3 false rape claims = 4 months in jail. Nice to know how much a person's reputation and future are worth to the courts.
At least the judge recognized the effects on those falsely accused. A civil suit should definately be in the works.
Emma Wallace cries rape falsely 3 times
A judge told a nursery assistant who falsely cried rape three times she had to be jailed for four months because she made genuine sex attack victims look like liars.
Emma Wallace, 25, claimed that David Spencer, a chef, raped her on two occasions in a bizarre attempt to 'seek attention' from her two lovers.
She also claimed a friend of hers, Samantha Raines, had 'procured' her for the rape - and threatened her with a knife if she went to police.
Mr Spencer, in his twenties, had the threat of prosecution hanging over his head for three months and was said to be 'devastated' by the allegations.
But he was cleared after it was shown he was working hundreds of miles away in Tetbury Gloucester, at the time of her story.
Judge Emma Guggenheim QC, sentencing Wallace at Isleworth Crown Court, said she had no choice but to send her to jail.
'Apart from the consequences to the accused man, every false allegation of rape increases the plight of poor women victims of this dreadful crime.
'It makes the offence difficult to prove and a jury may find itself insufficiently sure.'
She added: 'It causes such harm to not only the accused person but to all genuine victims of rape.'
Wallace wiped tears from her eyes during the sentence, as did her mother watching from the public gallery.
Wallace launched her smear campaign after a heavy drinking session at the Castle pub in Chertsey, Surrey, on June 15 last year.
After an argument with one of her lovers, Chris Hatchett, 44, a married man, Wallace told two friends in the car park she had been raped.
While 'crying and hysterical' she contacted another of her boyfriends, Adam Gibbons, to drive her to a police station.
At 2am and while still drunk she made the false claims she was raped on May 18 by Mr Spencer, on May 30 by an unknown man, and on June 8, by Mr Spencer again.
Police interviewed her again the following day when she had sobered up. She maintained the story until October 5 this year - the day she was about to stand trial.
She said the rape with the unknown man took place at Miss Raines' Isleworth flat, and with Mr Spencer at unknown addresses in the same area.
Her account unravelled after Mr Spencer was interviewed under caution and was able to provide his alibi for the dates of the alleged attacks.
Mr Spencer told police he had met Wallace 'three or four times' - and they had not hit it off as she had been 'abusive' toward him.
He was written to by police three months after the original allegation he was no longer a suspect.
On January 22 this year Wallace was invited to reconsider her account and told she would be let off with a police caution if she owned up - but she insisted her account was true and she was arrested.
Her account was lent support from Gibbons - who told police that on one occasion he had seen Miss Raines threaten Wallace with a knife.
But Gibbons - who had slept with Wallace just once - later admitted he had lied on her behalf as he 'thought it would strengthen their relationship'.
Gibbons was released with a police caution for attempting to pervert the course of justice.
On the day she was due to stand trial - October 5 this year - Wallace confessed to three counts of perverting the course of justice - one for each false rape charge.
Describing how Miss Raines was dragged into the case, Anthony Heaton Armstrong, prosecuting, said: 'She alleged Sam procured her as a rape victim.'
The prosecution told how, on one occasion, Sam threatened her with a knife so that she didn't go to the police to allege rape.
Mr Heaton Armstrong said that police were initially sceptical about Wallace's account which was 'maliciously motivated'.
But he said: 'Police do not lightly doubt a woman who comes to them with such a complaint.'
Andrew Turton, defending, said Wallace of Chertsey, had suffered depression from her parents divorcing. He said she would lose her nursery job she had held for the past three years as a result of the conviction.
Mr Turton in mitigation said: 'She can at times be gullible and naive, not necessarily bad things, but she is attention seeking and can be prone to exaggeration.
'These are character traits that must have relevance in mattters before the court today.'
Witnesses interviewed by police said Wallace was prone to fantasy - including lying that she had two children, and telling a friend that a previous boyfriend of hers had an affair with her mother.
Miss Raines said that on the night in June of one of the alleged rapes, she had seen her former friend 'making advances to a man buying a kebab' and instead of spending the night with Mr Spencer, went off with Gibbons.
Speaking after the case, Detective Constable Gavin Boult said: 'These complaints have had a devastating effect on the two people falsely accused by Miss Wallace.
'The threat of being prosecuted hung over their heads for months.'
Thanks to slwerner for the tip.
Link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1225823/Nursery-assistant-cried-rape-times-jailed.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I agree, it is not enough.
Nor should she have been offered a Police caution (which is in fact a conviction that stays on file for life)
However, since the 29th October 2009 ruling in the Appeal Court, at least we do have MANDATORY jail sentences for false rape accusers.
4 months isn't much, 4 years would be better, but the fact is even 4 days in prison for "perverting the course of justice" is a MASSIVE black mark against your name that you will take to the grave.
Even 4 days in prison for "perverting the course of justice" is still an absolute vindication and proof of innocence for the falsely accused.
