecutions routinely occur based on unsupported allegations.
And don't get me wrong, give me some hard enough evidence that all is needed for a prosecution is an accusation and I'll change my mind in a flash.
As I am not a feminist troll this won't be a surprise:
If some big feminist sites would treat the falsely accused fairly and give them a voice, and not answer every false rape story with a claim that "rape is far more prevalent," I will drop this site and work with them
Completely fair. Feminist websites are notoriously cruel and unfair to male victims of any stripe, whether they've been accused of rape wrongly, or abused by a woman - because these undermine their one sided arguments for things like Patriarchy and Male Privilege and the other things they take as articles of faith - or in their eyes "distract from the more prevalent and important issues of rape and female victimisation by men".
You'll be waiting a long time for any blog gender feminists to come to their senses though.
"Take that offer back to the enemy"
That would be hard. Not being one of them and all.
"I know we only tell part of the story here, and that's because there are a multitude of other sites that tell the rape side of it."
I think it's fine that you only tell one side of the story, I wouldn't say otherwise, and if you check, you'll see that I didn't.
You're right that there are plenty that tell 'the other side' as you say it - though if you look closely you'll see that there are in fact plenty of other sides, it is not a binary thing. There's a whole spectrum of possible views out there. Lots of different stories are held by all sorts of different people, blog-feminists and otherwise, and they often disagree with each other as much or more than they disagree with you.
For false rape claims, there are harldy any -- you all assert that false claims are a "myth."
I'm not one of them, so that's not about me (and I don't at all assert that, the opposite, they are as real as anything - I read Glenn Sacks among others) - but you're even wrong about blog feminists.
There are some that claim that false rape claims are so rare as to be effectively a myth - but there are plenty out there, the majority who hold that they are merely rare.*
And you're right. False rape accusations are demonstrably not a myth**. But when you make blanket descriptions of opposing positions which don't in fact accurately describe those opposing positions, you reduce your credibility and increase the chances of people nitpicking at your inaccuracies and creating the impression that you're wrong, when you're not
*And then go on to commit logical fallacies by assuming the law of averages means they should assume any individual rape-accusation is so likely to be true they may as well believe it is true. Which is wrong.
** Attempted rape accusation proven to be false:
http://www.tylerpaper.com/article/20080410/NEWS01/804100335
FTR, you're right about one thing, I am a feminist. In the old school, or literal, or simple meaning of the word. Whatever you want to call it.
I support the equal freedom of opportunity for women, and the right to personal autonomy and political power (voting, standing for office etc).
Wherever women get the short end of the stick, that needs to be fixed.
I'll believe in patriarchy, male privilege and the rape culture etc, the day that someone comes up with a well evidenced logical supportable definition and argument for any of them.
One that does not rely on baseless generalisations about men, and claims of 'sexist' intentions or actions even when there demonstrably are none.
Which is to say, likely never.
I also support Men's Rights (I'm not an MRA since I don't do anything about it, so I'm not an activist). Wherever Men get the short end of the stick, whether it's Father's rights or whatever, that is a problem that also needs to be fixed.
I also support fair justice. Rapists must be convicted to the highest possible number. The falsely accused must never go to prison. (As best we can, we're not perfect.)
These have no bearing on the comments I've made in this thread anyway - I've merely disputed matters of fact - like who changed their story - and matters of logic - what you can safely derive from different types of evidence.
One trouble with many internet feminists is their obsession with accusing dissenters of being MRAs or rape apologists, misogynists or worse, and ignoring what they're actually saying. And that's wrong when they do it, and would be wrong if you do the mirror image of it.
You haven't gone that far, but I'm painfully aware of the ease with which it can happen, as it's happened to me before, on feminist blogs, as I said.
Trolls exist, and so do misandrists, misogynists, Rad-fems, and bad MRAs. But polite logical or factual dissent should never be considered a bad thing - no matter what position you suspect the person of holding.
