Update: The charges against Jennifer Stigers were dropped in July 2009. http://www.mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/506014.html In that story, Houghton County Prosecutor Michael Makinen said there was no determination made that Stigers' original report was accurate.
What are the odds that if a man had been arrested in this case, he would be out of jail and walking around for as little as $1,000? Slim to none, would be my guess.
Up to 4 years possible for false rape claim.
Jennifer Stigers was arrested . . . by MTU Public Safety after she took back allegations that an assault happened in a campus parking lot on March 23.
HOUGHTON -- The 19-year-old Michigan Tech student, who according to police, filed a false sexual assault report last month, faces up to four years in prison if convicted.
According to court documents, Jennifer Renee Stigers lives in a residence hall on campus.
Stigers was arrested on Monday by MTU Public Safety after she took back allegations that an assault happened in a campus parking lot on March 23.
Judge Mark Wisti continued bond, ten percent of $10,000, which Prosecutor Mike Makkinen didn't object to.
A preliminary exam is scheduled in district court on May 4.
Link: http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=290405
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
35 comments:
What would a man get if he was charged by this girls false rape accussation??? 20 years??
4 years in jail, would deter her from doing it again (I guarantee).
At some point society must return order to their legal system, and that means not enabling women and girls to openly and willingly lie to law enforcement / and in our courts..
Anon,
Women have always had the ability to lie to law enforcement and in court. It used to be the husband/father/brother (whoever was considered head of the household), that was held responsible for her lies however.
While women now have greater freedom of choice, we still have the holdover from earlier times that deems them not responsible for their actions. This is one of those areas that Modern Feminism doesn't want to discuss or actually want to change. Why should they, when it gives women almost carte blanche to do what they want without any responsibility.
Where equality or priviledge already exists, they are silent. Where they percieve inequality, they scream. And they ignore areas where it would be inconvenient for equality to exist (enforcement of law is the primary example).
That is the primary thing that must be changed. Start enforcing and levying equal sentencing upon women for their crimes, and I would posit that you would see a severe reduction of, in our sphere, false accusations.
So what do we do?
How do we start this process?
Where do we start this process?
I'm totally on board with this. I'll bet you there are many more women like me, willing to be silent no more.
BTW,
Just to be fair - men have also 'always' had the ability to lie in court.
It's why rape shield laws came into being in the first place.
As I've said before - evil is gender neutral. The idea should be to fight evil - not gender.
Women should not get away with false rape accusations, men should not get away with rape. Both are crimes. Both are criminals.
Not all women have shirked unpleasant duties. I enlisted in the military in 1971, during the most hateful days of the Viet Nam war.
I didn't think it was fair men were forced to serve against their will while women stayed home baking cookies and dating his best friend who got a deferment.
You might take a moment to read about the deplorable way women who volunteered to serve during WWII were treated. It certainly wasn't any better during Viet Nam.
I thought Patriotism was the duty of every American. I found out quickly most men feel otherwise.
Women are being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan just as men are. They aren't losing their lives or limbs because they're ALL lesbian-whores-looking-for-a-husband.
Forgive my little digression. I'm just trying to keep this discussion between the fence posts, so to speak.
Just 4 years? You can get 20 years just for lying on a government form. What a joke.
Just to be fair - men have also 'always' had the ability to lie in court.
It's why rape shield laws came into being in the first place.
Huh? Do you even know what rape shield laws do?
I'm far too aware of what rape shield laws do - my son would never have been convicted without them.
His accuser's prior accusations were inadmisable, as well as her mother's history of accusing.
However,
Rape shield laws are a backlash against a time when a guy RIGHTFULLY accused of rape could get a buddy or two to testify they had sex with the accuser - that she was a woman of loose moral character.
Back then, women of loose moral character 'deserved' whatever they got, and the guy got off.
In 1957 my father was charged with manslaughter. When a drunk man in a tavern touched my mother 'inappropriately', my Dad literally beat the guy to death.
The prosecutor 'arranged' for several men to testify that my mother was of such loose moral character she enticed the 'victim' to touch her.
My father was saved by a 'speedy trial' technicality or he would most have served time in prison.
(His case is still on Findlaw)
My mother was a very prim and proper lady from a very good family. The prosecutor was a bitter enemy with her Dad over a speculative business venture that went bust.
People all over town began gossiping.
My Grandmother's housekeeper confronted a group of guys on the bus, claiming they'd ALL been with my mother during the course of that trial.
