Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Jenny Thibodeaux booked with filing false reports.
DA says rape, robbery complaints were made up
JENNINGS (AP) — A Lake Arthur woman has been booked with filing false police reports and theft after she admitted to making up separate rape and armed robbery claims.
District Attorney Michael Cassidy said Tuesday that formal charges will be filed against Jenny Thibodeaux.
Cassidy said the charges resulted from Thibodeaux alleged false complaint of a rape at the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Jennings last November and an alleged false complaint of armed robbery at the Dollar General store in Lake Arthur in January.
Thibodeaux will be arraigned on the charges July 13.
Cassidy said Thibodeaux claimed she was the victim of both crimes, causing law enforcement to investigate the cases for several months.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Employee at Assisted Living Center claims resident raped another.
WHEELING - An assisted living center is suing one of its employees for allegedly spreading rumors that an older man residing at the facility raped a woman.
Weirton Health Partners filed a federal lawsuit April 14 against Gabrielle Yates.
Weirton says it lost clients after Yates began to call families of residents living at Wyngate Senior Living Community and told them a resident had raped another resident.
But Weirton contends the claims are not true.
Rumors began flying after Wyngate staff members discovered the existence of a romantic relationship between two elderly residents in June, according to the complaint.
Shortly after the discovery, Wyngate's Wellness Manager Tammy Provenzano called the daughter of the elderly female resident to inform her of the relationship, the complaint says.
"The elderly female resident's daughter indicated that she was happy that her mother had found someone whom she liked and gave her consent to permit the relationship to continue," the suit states.
When a resident assistant discovered the two elderly residents together again on Oct. 29, she reported the conduct to the nurse on duty, who separated the elderly residents and returned the female resident to her room, the complaint says.
Directly after the incident, the elderly female was asked whether she was forced to engage in any inappropriate contact with the male resident, to which she replied she was not, according to court documents.
The nurse contacted Wyngate's administrator and wellness manager to inform them of the residents' conduct. Eventually, the ombudsman and the West Virginia Office of Health Facility Licensure and Certification were also contacted, Weirton claims.
Meanwhile, on Oct. 29, Yates contacted the elderly female resident's daughter and told her that her mother was being repeatedly raped, according to the complaint. Yates continued to say that the Wyngate administration was doing nothing about the situation.
Yates repeated her allegations to employees, to families of residents living at the center and to members of the community, the suit states.
Yates's alleged rumors spread to the police department, and on Nov. 1, police showed up at Wyngate to investigate, court records indicate. But after a search, police did not press charges against the elderly man.
In November, OHFLAC also visited the center to conduct an investigation, but found insufficient evidence of sexual assault, the complaint says.
Still, the elderly woman was pulled out of the center on Nov. 1 by her daughter because of Yates's allegations, Weirton claims.
"By reason of the publication and utterance of the aforementioned defamatory statements, Plaintiff has been injured in its good name and reputation, and has been brought into disgrace and disrepute among members of the public," the suit states. "Plaintiff, as an assisted living facility, relies on his reputation and good standing in the community in order to successfully pursue its business and to secure residents."
Yates is guilty of defamation, tortious interference with a contractual relationship, casting Wyngate in a false light, intentional interference with perspective business relationships and breach of contract, according to the complaint.
In the six-count suit, Weirton is seeking a judgment in excess of $375,000 and unspecified punitive damages, plus costs.
Martin J. Saunders and Craig W. Snethon of Jackson Lewis in Pittsburgh will be representing her.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
All that changed when people started publicizing Kanin's false rape studies from the mid-90s. Kanin went from being a serious social scientist whose pronouncements were not to be questioned to a complete nitwit who had no idea how to conduct objective and impartial research.
The recent study of Liz Kelly in the UK is touted among hard-core gender feminists as Gospel. They don't bother to mention that she has a history of writing things like this: "Sexual violence includes any physical, visual, verbal or sexual act that is experienced by the woman or girl, at the time or later, as a threat, invasion or assault that has the effect of hurting her or degrading her and/or taken away her ability to control intimate contact."
