From: Pierce Harlan
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 06:23:15 -0700 (PDT)
To: christina.hernandezXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: False rape claims
Ms. Hernandez:
False Rape Society was compelled to examine your report on the false rape claims in a post today:
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2009/07/frs-takes-southwest-florida-reporter.html
. . . .
Pierce Harlan
False Rape Society
_____________________________
From: christina.hernandez@winktv.com
christina.hernandez@XXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: False rape claims
To: "Pierce Harlan"
I did not talk about anyone falsely accussed of a crime. The information came from the FBI and it was about people filing false reports. According to the FBI and a Charlotte County organization, 2 percent of police reports for any crime are falsified.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
__________________________________
From: Pierce Harlan
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 06:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
To: christina.hernandez@XXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: False rape claims
You are wrong. Please cite the FBI study you are citing -- I am thoroughly familiar with this area, and there is no such study.
________________________________
From: christina.hernandez@XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: False rape claims
To: "Pierce Harlan" thefrs@ymail.com
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 1:57 PM
I apologize if your findings are different, but as a local reporter, I had to get my information from a local rape crisis organization. The organization is very credible and was recommended to me by my producer. If you would like me to forward their contact information I will, but I honestly don't feel I owe anyone who has been wrongly accussed of a crime an apology. In both cases, that WINK News clearly stated last week, both of the "victims" completely made up suspects, so no one was ever accussed of the crimes. I appreciate your concern and let me know if I could be of anymore help to you.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
_______________________________
From: Pierce Harlan
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
To: christina.hernandez@XXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: False rape claims
. . . . If you ask the sexual assault organization you cited for its authority, it is my firm belief they will not be able to furnish it other than to say "the FBI" or "the Justice Department." Trust me, I've been down this path many times. Your dismissal of my note by referring to "my information," and by refusing even to consider the sources I cited is genuinely disconcerting. It is not "my" information; it is widely respected information that the financially interested sexual assault counseling industry has never been able to challenge. By repeating the misinformation of the sexual assault industry that false claims are essentially a "myth," with no attempt to ascertain if what I am telling you is correct, you are doing a disservice to the falsely accused, and to your station's viewers.
I would appreciate it if you would pass along my comments to your producer. I find your refusal even to consider the scholarly sources I've cited -- which, by the way, no one has been able to refute -- most troubling.
Pierce Harlan
________________________________
And the last one:
From: christina.hernandez@XXXXXXXXXXX
To: "Pierce Harlan" thefrs@ymail.com
My producer already has your information.Thanks again for the email and voicing your concerns.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Posts
46 comments:
I apologize if your findings are different, but as a local reporter, I had to get my information from a local rape crisis organization. The organization is very credible and was recommended to me by my producer.
LOL! "The organization is very credible," huh? It's not like feminists have an agenda or anything, yeah.
Anon, we've frequently made the point here about how infrequently sexual assault counselors have found false claims. This flies in the face of feminist icon Eugene Kanin's findings; not to mention all the other sources we've cited. The fact is, the sexual assault industry is financially interested in fomenting a rape culture. This is not to say that all of it's reps are dishonest -- many do good work for rape victims. But on the false rape issue, many are biased against the presumed innocent -- men and boys accused of rape.
So what the reporter is saying, is that she did no actual research of her own, she just parroted what she was told by someone with a conflict of interest as to the information being presented.
Do journalists really not understand why the MSM is dying? Maybe because they don't bother to actually get credible information before printing it?
I would also like to recommend that everyone that can, please send a polite email to Ms. Hernandez explaining how her article is incorrect.
Steve/The Archivist, you are correct -- for so many of these false rape stories, the MSM thinks it's sufficient to interview some "expert" at the rape counseling center -- usually someone who never met a false claim they believed. Their first words are usually, "This hardly ever happens," or some prevarication to that effect.
My guess is that this very young reporter and her producer chalked me up as a "men's rights" nut -- without ever bothering to research the issue I raised. The fact is, I am probably more liberal than they are on most issues. THIS
two percent lie and its corollary evils are my "men's rights" issues. This issue is ground zero for this blog. In fact, the two percent lie is what convinced me to do this blog -- for a long time, I accepted it as the truth until I started to dig. That's when, after about ten minutes of research, I found that the two percent stat has a disreputable origin -- it's not true. If I can discover that in ten minutes, why can't a reporter find it in less time?
Pierce,
I too have sent an email. I will await a response, and share it with everyone here.