Guys like to lie abut stuff like that, and guys love to believe it, no matter how impossible or improbable.
William Kennedy Smith was able to circumvent rape shield laws to prove the woman accusing him was, in fact, a woman of loose moral character. Money didn't get a guilty guy off, it just bought him 'just us' no one else could have afforded.
Just to be fair - men have also 'always' had the ability to lie in court.
It's why rape shield laws came into being in the first place.Again, I don't disagree, but men are held to a much higher standard. I can't think of any rape accusations that proved to be false, that made it to court, and the woman was held in contempt and jailed for it. Men have ALWAYS been held to a different standard than women in court.
So what do we do?
How do we start this process?
Where do we start this process?It already has started. This site is proof of that. The article that Pierce and I had published, Here is a good example of how we are starting to get the word out. And that is the first step. Word of mouth is a great start.
The general public doesn't really know just how bad the problem is, due to the 'rape industry' campaign of misinformation, and blaming men for all of the problem.
Our site, glenn sacks, Counter Feminist, etc. are getting more and more information into the public discourse than ever before. And it is a great thing.
Men have not 'always' been held to a higher standard.
I'm old enough to remember men allowed a 'justifiable homicide' defense for finding their wife in flagrante. At least in Texas.
Now women use that defense for a multitude of things...
I remember my mother unexpectedly wearing sunglasses from time to time, telling people "I walked into a door...No. Really. I did..."
It was those 'higher standards' that triggered this current backlash.
It's also true that power corrupts, and the power of vengeance corrupts absolutely.
Men aren't that stupid. Women's rape lies were encouraged when it came time to string a rope from a tree branch or burn down the wealthy black district of Tulsa, OK, to "protect the womenfolk".
I'm not trying to be caustic by these gentle reminders. Misstating facts or rewriting history leads to wrong headed solutions.
I'm willing to do whatever it takes to assure a better, safer place for both my sons and daughters, and their sons and daughters.
sgt. mom, do we continue to justify current actions, based on our subjective interpretations of history, or can we simply say, in order to protect the integrity of the courts, women/girls cannot knowingly and willfully lie to law enforcement anymore.
You say you want the best for you're daughter and you're sons, and at this point that means stopping the war on man/boys....stop using faulty and inflamatory manufactured statistics.
Absolutely.
I've already proffered one small solution.
A 'Miranda Rights' for accusers to read, sign, and aknowledge they fully understand.
Just as the accused is read Miranda Rights before questioning, an accuser should be aware of their 'rights' as well -
the right to make an accusation, with the full knowledge intentionally false statements will not (any longer) be tolerated.
Any intentionally false statements can and will be used against you in a court of law.
Correctly worded gender neutral solutions such as this are considerate of true victims - it doesn't question their integrity. It just conveys the message this is a life altering step your about to take - accuracy is imperative.
For God's sake, anyone making any accusation should know and understand fully understand they are liable for their honesty.
An angry person, a person late for work or hiding something from a significant other would be given time to cool off or reconsider - they could go home and 'think' about it before making a statement.
See ya later.
Finally, if found to be false - and there WILL be false statements - punish to the full extent of the law.
It would be nice to run these question by true victims who aren't out for vengeance. I can't believe any true victim would tolerate a false accuser any more than we would.
Trouble is, most women like that aren't 'feminist' or posting on blogs - they're just quietly dealing with it.
True victims deserve better, as do the falsely accused.
For God's sake, anyone making any accusation should know and understand fully understand they are liable for their honesty.
That's the problem. They aren't liable. They are free to make up whatever bullshit they want.
i would just like to say,
why are laws different for accusation of rape and false accusation of rape? i mean i was accused and i was faced with life in prison and yet this girl can only recieve 4 years at maximum? i dont see that as fair! if this girl wants to be open her mouth and lie then she should face the same penalty that she accused some poor guy for!
Anon, you have kind of echoed what I wrote to the FBI about, concerning how easy it was for my false accuser to not only lie to the police,the state prosecutorand the DA but, also get away with committing a felony against me. All of them were so quick to take her word over mine, they ignored my complaint. Whenever anyone is put through the hell that we, the falsely accused,ware put through, everything in our lives is changed.
There is no way to replace a destroyed life.
Jennifer Stegers should face at least the possibility of life in prison.
