Wow! The headline for this post -- shocking and true -- is from from Barbara C. Johnson's book, "Behind the Black Robes: Failed Justice" (2009). She says we are living in the Age of Feminist Hysteria and Feminine Rebellion, and, of course, she is right. She correctly notes that being sorry or angry after a night of passion is not rape.
Here are some excerpts from her book, at pages 128-29: "But as bad as rape is, and whatever the cause, it is not as bad as an innocent man being sent to jail for 20 years for a crime he did not commit. Unfortunately, false and mistaken accusations of rape are not uncommon. . . . .
"Despite these high false-accusation rate figures, men are often assumed to be guilty on the basis of a simple accusation of a woman. A man who attempts to defend himself is often prevented from doing so by rape shield laws, which prevent him from presenting exculpatory evidence. Even worse, as some well-publicized cases have shown, women who knowingly make false accusations of rape are not prosecuted. Essentially, they are given a free pass for committing a crime.
"The result is that the credibility of real rape victims is destroyed. Since the rate of false rape accusations is so high, and since false accusations are not prosecuted, women are essentially encouraged to make false accusations of rape for political reasons, and the public has no way of knowing whether a rape accusation is real or not.
"Court reform should include the following two initiatives with regard to rape: Additional protections for men, to allow an adequate defense against false charges of rape. Prosecution of women who, knowingly and maliciously, make false charges of rape"
______________________________________
Ms. Johnson's book touches on a variety of subjects. Among other things, she labels college hearings on date rape allegations "Kangaroo courts" where young men are deprived of legal representation. She is absolutely correct. She concludes: "Emotionally, these hearings and the hysteria of society are putting young men in a position where they are afraid to trust young women."
Ms. Johnson, you are extremely perceptive to pick up on the trust issue. I know this for a fact from my legal practice and my work here at False Rape Society.
What a frightening picture Ms. Johnson paints. Frightening, because it is completely accurate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
This one is interesting, too: http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20090830/NEWS01/908300323
A wife falsely charges her husband with abuse -- only to find herself charged with the same, and with filing a false report! Occasionally they get one right.
And of course women have been encouraged to make false rape accusations for feminist political purposes for decades. This is nothing new. They want those rape statistics inflated as high as possible. Rape rates are very low these days, and that's a problem for the sisterhood.
Some areas of the country are more "gender feminist" dominated than others.
Areas that are more "gender feminist" dominated; that have more faulty and inflammatory agitation propaganda; these are also the same areas with more anti-male legal perversions.
Letting and enabling women and girls to make false accusations to law enforcement...is a perversion.
The only part I don't understand is 'Feminine Rebellion'. What is there for women to rebel against? Ladies, there are no barriers unless you yourself put them there.
In fact, it is men who should be rebelling.
Anonymous said...
This one is interesting, too: http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20090830/NEWS01/908300323
A wife falsely charges her husband with abuse -- only to find herself charged with the same, and with filing a false report! Occasionally they get one right.
Thank you Anon. Ihave said it before, sexual crimes are not the only crimes women and girls can rail false accusations against men and boys.
The arsenal of things a man or boys can be accused of is very broad, virtually endless.
Anonymous said...
Some areas of the country are more "gender feminist" dominated than others.
Such as Tennessee; a part of the traditionally chivalrous south. A state where a woman's or girls's word is considered as infallable "gold". A state you describe in your next statement
" Areas that are more "gender feminist" dominated; that have more faulty and inflammatory agitation propaganda; these are also the same areas with more anti-male legal perversions.
Letting and enabling women and girls to make false accusations to law enforcement...is a perversion. "
" Tennessee,a woman's state "
"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated." -- Catherine MacKinnon
A liar and her pretense?
"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated." -- Catherine MacKinnon
A liar and her pretense?
Scott says.. And it becomes a perversion...when it becomes part of the law enforcement establishment.
As someone who was falselly acussed of a rape ...that simply never happened, and almost beat to death over it...AND THE GIRL WAS NEVER CHARGED!!!