My email conversation:
From: steve berkimer
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:50:14 +0000
To:christina.hernandez@winknews.com
Subject: Two fake sexual assaults in two days, but false reporting is rare
Ms. Hernandez,
I must say, your article as printed is a disservice to journalistic integrity. The fact that you did absolutely no research of your own into the nature of false rape claims, and took the word of someone with a vested financial interest in minimizing the prevalence of such false claims, is abhorrent.
If you could, please send the link to the information that shows false rape claims are only 2%. While I doubt you will be able to present the evidence to support the claim, I will give you the benefit of the doubt.
Thank you for your time,
E. Steven Berkimer
www.falserapesociety.blogspot.com
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
To: xxxxxx
Subject: Re: Two fake sexual assaults in two days, but false reporting is rare
From: christina.hernandez@winktv.com
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:51:39 +0000
Thanks for the email.
The information I received is from the SATI, the Center for Abuse and Rape Emergencies, Inc. and Victim Services Center, the US Dept. of Justice, and the FBI.
Like I told the other man with the Web site who also contacted me, the stories WINK News did in regard to the two false reports did not ever identify anyone who was accused of the "crimes" because the "victims" made the "suspects" up, and no one was ever asscused.
I apologize if you believe my sources are incorrect.
This email, along with the other one, have been forwarded to my producer.
At the same time, I understand you all have a Web blog to administer, but I do not appreciate the personal attacks concerning my integrity and the way I do my job. Some things are just out of line.
If he wishes, my producer will be in touch.
Thanks.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
If you took it as an attack, my apologies. But I was always under the impression that you named ALL sources used. If journalism has changed that much, it is no wonder that the Mainstream media is declining so rapidly.
In your article, you only named 1 individual from one of those you listed. At the very least, it is shoddy work. As I stated, I will give you the benifit of the doubt, but it may prove beneficial, in the future, to cite all sources.
Best Regards,
E. Steven Berkimer
www.falserapesociety.blogspot.com
In my email exchange, she suddenly comes up with 5 different sources, yet only 1 is mentioned in her article. That, to me, is not journalism.
The only person she quoted calls false reports a 'myth', and that women lying about being raped is a 'myth'.
I guess she hasn't bothered to stop by our site.
And I do not appreciate being blown off as if I were an MRA nutcase after I have furnished objectively verifiable information and a position that is, frankly, irrefutable (albeit politically incorrect).
I do not appreciate having an entire class of victim, the falsely accused, treated as flotsam by news source that quotes people who pretend they don't exist (because women supposedly don't lie about rape) -- and the young reporter can't see why that would be offensive.
I do not appreciate the mainstream media masquerading politically correct and expedient positions as news.
The better response, the more appropriate response, the more prudent and journalistically correct response, which I've received from experienced reporters elsewhere, is to ask me where they can obtain better information. We have had reporters include both the information I forward and their own cockeyed, bullshit sexual assault counselor "stats" -- so at least they acknowledge that the cockeyed, bullshit sexual assault counselors' stats are not set in stone, they're not "gospel," they're not necessarily true. THIS piece, in contrast, presented one side (which was incorrect) and then gave me the bum's rush (which I've reprinted in this post) when I called her on it. I am unaccustomed to being treated in that manner, but it is symptomatic of a trend among some reporters to gussy up the rape culture metanarrative as news and to be smugly content that they've done their job. Innocent men and boys falsely accused be damned.
If I've offended you, Christina, please understand that your article, and your response, is offensive to countless persons who have been falsely accused of sexual assault.
Does Christina really believe that these two false accusations are no big deal because they didn't name particular suspects? She does understand how this had an excellent chance of sending innocent men to prison, doesn't she?
But why am I asking? Of course she understands that; she just doesn't care. We're calling her on her blatant unprofessionalism and bias, and she's trying to pass the responsibility on to her producer. But it doesn't work that way. When you lie about men this way then you are fair game for criticism.
Also, I'd advise everybody who does Email her (I'm not going to bother) to be conservative. This moron's next chess move will be to claim that we're harrassing her.
Anonymous, excellent point about the the harm caused by rape lies that don't name suspects. Does this young reporter have any idea how many rape lies have concocted imaginary rapists but real flesh and blood males are arrested for rape? She would do well to spend several days reading through this website because I suspect most rape claims do not target a specific male, but many of these end up with some hapless man (or boy - most of these guys are very young men, often in their teens) behind bars.
So, let's see, we've got two false claims that are used to show how women don't lie about rape. And we are being unnecessarily defensive just because, apparently, the police didn't arrest somebody. Hmm. I guess she showed us.