I'm willing to bet that in the end, this person will get less than a year. She'll get some type of probationary period and a very light jail sentence (if any).
I'll also bet there will be some type of defence fund set up for her by local feminists.
I read with interest the comments left by her defenders, and detractors alike.
Left one myself.
One thing I found somewhat disturbing was the suggestion she was coerced by LE to recant.
While I don't buy campus authorities would force this girl to recant - it's far more lucrative to convict and be a hero than be seen as bullying some poor victim.
I'm uncomfortable with the idea of this,I know of a case where a young girl was bullied by LE to recant a true rape allegation.
She arranged to meet a boy in an isolated place to buy drugs. He raped her. His LE aunt investigated the case and pretty much threatened to expose the girl's drug use if she didn't recant.
She was reviled as a liar and false accuser since she couldn't really tell why she recanted.
I know this little story is about as welcome as a turd in a swimming pool right, but this entire premise needs to be well thought out - dispassionately, without anger or vengeance.
I worked in a high school for 6 years. I've seen the false accusers, I've seen football jocks and predators get away with it, lesbian teachers openly flaunting student affairs while male teachers got slammed over obvious false accusations for giving bad grades...
I'm pretty convinced there's no such thing as justice...
I don't think she'll get much of a sentence in that geographical locale, if she was only held on 10k bond. Probably one year probation at most.
"Where equality or priviledge already exists, they are silent. Where they percieve inequality, they scream. And they ignore areas where it would be inconvenient for equality to exist (enforcement of law is the primary example). "
There is a saying for that: "Nothing less than equality for women, nothing more than equality for men."
Sgt Mom,
in spite of all you've said, the overall picture is that things are heavily tilted against MEN, and have been for quite some time; and there is an strong underlying current of misandry in the U.S.
"Men have not 'always' been held to a higher standard.
"I'm old enough to remember men allowed a 'justifiable homicide' defense for finding their wife in flagrante. At least in Texas."
Actually that is quite reasonable and is along the lines of recent scientific research, assuming what you mean is that the man may get a lesser sentence if he killed while in a rage.
There is a well-researched sex difference in response to sexual trysts by the partner: while women are likely to 'put up' with such a fling provided it does not lead to *emotioal* infidelity, men are hard-wired to react in rage in these cases, often killing either the spouse or her 'friend', as this type of thing raises doubt about paternity.
On the other hand, there is NO scientific evidence showing that rage is somehow "stored up" to explode later..as women such as Mary Winkler claim when they kill their spouses. That is an example of NOT killing in rage.
Basically the law has it backwards on all accounts, and runs diametrically opposed to all the science on this issue.
One thing I found somewhat disturbing was the suggestion she was coerced by LE to recant.
Why? If she is making statements that make no sense why shouldn't the police continue to question her until she admits it's all a lie? That's what the police should do all the time.
You say that you want to help innocent men but I just don't believe you. You seem to have a problem with even the most reasonable steps to punish false accusers.
False rape is seen as a viable choice by many women today. It comes with a wonderful reward system. Even if she is charged with falsifying the rape, she will still be seen as a 'victim' and someone who told the truth from the very beginning. After all, women don't ever lie.
quote: One thing I found somewhat disturbing was the suggestion she was coerced by LE to recant.
Why? If she is making statements that make no sense why shouldn't the police continue to question her until she admits it's all a lie? That's what the police should do all the time.
__________
Why? I already said why - I am aware of an actual victim made to recant by LE getting a family member off.
Don't say it doesn't happen.
It does.
I'm sorry if it appears I'm "not really trying" here.
I'm afraid you're as guilty of 'one sidedness' as any feminist if you think that.
These exact same thoughts have branded me as a 'traitor to my gender' by rape advocates.
Seems trying to work toward justice for all is a lonely proposition.
Quote:False rape is seen as a viable choice by many women today. It comes with a wonderful reward system. Even if she is charged with falsifying the rape, she will still be seen as a 'victim' and someone who told the truth from the very beginning. After all, women don't ever lie.
__________
It comes as a wonderful reward system for many many people.
The DA who prosecuted my son makes over $160,000.00 yearly, and gets reelected as a 'winner' every time. Has for years.
Men vote. Women vote. DA's are men. DA's are women.
Judges are men. Judges are women. Whatever 'interested' group enjoys political clout currently are ruled in favor.
Then we've got our 'for profit' prisons.
We've got attorneys. We got advocates. We've got 'counselors'. Medical staff. Media. Everyone gets a piece of the pie.