Even 4 days in prison hands the falsely accused an un-losable open and shut civil case against the false rape accuser for damages and defamation.
Even 4 days in prison gets these lying bitches named and shamed in the national press. Which raises awareness.
------------------
On a slightly separate issue, many of the judges in these cases are talking about "Apart from the consequences to the accused man, every false allegation of rape increases the plight of poor women victims of this dreadful crime."
Don't knock it, these are Judges, stating publicly and officially that the sheer number of false rape accusations makes it harder to convince a jury in the case of real rapes.
It is all grist to the mill.
Most importantly, what the Judge is also saying (if you read between the lines, which you HAVE to do with Judges) is that the sheer number of false rape accusations makes it harder to convince a jury in the case of another false rape accusation.
This is GOOD news for the falsely accused who end up going all the way to trial.
Defence can stand there and read out a litany of convicted and imprisoned false rape accusers for the UK in the past year, and nobody can shout "objection", because the Judges themselves have included this fact in so many judgements recently.
----------------------
There is no way Emma Wallace, or any of these imprisoned false rape accusers, can EVER put a shine on the fact that they were sent to prison for perverting the course of justice, e.g. LYING.
It is a CRIMINAL OFFENCE for Emma Wallace to fail to tell anyone of this conviction and prison sentence, every single job she will ever apply for, she has to tell them in writing on the application form by law...
... even if someone was stupid enough to employ her, her history would be all over the company before she started, and all the men could legally refuse to work with her and still get full pay. Company has a duty of care etc.
Emma Wallace is never going to get a visa to go the US, or NZ, etc etc etc.
Emma Wallace is going to find out that her name is now a rash across the Police National Computer network, and every time her name comes up, can even be ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) of a car registered in her name, or phoning police, or being stopped by police, or being questioned by police as a witness to some other incident, every single time, the screen is going to light it with IMPRISONED - PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE (FALSE RAPE CLAIM)
So, please, there is *much* to applaud in the way the UK is going with this.
Sure, it's not perfect, and sure, 4 years would have been better, but even so, it is getting there.
I'm sure many of the American readers would dearly love their FRA to get even 4 days jail time, in preference to what they actually have right now as victims.
AfOR
AfOR - "Even 4 days..."
A very well reasoned enumeration of the positives here. Nicely done!
Despite what you've had to endure to get to this point, AfOR, you've become a bit of an expert of the English laws in this legal arena, and you are now educating the rest of us. I beleive I am echoing the feelings of our hosts here on this forum when a say, "Thank you so much for doing so".
Seconded Slwerner,
AFOR,
If and when your situation is cleared up, I certainly would like to recommend you start blogging in this arena. You, as does slwerner, make concise, easily understood points, and would do well.
I was lucky, in many, many, many ways.
I was lucky to have a good education.
I was lucky to have enough time on this planet to have a good clean(ish)history.
I was lucky to make (police) bail.
When you put all this together, you realise that the only practical, workable, effective approach to the challenge that you face is the systematic and logical one.
NB I am talking real life here, not the edited and oblique stuff that I feel able to post, however anonymously, online, while the case itself is ongoing.
Taking anything other than a systematic and logical approach is literally playing reverse russian roulette with your future.
(reverse russian roulette is 5 chambers loaded, 1 chamber empty)
The greatest challenge BY FAR is the fact that when the shit hits the fan you have precisely zero experience of how the police and court system works.
In any other venture, say going big game hunting, that sort of ignorance is usually fatal, but being the victim of a false rape accusation is not something you choose.
I *strongly* suspect that the greatest thing going for most accused is *exactly* the same thing as in my case, your accuser probably suffers from an (undiagnosed) Cluster B Personality Disorder.
This is your accusers greatest weakness, and therefore your ideal target.
DO NOT expect the police or courts to target this, they do not have the same goals as you do.
DO NOT expect your legal team to share your goals either, they won't share a cell with you.
Bottom line is YOUR future is in YOUR hands, and that means you have no choice put to take control, and since you are by definition diving into a field in which you know nothing, your only possible approach is being SYSTEMATIC and LOGICAL.
Pierce, check your email shortly please.
AfOR
Slewrner
A very well reasoned enumeration of the positives here. Nicely done!
Q. What does even a 4 day jail sentence for your FRA get you?
Conversation in a bat between a FA (falsely accused) and JS (Joe(anne) Sixpack)
FA Yeah, so anything, I was totally innocent of everything she accused me of.
JS Uh-huh, isn't that kinds your word against hers/
FA What are you trying to say?
JS nothing, just that people will think there is no smoke without fire, you know?
FA the bitch got jail time for lying.
JS Oh! You didn't say that! That's different! You poor bastard!
FA Yeah.
JS Hey, let me buy you a drink.
----------------
Those 4 days in jail get you the last 4 sentences in that conversation.
AfOR
Thanks for the posts AfoR.
Being in Australia a lot of similar laws and practises are used across between the two countries. So at very least this is incredibly useful information for self protection.
Thanks again.
Post a Comment