I have exhausted my communications with her, and I'd suggest that, given the response Steve received, no further communications with her would be helpful. I am disgusted with this sort of non-response, "Oh, well, hey, the sexual assault counselor said it, so it must be true." I am disgusted that a news source would be allowed to print this: "'False reports just feed into the myth that women lie about rape, and it's not true,' Baer said."
But hey, it's politically correct, and perhaps that's all that matters.
Thanks for this Pierce. I like it when she cites the supposed FBI stts,, then in the next email says to you,
"as a local reporter, I had to get my information from a local rape crisis organization"
That must mean she got the FBI info from the sexual assault place!
Second-hand info...and from a very unreliable source.
Reporters these days are so ethical and astute, I am simply head over heels!
the above should say, "the supposed FBI stats..."
Norm, you know this as well as I do but I note it for the sake of others: sexual assault counselors frequently cite "FBI" or "Dept. of Justice" for their two percent lies. I don't know if that's what happened here but I wouldn't be surprised.
Damn it, though -- why on earth can't these people see that this issue is so politicized that the info they are getting might be suspect. In fact, it is worse than suspect -- it is wrong.
We need to keep beating the drum on this issue, and too bad if our style offends some people. I'd feel sorry for any offense I cause if they would just do the right thing and publish a retraction.
Norm, you know this as well as I do but I note it for the sake of others: sexual assault counselors frequently cite "FBI" or "Dept. of Justice" for their two percent lies. I don't know if that's what happened here but I wouldn't be surprised.
Damn it, though -- why on earth can't these people see that this issue is so politicized that the info they are getting might be suspect. In fact, it is worse than suspect -- it is wrong.
We need to keep beating the drum on this issue, and too bad if our style offends some people. I'd feel sorry for any offense I cause if they would just do the right thing and publish a retraction.
"The information I received is from the SATI, the Center for Abuse and Rape Emergencies, Inc. and Victim Services Center, the US Dept. of Justice, and the FBI."
I think some of you guys are missing the point. Did she ever actually send a link to any study or stats? As Warren Farrell has stated, the FBI/DOJ do not keep track of the final outcome of cases, so as far as we know from their data, the false accusation rate could be anywhere from zero to 100 percent.
The other orgainization sounds ideologically driven.
Finally, as I've stated here before, Farrell personally contacted, by phone, a high-ranking official at N.O.W., and they admitted they could not verify the 2% claim.
Did someone tell her all this stuff?
Again, well-done Pierce!
Arch and Pierce, our comments 'crossed'.
Also,
thank you Steve B. and others who corresponded with them.
The current gender feminist / law enforcement misinformation alliance is a perversion.
Not only is it a perversion, it is unconstitutional.
The gender feminist elite are breaking all patriarchies. Young males are easy to harvest when they come from the matriarchal underclass.
Thanks Norm.
Anon, as long as everyone keeps it respectful, I don't believe harassment can be considered. She allowed her email address to be published on a public website. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sending an actual email to her, if she has posted her contact info.
The fact is, she is the one who is trying to use government stats to prove the case, even though she got them second hand, and didn't even research to verify. That is irresponsible and grossly unethical in a "journalist".
The worst part is, that the stats that the government uses, aren't from a study, they are just compiled from law enforcement reporting. Due to the widely different definitions that different states/agencies use, the stats aren't even close to being correct. And we know the 2% lie is just that, a lie.
So Ms. Hernandez published 2 obvious lies in this piece, and doesn't even have the regard to correct them.
I would urge all who are reading this to please send her an email requesting either an article showing the other side, or a complete retraction. Either way, she needs to correct what she has put in print.
All the best,
E. Steven Berkimer
Steve, Pierce said above not to email her anymore? Perhaps you have not communicated with him recently. Please advise - I want to send her something, and of course I can avoid mention of FRS, but she might figure that's where it's 'from' anyway.
I'll leave that up to Pierce. I personally don't have a problem with sending her an email. Something along the lines of Glenn Sacks' action alert.
The main reason that I think it should happen, is that this type of thing needs to be challenged. The site this story is at, isn't allowing comments to the story, and they need to be aware of just how false and inflammatory what they print is.
But as I stated, I'll allow Pierce the final say.
All the best,
E. Steven Berkimer
I defer to Steve -- I think I've exhausted what I need to say. I am from the Earl Weaver school -- Weaver was the genius manager of the Baltimore Orioles. He argued with umpires every single time he thought they blew a call, and the umps didn't like it -- but they candidly admitted they were more careful when they handle a game with the Orioles. The same here. We won't change her mind, but she damn well better know not to do this again.
The Senators were better than the Orioles hands down. Just thought I'd mention that...even if it's not true.
I always loved that name "The Senators" -- much more impressive than "The Orioles" or "The Phillies." Neither were as impressive as "The Pirates" or "The Tigers."