Generations of black men have cried out about false accusations for generations. They still do.
As long as it happens to someone else, most men are more interested in protecting their wives and daughters to do much about it.
Another report of a false rape http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=4981016accusation
Someone in Ireland agrees with us
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/false-rape-report-as-bad-as-crime-1736910.html
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/Man39s-car-damaged-by-partner.5272301.jp
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2009/05/15/edmonton-cab-driver-lawsuit.html
Anon,
Thanks for the links. Already set for posts here down the road.
Sgt. Mom,
Men have not 'always' been held to a higher standard.Back to my original statement, when proven they have lied in court, they are.
That is the key. Men are jailed for perjury much quicker and more often than women.
Not that I doubt you, but I have to ask for some back up that men are prosecuted for perjury than women are.
------------------
One last thought here - Glen Sacks just took a huge leap in my estimation, discussing his take on the Judge Judy confrontation -
He complained the woman presumably making a false accusation was cut off by Judge Judy, not allowed to state her case LIKE SO OFTEN MEN ARE.
I think Glen Sacks is taking the right approach here - promoting equal treatment of both genders.
As a woman, I'm going to listen to him and his opinion with far more respect and trust from here out.
Hey, Sgt. Mom -- how about me? Didn't you see MY comments to Glenn Sack's post? I will reprint:
Glenn is right on the mark.
The worst mistake we can make when talking about domestic violence or rape -- or false accusations of either -- is the same mistake our radical feminist sisters have institutionalized as a way of looking at the world: assuming guilt without due process of law. And depriving a litigant of the opportunity to have his or her say is a deprivation of due process.
If there is one thing this movement must preach -- if there is one thing that must set us apart from the gender-feminist/sexual-assault-industrial complex -- it's that when it comes to justice, we must remove the gender lenses and replace them with the blindfold worn by the iconic statue of Lady Justice.
Mostly when it comes to rape, domestic violence and false allegations, the gender lenses are unfairly worn to persecute males. We mustn't lower ourselves to their level by rejoicing when the tables are turned on a woman.
________________________________
Then when someone said: "Why are we defending a woman confronted by a entertainment judge? Isn't that what women's groups do, and I will add that women's groups do it better than men's groups."
I SAID:
Why? Because defending what is right is blind to gender.
Because we don't want to stoop to their level of becoming a lobby that advocates unfair positions merely because they benefit some of the members of our gender.
Because defending what is just is what good men have always done.
And I disagree that women's groups "do it better." They do it blindly, not better. They base their decisions as to what's worth defending solely on gender. That standard is indefensible by any reasonable measure.
____________________________
You are correct about Glenn. He is a fair-minded individual. He told me once that he formerly worked with the feminists and -- believe it or not -- he does agree with the notion of gender equality for women and men. He thinks that men are getting a raw deal in certain areas but that doesn't mean he things all is well with women.
Not that I doubt you, but I have to ask for some back up that men are prosecuted for perjury than women are.
All you have to do is take a look at Family Court. It is rampant with perjury, but men are predominantly the ones who are penalized.
So what category of litigants features the most perjurors? According to John Henry Hingson III, the former president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, it’s not criminal defendants. “The grand-slam, home-run winner is in domestic relations (family) court."Financial incentive along with lack of punishment is a sure recipe for perjury.
For those of you so ignorant to post this without knowing Jennifer, her charges were just dropped since her rape kit results (which clearly showed assault) were finally released to the court. After much pain and humiliation she can finally get back to her life.
Although I understand that men who are falsely accused do wrongfully suffer, naming this young woman on this site is reprehensible. She was accused of falsley reporting a sexual assault because the police said she recanted her charge. However, it was never set forth in court that this was the case, I very much presume, due to lack of evidence.
Yes, despite the fact that your website feels free to name this person, she never recanted her accusation, which never named an attacker, as she was assaulted by a stranger. So, seriously, you do your cause a disservice by naming her and hanging her out to dry in the same way you claim that the falsley accused men are victimized.
I hope that someone actually oveersees this site and would have the integrity to remove this young woman's name as the charges were dropped due to lack of evidence, and to leave her name and this article on this site would be doing to her exactly what you claim is so reprehensibly being done to men.
It is my considerable hope that you are better than that.
If not, your entire arguement is rididulous. It applies to all or is not applicable to any!!!!!
Post a Comment