Friday, May 29, 2009
Teen boys twice victimized: when their statutory rapists falsely accuse them of rape
"Binkley [the accused teacher] said there had been an unfair rush to judgment against her because of her profession." Welcome to our world, Ms. Binkley. Usually with rape accusations, there is an unfair rush to judgment against men and boys -- because of their gender.
Comment: It is not unusual for female teachers who have statutorily raped teen boys to defend themselves by falsely accusing their victims of rape. Remember Robin Mowery? How about Lina Sinah? In those cases, the young males were twice-victimized by the same woman: once of statutory rape, and once of a false rape claim. How peculiar -- and awful -- it must be to be falsely accused of rape by your own rapist, but that is what occurred.
I suspect that when female teachers and male students engage in consensual sex, even the prospect of a rape claim by the teacher will sometimes keep boys from reporting the encounter -- because, let's be honest, it's all-too easy to accuse a teen boy of rape, and the boys would likely be fearful of going to prison. Boys also likely underreport being statutorily raped because their parents -- their mothers especially -- would consider it to be an atrocity and would engage in serious victim blaming.
The news story below furnishes some interesting twists on this peculiar scenario. A teacher is charged with statutorily raping a boy. The boy at issue was almost a man -- one month shy of having to register for selective service, and that likely would serve to reduce her sentence if she is found guilty.
It is plausible that this boy, like most 17-year-old boys, was capable of physically overcoming his female teacher if he intended to rape her. And, yes, false rape claims are a problem for teachers -- especially male teachers. "Mark Pudlow, spokesman for the Florida Teachers Association, the state's major teachers union . . . points out [that] unions . . . have an obligation to help teachers who are themselves victims of bogus accusations . . . . 'There needs to be an understanding,' says Pudlow, 'that even when a false accusation hits the newspapers, it can ruin a teaching career.'"
But if the boy didn't rape the teacher in this case, she raped him because the law is the law, and at 17, he was too young to engage in legally consensual sex with her.
And lest we minimize the victimization of teen boys molested by female teachers by thinking them "lucky," it is well to remember that "boys who are sexually abused by women often develop alcoholism, depression and their own sexual dysfunctions, including rape, as men."
We don't know if the teacher in this case is lying, and we shouldn't rush to judgment. The police think she is lying, and the story notes that two other students have come forward claiming a sexual relationship with her. If the genders were reversed, we all know how everyone would react to that last bit of news. And we can also envision the harsh criminal sentence he'd receive.
But here's the most interesting aspect of the story -- the teacher's take on it: "'Binkley [the accused teacher] said there had been an unfair rush to judgment against her because of her profession.' . . . . . She said there had been some unfair comparisons to other high profile cases. 'Cause it's a teacher. All teachers are guilty. With all the things recently - it's a teacher story and teachers have to be guilty,' said Binkley."
Hmm. Interesting, isn't it? The fact is, female teachers are the only group of females at real risk of having false rape claims lodged against them. She might be correct that teachers in her situation (caught having sex with boys) are automatically deemed to be statutory rapists.
But when she says there is an unfair rush to judgment because of her profession, it reminds me of virtually every case we cover on this blog -- only the unfair rush to judgment is almost always against an accused male, because of his gender. It's assumed that any man or boy accused of rape must be guilty. And, as shown on this website over and over and over again, that's exactly how they are treated by the legal system and by society.
We all want justice to prevail here, as we do in all of these cases. We shouldn't assume the teacher is guilty. And if, indeed, Ms. Binkley is innocent, then now she knows how virtually every innocent male accused of rape feels -- it's as if the trial is over even before it has begun and she's been convicted in the court of public opinion solely because of what she is, not what she did.
Welcome to our world, Ms. Binkley.
HERE IS THE NEWS STORY:
Statutory Rape - Or A Victim In Her Own Classroom?
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - In an exclusive interview, former Portland High School math teacher Sandy Binkley does not deny the encounter with a student, but said she was the victim of rape by the student.
Binkley is charged with statutory rape by an authority figure. Police said she had sex with a student in a classroom during school hours.
"There was one incident with one student - who was a month away from being 18. He was bigger than me and he forced himself on me," said Binkley. "He came into the room and forced himself upon me."
Attorney David Ridings said his client did not seduce the student for sex.
"There's been so many lies and mischaracterizations," Binkley's attorney David Ridings.
"Nothing could be farther from the truth."
Ridings and prosecutors do agree something happened in the girls' volleyball office. During a preliminary court hearing the student, who was a teacher's aid, testified.
