Here's an update to a story we've previously reported here, and here, and here. A woman who found religion and who confessed that her rape lie sent an innocent man to prison for four years has been indicted. This is welcome news.
While the young man might not be free without the recantation, there needs to be some punishment for allowing him to rot in prison for four years in order to deter other false accusers. A principal reason women are apt to make false rape claims so freely is because they are rarely punished for them. In order to stop women from telling rape lies in the first place, we need to deter the falsehoods before they occur. After all, we believe in deterrence for every other serious crime, why should making a false rape report be any different?
We must not allow men's liberty to rest on whether women, in their sole and unilateral discretion, deign to free them from the rape lie torture by recanting. If we deter women in the first place, we would not need to rely so heavily on recantations. As we've said previously, an early recantation, before a man or boy is targeted, should be given a less serious punishment, to reward early recantations. But even there some punishment must be given or we will not deter rape lies.
HERE IS THE NEWS REPORT:
Rape-lie indict
False accuser sent man to prison
A grand jury has voted to indict a woman whose lies about being "raped" sent an innocent man to prison for four years, The Post has learned.
The perjury indictment against Biurny Peguero Gonzalez will be unsealed today at her arraignment hearing in Manhattan Supreme Court, according to a knowledgeable source.
Gonzalez was 22 years old in 2005, when she told cops she'd been gang-raped at knifepoint by carpenter William McCaffrey and two of his friends in upper Manhattan.
But in March, she admitted the story was just a hoax, crafted after her friends got angry at her for leaving them and hanging out with the three men.
The married mother of two came forward despite the consequences for her young family, because "every night she would cry, and she was not at peace with herself" over what she'd done, Assistant District Attorney Evan Krutoy wrote in court filings concerning the McCaffrey dismissal.
Gonzales first confessed her lies to a priest in Union City, NJ, who then urged her to contact authorities.
McCaffrey, meanwhile, had pursued his own path to freedom while serving a 20-year prison term, arguing that bite marks on her arm -- which Gonzales had blamed on McCaffrey -- could not have been made by him, a claim borne out by new DNA evidence.
The carpenter has been free on bail, thanks to the new evidence, since Sept. 1. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Richard Carruthers has set Thursday as the day he will formally toss McCaffrey's indictment and conviction.
Link: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/rape_lie_indict_bi2oQ44Bb7NoYfuwQJLFwO#ixzz0Z0cwLGUa
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
"But in March, she admitted the story was just a hoax, crafted after her friends got angry at her for leaving them and hanging out with the three men."
Jesus.
Some women - and I am careful to emphasise SOME - are more childish than actual children.
20 years Joliet and Sex Offenders register for life.
AfOR
Right, Snark. From what I can tell, it is a small percentage. Given how easy it is to lie about rape and how there is so little deterrence for false rape claims, I often marvel that there aren't a hell of a lot more false claims. I think this speaks to the basic decency of MOST people.
About Damned Time!!!
How long does it take to get an indictment against a man who they think might have committed a crime?
Good stuff the way the press soft-pedals parts of this story:
"Gonzales first confessed her lies to a priest in Union City, NJ, who then urged her to contact authorities."
I've heard from other usually reliable sources that Gonzales only went to her priest to confess with the idea that she would only have to do some small penitence to be absolved of her guilt, as was completely taken aback when the priest told her she needed to tell the authorities.
According to those source (and, yes, it was several independent sources), she initially refused to do so, and continued to do so despite his pleading with her.
It was only because he told her that if she would not, he felt that he would have to do so himself (at peril to himself for breaking confidence), and advised her that she should see a lawyer, that she did finally come forward.
Even then her demand (via her lawyer) was for her complete immunity in exchange for her cooperation.
Sadly, but not terribly surprisingly, the DA's office which had convicted McCaffrey went on the offense to cover their own *sses - refusing to accept that both her confession and DNA evidence (not to mention the women who had been the one that bit Gonzalez also stating that she had done so - the reason why it was her DNA found in the bite) were actually proof that they had convicted an innocent man.
It took from March until September to get McCaffrey out of prison, only only out on bond - not exonerated until now.
So, while the press goes to some lengths to point out the agony Gonzalez suffered, they completely fail to note several key things: she didn't really want to confess in a way that would exonerate the innocent man she sent to PRISON, she was way more concerned about not getting into any trouble herself than she was for the plight of an innocent man, she could have (as I have oftern ranted about) put an end to teh injustice anywhere along the way, and finally (and, most significantly), that her "plight" in suffering from a guilty conscience paled in comparison to what William McCaffrey faced in a long sentence in prison.
I'm sorry to rant so much, given the apparent victory here, but this soft-pedaling of EVIL meted out by Biurny Peguero Gonzalez id flat-out BS, IMHO.
Also, sorry for all the typo's. I tend to make a lot of them when I'm pissed off.
Excellent, slwerner.
To repeat the comparison I often make: a 16-year-old boy once was convicted by a jury of a felony after he delayed withdrawing from intercourse that started out consensually for five to ten seconds (that time frame was from the mouth of the accuser herself) after the accuser told him to withdraw.
Compare that FIVE SECOND misconduct with this FOUR YEAR misconduct. This woman had it within her power to release this man from his hell at any point in time (ideally, she shouldn't have lied to start with) but didn't do it.
And which misconduct was worse? By any measure? The question scarcely survives its statement.
Yet she's only now indicted?
slwerner,
I think I can speak for us all when I say, make as many typo's as you want. Even when angry, you ALWAYS make excellent points, and speaking personally, thank you for doing so.
Excellent stuff slwerner, thanks for sharing.
----------------------------
"Compare that FIVE SECOND misconduct with this FOUR YEAR misconduct."
In-fucking-deed.
Give me the choice of five seconds of sex that was once consensual but I then decided is not, or four years in prison as a 'rapist', and I will take the """rape""" every time.
This case also shows how all you need is a woman's word to put you in prison!
Keep in mind that no rape even occurred and he gets 20 years!
It is a frightening case. It contains most of the things that are wrong when it comes to false rape claims.
This story is enough to make a man stay celibate for life.
She should have to register as a sex offender for life.
As a Christian woman, I'm sure she sees how right it is that she should be punished, and that she should bear her punishment with humility.
I say test her humility to the limit, and may she get her reward in heaven.
"I say test her humility to the limit, and may she get her reward in heaven."
God rewards those who commit perjury. Yeah right. She'll have to answer to God for this.
The Archivist said...
slwerner,
I think I can speak for us all when I say, make as many typo's as you want. Even when angry, you ALWAYS make excellent points, and speaking personally, thank you for doing so.
Dec 7, 2009 11:34:00 AM
I second this.
I posted this story along with all links on the blogospehere to see what reaction(s), if any, the general public has to say about this injustice that was allowed to happen. I don't expect to get any reactions but, still there it is for the whole world to read.
I wonder what all of those chivalrous "eye for an eye" types think if they have read about this.
Anon,
We see it regularly. Suddenly, it will be:
"Well, two wrongs don't make a right", or "She has suffered enough" (WHAT? how has she suffered?).
Any way it falls, they will come up with excuses as to why she shouldn't be punished. Hypocrites.
Post a Comment