IM VERY GRATEFUL FOR THIS WEB SITE THAT GIVES ME A VOICE...IN AN AGE WHERE THE GENDER FEMINIST ESTABLISHMENT WANTS TO TAKE MY VOICE AWAY!!
Scott, you know you always have a voice here. The women who control the public discourse about rape might claim you and your ordeal were myths but we know otherwise. And the attorney who authored the book cited in our post knows otherwise, too.
" .... being sorry or angry after a night of passion is not rape."
But that's not the issue. Having been "raped" is the issue.
" .... as bad as rape is, and whatever the cause, it is not as bad as an innocent man being sent to jail for 20 years for a crime he did not commit."
How can she compare one crime to the other, unless she has been both a victim of rape and a victim of a false accusation?
Besides, what's the "conviction rate" of men accused of rape? A very low percentage I would imagine, considering how widespread the problem of rape continues to reek havoc on women in our society.
You mentioned college hysteria. Don't you know that college has long been a breeding ground for rapists?
Anon-Thurs
"Besides, what's the "conviction rate" of men accused of rape? A very low percentage I would imagine...."
Prove it.
Your question should be: What's the "conviction rate" of women falsely accusing a man of rape? A very low percentage I would imagine....
The conviction rate of those who go to trial is one thing, the overall conviction rate another. The vast majority of criminal cases in the US are settled by plea bargain. If you are facing a possible 25 year sentence for something you didn't do and are offered a year or two instead -- much of which you may have already served -- it certainly isn't impossible that you would take the deal. Some people would go to trial no matter what, of course.
And no, not every person who is found not guilty really is not guilty, but then again, not everyone who is convicted is really guilty, either. And just by charging a man with a crime you have already ruined his life and consigned him to second class citizen status. He will never work for a major employer again, most likely.
Your question should be: What's the "conviction rate" of women falsely accusing a man of rape? A very low percentage I would imagine....
Women are almost never charged when they are caught lying about a rape. The authorities don't want to "send the wrong message" that vaginas can lie, too.
Anon...you mention that law enforcement do not charge false rape acussers.."BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO SEND THE WRONG MESSAGE".
I SAY...When did law enforcement get out of law enforcement..and into the "message sending" business???
And now that they are in the "message sending" business...why are they sending faulty and inflammatory misinformation as.... "messages"??
why are they sending faulty and inflammatory misinformation as.... "messages"??
Because of the influence of feminism, and the tabloidization of our media, and a general loss of respect for the rights and principles this country was founded upon.
"" .... being sorry or angry after a night of passion is not rape.""
anon 'responds',
"But that's not the issue. Having been "raped" is the issue."
What are you talking about? In the above, you are assuming what is at issue. Your statement isn't even wrong - it simply does not address the portion of the comment you quoted.
You mentioned college hysteria. Don't you know that college has long been a breeding ground for rapists?
Anon-Thurs
No, I didn't "know" that. I did know that colleges have long been breeding grounds for feminists and other extremists who are out to warp our society.
" .... being sorry or angry after a night of passion is not rape."
But that's not the issue. Having been "raped" is the issue.
Or NOT having been "raped." You win the MRA bonus round for putting "raped" in quotes.
"But that's not the issue. Having been "raped" is the issue. Or NOT having been "raped."
Do you even know what the fuck you are talking about? Seriously? We're talking about consent, genius. The author the book is an attorney who's been in the trenches. Consent is not based on the female's secret, subjective desires, whims, wants, or belated, ex post facto, after-the-fact regrets. It's based on her outward manifestations of assent. THAT's the point, dumbell.
You win the radical feminist prize for idiocy, and that's saying a lot.
No, it isn't "outward assent." Consent means that she didn't tell him to stop, not that she gave a five hundred word speech welcoming him into her vagina. Consent is often very obvious during a romantic encounter, and words are not necessarily exchanged.
We can't have a system in which women can retroactively claim to have been raped even though they never attempted to end the sex, based on nothing but personal regret over the experience.