Professor Kanin, on the other hand, is viewed as a traitor to the feminist cause -- because feminists don't like the results of his objective false rape studies.
Read his famous report here. It is anything but the report of a flaming MRA. If this report, written with objectivity by someone with unquestioned feminist credentials, can be attacked by gender feminists as it has been, it only underscores the vacuity of the feminist movement -- a movement that has no interest in facts that interfere with the feminist agenda.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
You see, Deborah is a living manifestation of the vacuity, the downright falsity of the feminist mantra that rape claims should not be viewed with suspicion because it deters some women from reporting rape.
According to the news story: When Deborah was "arrested for perverting the course of justice the 35-year-old brazenly said: 'That's why women don't report rape.' But having maintained her innocence during four interviews, she then admitted her lies when confronted with all the flaws in her story and claimed she did it because she 'wanted some attention.'"
Read it again. Savor it. Celebrate the irony. A false rape accuser is parroting the feminist mantra that when police question the veracity of a rape accuser and find it wanting, that deters real rape claimants from "coming forward."
Deborah is living proof that the mantra is typical gender feminist bullshit, concocted out of a loathing for approximately one-half the population of planet earth.
Deborah is living proof that the opposite of the mantra must be applied -- police must question the veracity of a women's complaint of rape, and that if they fail to consider the possibility that she may be intentionally lying, they aren't doing their job.
Deborah is living proof that when the mantra is applied in the real world, there is a real possibility that criminals, like Deborah, will get away with their crimes.
And actual rape victims should be outraged by the fact that people like Deborah arrogate unto themselves the mantle of victimhood -- a mantle that feminists insanely want to use to cover every woman who cries rape, instead of just every woman who actually is raped.
And therein, ladies and gentlemen, lies the problem.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Lorraine Rothwell missing after restriction of liberty order imposed.
A WOMAN who made false rape allegations against a neighbour has gone missing from her Perth home.
Police officers are "growing increasingly concerned for the welfare" of Lorraine Rothwell. The 45-year-old has been missing from her home in the Bridgend area since around 9.45pm on Thursday.
Earlier this year Mrs Rothwell appeared in court after she falsely claimed neighbour Alexander Green had forced himself upon her and had sex without her consent.
Perth Sheriff Court heard Mark Rothwell had suspected his wife was having an affair with Mr Green after she spent a night in his flat downstairs.
In a row with her husband she admitted she had kissed their married neighbour, before claiming she had been raped.Officers from Tayside Police visited the couple's flat in Dunkeld Road and were told about the allegations.
She maintained the lie for two days before conceding it was not true.
A restriction of liberty order was imposed when Mrs Rothwell appeared for sentencing on January 7.
She admitted a charge of wasting police time by making a false allegation of rape on November 5.
Tayside Police said Mrs Rothwell may have been in Perth town centre shortly after her disappearance. Officers are urging her to contact the force directly to confirm she is safe and well.
Mrs Rothwell is 5ft 2in and slim with blue eyes and long blonde hair. She was last seen wearing a black waist-length jacket, grey jeans and black boots, and was carrying a black handbag.
Anyone who has seen Mrs Rothwell or has information that could assist police inquiries should call officers on 0300 111 2222.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
A college admissions examiner recently said this: "Colleges are trying desperately to maintain gender balance on campus, and that means turning down female applicants who are far more qualified than the males who get accepted. There are many theories floating around about why girls are better students, why their dropout rates are lower, and why they are applying to college at a higher rate than boys. But whatever the reason(s), the result is 'gender balancing' that makes it harder for highly qualified girls to get into college than their less qualified male counterparts. If you’re male and getting ready to go to college, or you’re male and want to be part of the affirmative action/legacy discussion, take a breather."
This is consistent with Audrey Kahane's take on the gender divide in higher education earlier this year: "To avoid ending up with a campus that is 75 percent female, admissions officers at a number of schools are practicing affirmative action for men. Men are admitted if they are qualified, but women need to be more qualified and have a 'hook' to set them apart."