Then I would ask any and all to please feel free to email Ms. Hernandez.
Please keep it polite, and to the point. I would also recommend adding links to studies showing the prevalence of false claims (Kanin, Mcdowell, Times of India, Daphne II, etc.).
It has been asked many time by people on this site what can be done. This is it. Start sending emails, making phone calls, etc., to make this problem known, and that there are those who view the MSM bias as untenable.
I would like, ultimately, to see something akin to what is done on the Glenn Sacks' site, with his action alerts. The more people who speak up, the better chance that the MSM, and then government officials will start to pay attention.
All the best,
E. Steven Berkimer
http://www.mediaradar.org/
Archivist - a simple reposte to this woman would have been "And did you get the title of the DOJ and FBI reports/studies?"
This is the email I just sent her:
When the U.S. Air Force investigated 556 cases of alleged rape, 27% of the women eventually admitted they had lied (either just before they took a lie-detector test or after they failed it).[1] Because other cases were less certain, the air force asked three independent reviewers to review these cases. They used twenty-five criteria that were common to the women who had acknowledged they lied. If all three reviewers agreed that the rape allegation was false, it was ranked as false. (There were no convictions of these women - it was just a study.) Their conclusion? A total of 60 percent of the original rape allegations were false.
Dr. McDowell, the supervisory special agent, had already distinguished himself by being among the first to predict that Catherine Cromwell Webb's false accusation of Gary Dotson was, in fact, false. Webb was so impressed with his analysis that she published it as an appendix in her book Forgive Me.[2] Dr. McDowell nevertheless feared publishing the air force findings, thinking they might be representative of findings only in military situations and that publishing them might therefore be misleading, so he examined the police files from a major midwestern and a southwestern city. The findings of 60 percent false accusations held, but the cities requested anonymity for fear of political repercussions.
..false claims of burglaries, robberies and auto thefts range between 1 and 5 percent.[3]
Aren't these findings in conflict with the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports which the media has popularized as saying that only 9 percent of rape accusations are false or unfounded?[4] No. The FBI knows the number of women who reported they were raped, but not whether the rapist was found guilty or innocent. In 47 percent of the cases, the alleged rapist has not even been identified or found, or if he has been found, there was insufficient evidence to arrest him.[5] The remaining 53 percent were arrested, but the FBI doesn't receive data as to whether they were eventually found guilty or innocent.[6] In brief, as far as the FBI knows, the percentage of false accusations overall could be anywhere from zero to 100 percent...
Why would a woman make a false accusation of rape? ...The air force study has the only systematic reporting of motivations [as of 1993].
Motivations Given by the Women Who Acknowledged They Had Made False Accusations of Rape:[7]
Spite or revenge - 20 percent
To compensate for feelings of guilt or shame - 20 percent
Thought she might be pregnant - 13 percent
To conceal an affair - 12 percent
To test husband's love - 9 percent
Mental/emotional disorder - 9 percent
To avoid personal responsibility - 4 percent
Failure to pay, or extortion -
4 percent
Thought she might have caught VD - 3 percent
Other - 6 percent
-----------------------------------
TOTAL - 100 percent
[1]-[7] availabe upon request.
The above is from Warren Farrell's Myth of Male Power (1993, Berkley), pp 322-325.
Warren Farrell is the only man ever elected three times to the board of N.O.W. in New York City
-Norm....
........
Comments:
1)note the 9 percent.
2)after the word 'repercussions', I was incredibly tempted to put in, 'from fascists like you'. Oh well, she probably deleted the email the moment she saw 'rape' or 'McDowell' in the subject line.
Question: did Kanin or any of the others study motivation?
this is the 'sonja' I was talking about before...she has the 'virginal suicide' blog, which I have viewed. Watch out for her...very suspicious. Note she now longer lists the blog under her profile, ever since I made a couple of comments on it.
Not the same as 'Sonja Newcombe'.
should say "NO longer lists the blog..."
hate to sound like I'm talking to myself tonight, but how can Kanin be a feminist icon?
Norm, he was a feminist icon -- before the rape studies didn't fit their metanarrative.
Sonja, my response to her was just fine, thank you. You respond to her if you'd like.
Why would any reporter get any information from this site? It is the most biased page that does not show the other side at all. Women are raped more than women who make it up. If anything, this news article helps your case with two women lying in two days. I wouldn't be surprised if a lawyer contacted you for the slander that is being posted online.
"Why would any reporter get any information from this site? It is the most biased page that does not show the other side at all. Women are raped more than women who make it up. If anything, this news article helps your case with two women lying in two days. I wouldn't be surprised if a lawyer contacted you for the slander that is being posted online."