To Feminist/MRA Bob -- sorry for accusing you of being a troll. I receive a fair amount of hate mail, as you can imagine, and sometimes I am hypersensitive. I find your comnments very interesting and refreshing and you're welcome here anytime.
No worries, it's the natural reaction when you're deluged with hatemail - and another reason hatemail is a damn nuisiance. Good on you for reading my posts fairly, and not just writing me off.
Thanks for the welcome, you've got an interesting blog here - I've read a lot of stuff about rape, and different positions on that but not too much about false rape accusations, except the occasional thing like that false 2% statistic. I'm looking forward to finding out more.
I've got a bad habit of lurking when I agree, and mostly posting only when I'm questioning something or disputing it.
Questions don't assert anything so they're never wrong, the worst they are is irrelevant. But I know I make mistakes like everyone, and I'll try to recognise it when I do because I'd rather change my mind and be right than be stubborn and wrong.
Try being a man who was arrested,jailed and, had you whole world tuned upside down by a false accusation and the system simply taking the " victim's " word over mine. No proof or evidence to back up her accusation. Based only on her word, I was kept in jail. I now have proof that she told the police one story and, a court another. I am preparing to send this to the proper authorities. It may not give me my life back but, it will prove the " victim " lied and the system was gender biased toward me.
Btw, my false accuser came to my workplace and ,now that she knows where I work, I have been getting phone calls filled with threats and hate speech.
Hey, I'm sorry to hear that, nony, that's why anonymity is necessary for both parties until after a conviction.
I'm glad that you've got the evidence you need, and I hope that once you exonerate yourself it's enough to clear your name in the minds of the idiots who have pre-convicted you.
If you don't mind me asking, are they actually proceeding to prosecute you, or are they investigating you?
It certainly does happen, someone I know's husband was accused of rape by an ex-girlfriend, luckily there turned out to be video evidence of him being elsewhere at the time.
Where there is exonerating evidence the accuser should face criminal charges.
That said, these things just show that sometimes prosecutions proceed on just an accusation. I've also heard of several cases where they haven't. Without some statistics we can't conclude that 'all a woman has to do to get a man prosecuted is make an accusation.'
Though I wasn't accused of rape, what I was accused fo is just as serious. I was accused of waving a gun at a womman and her friends. I didn't have a gun or any type of weapon. I didn't even pretend to have a gun or any type of weapon. The only thing I had in my hands were a cigarette and and ink pen. The " victim " claimed I did. I spent seven months in jail, with no one to speak to except those who were supposed to defend me but, instead, coerced me to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge ( two public defenders and one court appointed private attorney). A letter I am sending to the FBI and other agencies, contains my full account of what happened that night an account that the police, the DA, the prosecution, the public defender's office and , the court appointed attorney never requsted but, refused to hear. Their whole case was hung on her word alone. She gave the court a different version of what she claimed happened from what she gave the police on the night she made her false claim. I am hoping to be exonerated, even though I have already served the punishment and have been released from it. It is impossible to find a lawyer here in Nashville or, anywhere in Tennessee who will help anyone take back a ple bargain. They consider it a " done deal ". I don't agree with this. I am sure after the proper authorities see this evidence and, what the state considered to be enough evidence to gain a conviction, they will see the injustice that has been caused by someone who told a lie. I don't want to give out too much information about what I have but, suffice it to say the whole case was a he said/ she said case, and the state stood behind, and took up for someone who wanted to play victim just to commit harm against someone she didn't know. I have had people suggest that I file a lawsuit against the state of Tennessee but no amount of money can ever make up for what I have suffered and what I have lost.
" True justice is never served by the blood,suffering or, death of the innocent ".
I realize there is a difference between rape and aggravated assault but , both are classified as class c felonies in the state of Tennessee. So, what she did , in my honest opinion, was just as serious as screaming rape, while knowing she was not raped.
Post a Comment