"She laid down on the desk and I began to have intercourse with her . . . She said her tubes were tied which is why I didn't wear a condom. . . She said this isn't what you expected when you signed up for a teacher's aid," from the student's testimony in the preliminary hearing transcript.
The testimony was enough for the grand jury to indict Binkley, but her attorneys said there are inconsistencies.
Under cross examination the student admitted he was physical with Binkley.
"Did you pick her up and force her on the desk and have sex with her?" said the attorney.
"Not at all," said the student.
"You did not pick her up?" said the attorney.
"I picked her up, but she wanted it," said the student.
Binkley said there had been an unfair rush to judgment against her because of her profession.
"It's been terrible. First few months spent in bed. I didn't interact with my husband or kids - my family. Nothing," said Binkley.
She said there had been some unfair comparisons to other high profile cases.
"Cause it's a teacher. All teachers are guilty. With all the things recently - it's a teacher story and teachers have to be guilty," said Binkley. "I don't see myself that way."
Pam Rogers, a former beauty queen turned teacher in Warren County, is serving eight years in prison.
She was convicted in 2006 of having a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old student.
"I don't know how I got lumped into the same category as her," said Binkley.
Binkley said unlike Rogers she did not do anything wrong.
"It was just one incident. It was not a wanted incident. He came into the room and forced himself upon me," said Binkley.
Two other students came forward claiming sexual relationships with Binkley.
"I know she's innocent. I know she didn't do anything wrong. I know she's the victim in this case," said husband Doug Binkley.
In an exclusive interview Thursday Binkley responds about the other relationships. She also talked about a certain style of teaching; she said the administration encouraged that could lead students to cross the line with their teachers.
Her attorneys hope the community will hear Binkley's story. They believe there are people out there who will say the students are lying and may come forward.
Police said there was no evidence of that.
Link: http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=10342970
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
Here is what needs to happen: the teacher claims to have been raped, right? And it's just he said / she said? Then you throw out the case, you burn it and bury it, you pretend it never happened. Because she said is never PROOF.
You can never have proof beyond a reasonable doubt if it's just her word against his, and if you allow convictions in those cases then you have thrown the presumption of innocence out the window.
"You can never have proof beyond a reasonable doubt if it's just her word against his . . . ."
Your point is well taken that if there are two plausible stories, it should never be brought to trial. But to adopt a rule of thumb that we dismiss any rape claim where there are conflicting stories would only encourage teachers who statutorily rape students to get away with merely by crying rape. It would also excuse almost male rapist from the consequences of his actions.
Rape claims are incredibly difficult to untangle because often the only proof is the word of the accuser. We can throw our hands up in the air and decide that there's nothing we can do -- and that's how a lot of these cases come out. But the better practice is for the police to do a painstaking investigation to see what the other objective evidence shows. If it's inconclusive, I agree with you -- it's not fair, or just, to play the lottery by sending to the jury. Juries have been known to do strange things, and justice should not be a Vegas table game dependent on chance.
No, there shouldn't be a painstaking investigation unless there is already corroborating evidence. We all know that if the painstaking investigation reveals a serial false accuser that she won't be brought to justice, anyway. It's fine if more women get away with statutory rape as a result, but we need to stop these people from prosecuting every piece of shit case that they get their hands on.
In other words, we need to adopt a rational, normal criminal justice system, such as other industrialized countries have. In no other country -- except Russia, North Korea, etc -- do innocent men have to worry about life in prison based on the word of a liar.
In looking into cases of wrongful convictions, I am struck by how often an actually guilty person successfully accuses or is a witness against an innocent person for the crime they committed. (Ronnie Williamson again comes to mind)
This poor teacher is right - only within the last few years has it been aknowledged that Female Teachers commit sex crimes.
Ten years ago she could have easily pulled this off.
The mother of this accused boy would have been told it's a "one-in -billion chance" the adult FEMALE rapist would turn around and falsely accuse a teenaged guy of rape.
I threatened to report my sister in law as a molester, and she in turn accused my son of rape.
Who do you think the court listened to?
People are slowly recognizing that female teachers are just as capable of sex crimes as male teachers...
just just as false accusers are rarely punished, NEITHER ARE FEMALE TEACHERS WHO RAPE.
Try going into a court of law and telling them the woman accusing you of sexual abuse is herself a sexual abuser.
Try telling them she is a serial accuser. Try telling them you have proof.
They'll explain to you how RAPE SHIELD laws work, and punish YOU for RETRAUMATIZING THE VICTIM.
You will end up on a sex offender registry, and she ends up a heroine/victim for her COURAGE.
It's now recognized that false child abuse claims abound in divorce cases, and that a whole slew of young, pretty female teachers are molesting kids, but outside those strict boundaries, female predators are still a protected class.
