Prosecutors drop rape charges against man
Girl recanted her story that Allentown resident had sex with her for years.
August 27, 2009
The charges against an Allentown man accused of raping a girl a decade ago were dropped Tuesday after the victim recanted her story, the Lehigh County district attorney's office said.
Jorge Lopez, 42, had been charged with rape of a person less than 13 years old, indecent deviate sexual intercourse with a person less than 13 years old, sexual assault, aggravated indecent assault and indecent assault.
He was released from Lehigh County Prison, where he had been since charges were filed in April.
On Wednesday, he said he feels vindicated, but was upset about spending four months in jail and having everyone read about the accusations.
According to court records, the girl, who was between 4 and 6 years old from 1999 to 2001, confided to a friend's mother this year that Lopez had been having sex with her for years. Lehigh County Children and Youth officials were contacted by the friend and referred the case to Allentown police.
Charges were withdrawn Tuesday after the girl, who is now 14, recanted her story and prosecutors could not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, district attorney spokeswoman Debbie Garlicki said.
-- Manuel Gamiz Jr.
Link: http://www.mcall.com/news/police/all-a23_5dropped.7000356aug27,0,3903536,print.story
TO THE MORNING CALL -- FROM PIERCE HARLAN
I write to express my concern about your use of the term "victim" to describe the former rape accuser who recanted her claim in "Prosecutors drop rape charges against man," August 27.
A man spent four months in prison based on the say-so of a child for alleged sex acts that occurred a decade ago. She has now recanted, and the charges have been dropped. Yet your news report refers to her as "the victim."
Language matters. By labeling her the "victim" when the prosecutor has determined there is insufficient evidence to proceed to trial, much less obtain an adjudication of guilt, you have implicitly declared her allegation to be factual, and the former accused to be a "rapist." Such a description does a grave disservice to (1) the presumed innocent man who is no longer subject to rape charges since, by necessity, he "must" be guilty-in-fact if The Morning Call labels his accuser a "victim"; (2) actual rape victims, because you trivialize rape when you include among its victims women and girls who have recanted and are likely, or at least may be, false accusers; and (3) your readers, who are entitled to accurate reporting but receive something less than that when you transform a former accuser into a "victim."
It is well to note that the U.S. Supreme Court last year in Kennedy v. Louisiana recognized "[t]he problem of unreliable, induced, and even imagined child testimony" in child rape cases. The Court noted: "Studies conclude that children are highly susceptible to suggestive questioning techniques like repetition, guided imagery, and selective reinforcement." It also bears noting that every objective study ever conducted on false rape claims in general shows that they are a significant problem. Every single one, with apologies to rape counselors who continue to call false rape claims "a myth" and to cite a two percent statistic that has been thoroughly debunked in the law reviews and by everyone who has examined the issue.
The only fair manner of reporting on these cases is to refer to recanting accusers as exactly what they are: recanting accusers.
I implore you to exercise greater care in reporting on such stories, and to show sensitivity to the presumed innocent and their families, by not suggesting that when rape charges are dropped that depend on the say-so of a child, the former accused, the presumed innocent, evaded justice.
Thank you.
Pierce Harlan
False Rape Society
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
Naming him again is another vicious personal attack. That should flat-out be illegal. Innocent men need to be protected from morons like this.
The "victim" is The Victim no matter what the truth says! This article is called "kicking him in the balls one last time."
Anon, right. And the D.A. hides behind "beyond a reasonable doubt" as the reason they won't prosecute. The implication there is that the little girl MUST be telling the truth, but the rapist gets away with it because of our criminal system.
Here is one of the reasons why people don't care about false accusations: http://www.newsweek.com/id/213575/page/2 This article is about how we have become a culture of liars, in which most kids grow up cheating on tests and the adults routinely get ahead through their dishonesty.
The reasons why people don't care about false accusations are:
1/ Because most people are liars, and think there is nothing wrong with lying
2/ Because most people mistakenly think that they can tell when they are being lied to -- and they can't!
Thanks for writing the letter Pierce.
In the land of the broken patriarchy..the only thing that is left is violence / lying /crime!!
That's why we must take a stand against those things.
Speaking of name and shame, is there a site that logs the names of sleazy DAs like this one, some kind of a "Nifong File"?
Speaking of name and shame, is there a site that logs the names of sleazy DAs like this one, some kind of a "Nifong File"?
A Nifong database? Not a bad idea. A false accuser database also wouldn't be bad.
To think most people do not think a child can lie about such a thing.
This case represents another danger to ALL adult males. A child can claim you had sex with them ( this ,as we all should know, isn't the only thing a child can lie about) and you are going to go through unimaginable hell. I seriously believe this man will never feel safe or secure around any child for the rest of his life.
I think we should wonder where this girl,at that age, learned to tell such a lie.
It reminds me of this thread;
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2009/08/where-does-males-as-predators.html
Post a Comment