Trust me, the only "slander" is your comment about this site -- kindly identify yourself and I will deal with it accordingly. (In any event, I think you mean "libel"). Tell me what you think is erroneous and we'll discuss it. Have you reviewed the authorities I cited to show that the two percent stat is simply a made-up number? How do you defend that? We publish objectively verifiable information; we don't make characterizations about writings that we don't publish -- you are free to disagree with our characterizations simply by reading the writing we are discussing; and we are not responsible for the comments of our readers.
As for this -- "Women are raped more than women who make it up" -- even if it were true (and it is doubtful, unless you define "rape" the way the radical gender feminists do, including lustful looks -- my bet is, you do) what does that have to do with speaking up for the victims of false rape claims? Must you people always win the Oppression Olympics? Can we not have ONE site where these victims have a voice?
A word about TV journalism. It's an oxymoron. TV is about ratings, especially the local news.
The journalist in this case is nothing more than a talking head used to increase ratings.
As well, there is little or no time to do any real research, just get the story on the air and move on to the next fire, murder, or car accident.
Pierce's emails were useful in that the station is now aware of this blog and the issues that is presents.
The heavy lifting in this issue is about public policy and laws in state legislatures and in Washington DC.
Biased?
Check out this from the Center for Abuse and Rape Emergencies, Inc., website.
Link. Note that they refer to the Duluth model which is the most sexist and biased view of DV around.
Everything in this talks of abusers and rapists as HE. Who are the ones who are biased?
While those falsely accused are predominately male, we have run multiple stories of men who are false accusers.
WE are NOT the biased party in all this.
E. Steven Berkimer
Look, all I am asking for is a dialogue with people who spread this two percent nonsense -- a dialogue is not "well, you have your stats and we have ours." I want one of them to show me why I am wrong. I want one of them to refute the law review article I've cited that traces the two percent claim back to its origins. Instead, all I am getting is vague threats and hissy fits because we dare to be angry about reporting that doesn't get it right. If it makes the young reporter any happier, a lot of your colleagues don't get it right. And I am sure that a lot of producers write me and others off as a bunch of angry MRAs. That's not even factual. Others here are bona fide MRAs. THIS is my issue -- and that's not to say that others aren't important, they are. I focus on this one And the two percent lie goes to the heart of it.
Why is the two percent lie so important? As we've explained time and time again, a lot of legislation got rammed through using this as justification -- legislation that hurts the presumed innocent in ways too numerous to recount here.
So, yeah, I am sorry that some people have taken offense at our anger. I am even sorrier that they refuse to engage us in a real discussion. They seem to be content to just be offended and probably to write us off as kooks.
No need to defend this website or worry about any kind of charges. This is a blog, not the MSM. Anyone wanting to 'sue' hasn't got a legal leg to stand on. There's effectively no such thing as censorship or libel here. The only exception MIGHT be 'hate speech', but we haven't even come close to that. That is the business feminists are in, such as feministing.com.
Just think of sites like 'manhaters'. They outright put up guys' full names, with nary a problem.
Norm, I appreciate the comments, but we do not libel anyone on this site. I am familiar with the law in this area since I've been practicing law for many years. We are not a commercial entity afraid of alienating our readers -- and we've got anyone who buys into the two percent canard, or who spreads it, in our bullseye. I do challenge the naysayer on this thread to SHOW ME HOW I'M WRONG.
Bottom line why this annoys me so much -- the hissy fits and the vague threats: I have furnished the young reporter information that refutes what she wrote. I have not heard any acknowledgement from any at that television station that they are wrong. They are content to go with their source -- because their source deals with rape -- and that seems to be that.
Get it? If the MSM relies solely on entities that make their living counseling rape "victims," where does that leave the men and boys the "victims" lie about?
Sorry Pierce, didn't mean to 'pre-empt' you on the legal stuff. Anyhow, I think you and I are both basically saying the same thing about 'libel' here.
This reporter will want to be moving on someday. This exchange should be made as public as possible - it's not as though it is some kind of priveleged communication and one or the other side of it is free to do whatever they want with it. It reflects on her professional competence, or lack of it, and a prospective employers should know. It's quite obvious that she sees her job more as an entertainer than some kind serious journalist. what serious news organization would want that?
Actually, Norm, I hate to break it to you, but I'm Sonja Newcombe. I'm logged in to my old Google account with my maiden name - Fitzgerald.
I got married almost 2 years ago.
sonja,
sorry, then I guess you're not the one with the virginal suicide blog?
Post a Comment