"No, there shouldn't be a painstaking investigation unless there is already corroborating evidence."
Yeah, there should. Testimony is evidence. If it weren't, we'd be in trouble. The effect of what you're saying is that rape ought to be legal -- unless the rapist happens to get caught.That's indefensible, on any level.
That's bullshit. The vast majority of real rapes leave real evidence. There is never any reason to accept a mere story as proof.
What you're arguing in favor ammounts to a presumption of guilt. This is unacceptable.
You know, you people complain endlessly about false prosecutions -- but then you don't want to do what it takes to prevent them. How do you reconcile that? You can't have it both ways.
Let me tell you gentlemen a story, that has the virtue of being true. A long, long time ago there was this boy who was attending a bording school. He was English, with an American mother. This boy had the misfortune of being accused of raping another boy.
Do you know what happened? Nothing! Because it was a lie, they covered it up. It's a good thing they did, because the boy's name was Winston Churchill. Don't believe me? Google it.
Now just imagine if there had been a massive investigation for no reason. Just imagine if this had gotten all over the papers, and this boy had been prevented from becoming the war time leader that he became. That's what your beloved US legal system would have done to him.
Not every cry of rape should be taken seriously. Unsubstantiated accusations should be buried -- there is no other way to protect the innocent.
Gee, you're welcome. You know what? I can't wait to find a blog for the falsely accused that actually supports the falsely accused, instead of feminist trolls. If that ever happens then please post about it, m'kay?
"Not every cry of rape should be taken seriously."
Correct. But the police have to look into it -- were there any witnesses? Can anyone else corroborate it? Did you scream out -- why didn't your neighbor hear it? Etc. You will see if you dig back through the site that police who speak candidly about these issues handle these claims exactly as you suggest -- they bury the vast majority of them when they are he said/she said. Most police can see through the horseshit claims. When they catch one of the parties in a lie, they start to think there might be something to it.
P.S. Winston isn't the only one who had that experience. So did I -- the false accusation against me went nowhere because it was entirely made up, and I didn't even learn about it until after it was a dead issue.
Q: "You know what? I can't wait to find a blog for the falsely accused that actually supports the falsely accused, instead of feminist trolls. If that ever happens then please post about it, m'kay?"
...m'kay?...hmmm...first guy I ever heard use that...
...so...why haven't you started one yourself?
Pierce Harlan , responding to: "Not every cry of rape should be taken seriously." -
”Correct. But the police have to look into it -- were there any witnesses? Can anyone else corroborate it? Did you scream out -- why didn't your neighbor hear it? Etc. You will see if you dig back through the site that police who speak candidly about these issues handle these claims exactly as you suggest -- they bury the vast majority of them when they are he said/she said. Most police can see through the horseshit claims. When they catch one of the parties in a lie, they start to think there might be something to it.”
Very well said.
I would also add that from another site, I did find out that this teacher’s (Sandra Binkley) case was taken before a grand jury, which , in turn returned a nine count indictment of statutory rape by an authority figure and three counts of sexual battery by an authority figure against her. (http://badbadteacher.com/sandra-binkley/) I’m not sure that all the readers here fully understand just what a grand jury indictment entails, but, to put it simply, it amounts to a very through investigation by citizens who review the evidence provided by police and prosecutors. Here, as is so often the case, a panel of citizen’s easily saw through Sandra Binkley’s BS about having been raped, and chose to level the most severe indictment they could, complete with charging enhancements, against her, and only her – and, not just for the occurrence with the one victim, but apparently for occurrence with the others who came forward.
Not to take the discussion too far afield, but grand juries get to hear evidence well beyond what would be admissible in a criminal trial. Some of that evidence will remain sealed – forever – and only the direct participants will ever know about it. But, given as I am to rampant speculation, I’d suggest that what may well have done this women in was that she confided in a friend about the multiple sexual encounters, and that friend was compelled to testify of this before the grand jury. Just my speculation, but I know of another case (not involving a rape) wherein personal confidences which would have been inadmissible in a criminal trial were used to gain a grand jury indictment.
Anonymous - ” No, there shouldn't be a painstaking investigation unless there is already corroborating evidence. We all know that if the painstaking investigation reveals a serial false accuser that she won't be brought to justice, anyway. It's fine if more women get away with statutory rape as a result, but we need to stop these people from prosecuting every piece of shit case that they get their hands on.”First, this woman is not getting away with her statuary rape(s), nor are the falsely accused boy(s) going to face any charges.