And of course, they dont actually have to make a false accusation, just knowing it may happen is enough to make a lot of male politicians wimp out and give them what they want.
Yes, anon, it is outward manifestations of consent. Kindly do not presume to lecture me on the law. I know this area very well.
Anonymous said...
The vast majority of criminal cases in the US are settled by plea bargain. If you are facing a possible 25 year sentence for something you didn't do and are offered a year or two instead -- much of which you may have already served -- it certainly isn't impossible that you would take the deal.
Based on what I have read and overheard,this is true. IMHO,and in my case, accepting a plea bargain is the only way to avoid losing everything you own. I think many prosecutors know this. There is also the fatigue of being stuck in a jail cell until the proscutor and the state feel like taking the case to trial. In the state of Tennessee most citizens are forced to wait up to two years in jail before their cases go to trial. Unless they can afford,or have someone who can afford to bond/bail them out. Many citizens are unable to afford a private attorney and must rely on a public defender or an attorney appointed by the court/state. I will simply say you get what you pay for. Public defenders have an evergrowing caseload and feel compelled to do what it trakes to ease the caseload. This,from what I have learned, is why many coerce their clients to accept plea bargains. I found a pretty good argument against plea bargains.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv26n3/v26n3-7.pdf
There is this
http://www.lawmall.com/pleabarg/
Some people would go to trial no matter what, of course. For most,if not all, it is the only way they have to keep from losing everything they own. Imagine waiting and going to trial. You are ,in the slim chance, found not guilty. You leave the courthouse,after being in jail for at least a year or two, where would you go if you lost your home? You lost your job. You are broke. You have been "cleared: but, you still have an arrest record. What would you do? This is what at least some rightfully and falsely accused people(mostly men) go through. Even though they have been "cleared", their lives are destroyed. In my case ,though I wasn't falsely accused of any sexual crime (except indecent exposure to a minor[which, if the child's parents/relative knew this had happened as they claimed, they would have sought a warrant and had it investigated,instead they allowed the state of Tennessee to seek a conviction against me all on a criminal woman's claim that I waved a gun at her. The gun ,which never existed, never materialized]). That is correct, a woman falsely accused me of waving a gun at her, while knowing no gun ever existed. You might ask "how could they arrest and hold someone in jail when there is no evidence of a crime occuring, just the word of one against the other"? It is simple. She knew exactly what to accuse me of, a crime that is a violation of VAWA. As I have said before, rape and other sexual crimes are not the only crimes a man can be falsely accused of and have his life destroyed. I lost not only most of everything I owned but, lost a very promising career in the U.S. Army. I do have to say, if there were really a gun that existed, the investigators would have found it or, my twin brother would have presented it to them. He has the habit of rummaging through my things. You might be thinking (sorry to get off topic) you could have hidden the gun where it would never be found. I must admit if I had a gun and managed to hide it well I ,seeing as I am still very upset, would have recovered it and used it by now. If someone lied and cost you almost everything you had, wouldn't you seek revenge? It is completely logical, the state and it's henchpeople knew the woman was full of shit yet, they still took her word as the gospel and aided in destroying a man's life.
Archivist said...
Yes, anon, it is outward manifestations of consent. Kindly do not presume to lecture me on the law. I know this area very well.
Too bad you weren't representing me. You must have wisdom and experience beyong your years. I do mean this as a compliment.
"You win the MRA bonus round for putting "raped" in quotes."
LOL! I thought about that myself. Maybe she does have a fragement of a guilty conscience, or at least realizes the limits of her integrity.
Yes, anon, it is outward manifestations of consent. Kindly do not presume to lecture me on the law. I know this area very well.
I'll presume, and you'll like it, mister! And when did you turn into Mr. Crankypants, anyway?
The above comment is a joke, by the way. I actually don't think we're arguing about anything meaningful here; just semantics.
Are you aware that the author of this book was disbarred?
http://www.mass.gov/obcbbo/bd06-039.htm
Post a Comment