Secondly, police and prosecutors are compelled to go forward with any alleged rape case for which they cannot find conclusive evidence that nothing happened. There are huge social pressure upon them to do so (including many which are entirely undeserved and way over-blown). The way to stop prosecutions of false rape allegations (many, if not most, of which end up in acquittals anyway, BTW – juries generally see through BS just fine) is to “target” the false accusers. This would mean a combination of increased scrutiny and pressuring of them during the initial investigation (something that police are very wary of doing due to the potential fallout of “not believing the victim”), as well as a punishment/reward system to encourage false accusers to recant as early as possible.
The victim card once again...
It's the boy's fault ("he forced himself upon me" - "it was an incident....... an unwanted incident" - I find the wording to be revealing), the administration's fault ("they encouraged a certain style of teaching"), everybody's fault ("everybody blames me for being a teacher")... But the poor woman is a victim!
And everybody buys it - hubby buys it, attorney (male) buys it, journalist buys it.
Women can never be equal to men unless they assume responsibility for their actions in the same way men do... Instead of playing the victim card and blaming everyone else because they know men will buy into it.
This type of behavior makes me sick.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1901762,00.html?cnn=yes
P.S. Winston isn't the only one who had that experience. So did I -- the false accusation against me went nowhere because it was entirely made up, and I didn't even learn about it until after it was a dead issue.
I'm glad to here that it didn't go further than that. And I have no problem with the level of investigation that you described; that isn't what comes to mind when you say "painstaking." I just meant that you shouldn't drag a man's name through the mud without more evidence than that.
". . . you shouldn't drag a man's name through the mud without more evidence than that."
Absolutely correct. Any investigation needs to be swift and the man needs to be cloaked in anonymity.
In a sense I disagree that Blinkey was rushed to judgment "because" she is a teacher. She is 'rushed' because there have been so many female teachers actually found guilty or rape. It's like men are rushed to judgment partly because of the 2 percent b.s. If everyone knew 60% of claims were false, then the guys wouldn't be rushed as much.
Of course the difference between the two is that there is a natural innate prejudice operating against all men and boys (in all cultures), so if the "guilt percentages" and total number of rapes were the same, we would still blame men and boys more than women.
Well put Norm. This what I was touching on in my toughts on the last story. Once a stereotype is made, it is hard to dispell it alone. People see news reports on something wrong and associate it with the gender of the culprit and with those who are of the same gender.
It doesn't sound like a 'rush to judgement' here at all - it sounds like this woman is hoping for a new 'race card' -
"you presume guilt just because I'm a female teacher" card.
Sgt. Mom - "It doesn't sound like a 'rush to judgement' here at all - it sounds like this woman is hoping for a new 'race card' -
"you presume guilt just because I'm a female teacher" card."Agreed. I think you've nailed this one.
And, frankly, far from any rush to judgment what so ever, this women was indicted by a grand jury. From what I can tell, she wasn't even arrested until the indictment came down.
That's where the real disparity shows up. If a female student would have gone to her parents to say that she had had sex with a male teacher (as the boy did in this case), that would have been grounds enough for police to descend on his home or place of work to lead him out in handcuffs, and have his name announced in the news.
That the female tech was given such inequitable deference is what I'd key in on here. Rather than haul her in and arrest her on the word of a male student, a lengthy and thorough investigation was undertaken, during which other boys came forward with similar accounts. Then, instead of taking the word of three males, the evidence was taken before a grand jury.
This is when this married woman, who never previously reported that she'd been raped, realizing that she was in serious trouble, decided on the tact of claiming that she had been raped.
This ploy of going on TV to proclaim her innocence and that it was she who was raped is nothing more than a defense strategy to suggest an "alternate theory" without having to put her on the stand during trial, IMHO.
Is this the new " fashionable " thing to do? Get caught preying on boys then play victim?
judging by the number of trolls on this site, I'd say the fems are starting to get worried.
I believe you're right Norm. They can wrack their brains out trying to put a spin on every false rape report but, there is no refuting the fact that false rape accusations and false accusations of other violent crimes are being made everyday and around the world. Still billions of tax dollars are being used to reauthorize the sexist and unconstitutional crime bill VAWA and all the laws based on and patterened to it here in the U.S. Notice there is still no such crime bill that offers men any special protection or special treatment/entitlements.patisom
I just wanted to say I enjoyed reading this blogging but you guys have to understand something this is the USA!!! If you think about it a little bit with all this freedom tons of shit will happen. I'm not saying go stone cold like Russia but I think the USA needs to tighten up a bit put striker laws, bring the death penalty PERMANENTLY TO ALL STATES!!!
Thank you :) take a look that emo boy hair at this blog:
http://emo--boys.blogspot.com
Post a Comment