I don't know if these authors intended us to be outraged by these revelations or merely startled. I suspect they are simply beating the feminist tom-tom to highlight yet another area where females supposedly are "victimized."
At this moment in our history, boys need more help when it comes to education than girls, period. That is a fact beyond dispute, despite the spin often put on the issue by financially interested radical feminists who refuse to acknowledge that there is no female monopoly on victimization.
Heaven knows there are a cavalcade of programs promulgated over the past several decades affording females special treatment in areas where it is felt they are held back by their gender. Why should this be different? Or do we subscribe to cafeteria-style affirmative action -- where the only boost is for women and racial minorities, and the minute white boys need a boost they are told to go to hell?
There are plenty of people who think this affirmative action is somehow different, and that it's a bad idea -- because, they surmise, it somehow will hurt girls. To hell with the boys, is their implicit message. Boys do not belong to an "historically disadvantaged class." (A topic for another time.)
In fact, helping the boys keep up with the girls won't hurt the girls. It seems to have escaped the the notice of the gender-divisive matriarchs who view the world through a simplistic male/female lens and who are intent on girls "winning" the gender war at all costs, the genders are so terribly interwoven that when one falls behind, we all fall behind. In the college setting, it is young women who want a significant portion of the student body to be male for social reasons, and this -- truth be told -- is probably the reason for this affirmative action push.
In any event, something is going on with males that is holding them back when it comes to higher education.
Is it the feminization of our educational system from the earliest grades, where boys exhibiting typically rambunctious male behavior are punished and drugged with Ritalin?
Is it that the push to get girls to do better in school has worked so well we've completely ignored the boys?
Is it that guys find the college setting pointless, with a multitude of courses that don't play any real role in acquiring skills needed to earn a living -- a fact more obvious to young men than young women given that the former are still told they must be the "breadwinner"?
Is it that the guys find the college setting downright inhospitable, with sexual assault indoctrination that paints their entire gender as predatory, and with women's studies programs teaching students that men are the primary exponents and beneficiaries of an evil system that oppresses women?
Maybe it's a combination of all these things?
Regardless, isn't it a shame that when young guys are the ones now getting a little bit of help -- because they need it -- the first reaction of a lot of supposedly enlightened people is to be outraged?
And there are those who say that false rape reports are a myth.
Even with three false reports, not a single name is published of the false accusers.
It appears that they were filed to:
1. Make a boyfriend feel guilty.
2. Keep family from finding out she had pawned jewelry.
3. Isn't stated, but based on the information, it was likely consensual, but alcohol played a part and she wasn't too clear on what happened.
Great reasons to make a claim that could land someone behind bars for years, if not the rest of his life. At some point, all women are going to have to accept the responsibility that goes with having equal rights. Until that time, most rape reports are going to be looked upon with a jaundiced eye by many people.
3 false rape reports in one week.
Three young women have been charged with reporting false sex attacks in three separate cases in the city of Malaga.
In the first incident, a 20-year-old woman reported an attack to the police on May 8th. According to her statement, she had been walking home in the early hours of the morning when three men forced her into a car and assaulted her. After the police had started an investigation, the alleged victim admitted that she had made the story up because her boyfriend had refused to accompany her home.
The second false report was made in the city centre five days later when a young woman told police that she had been jumped by two black men as she walked along the street. She claimed that her attackers had forced her into an empty house, tied her up and raped her at knifepoint before stealing her jewellery and making off. Once at the police station, officers discovered that the whole story had been invented and that the woman had in fact pawned her jewellery because she needed money, but didn't want her family to find out.
Last Saturday another young woman reported a sexual assault in the city and told police that she had met a man in his forties in a pub, who offered to take her home. He apparently took her to the Montes de Malaga area and assaulted her. She was later found by a cyclist in a dressing robe and apparently in a "state of shock", but once the police began an investigation, they discovered that the events had not occurred exactly as the victim had described them.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
I have often pointed out that what we do here is in no sense controversial -- except among the shrieking radical gender feminists who have arrogated to themselves the right to control the public discourse on all issues relating to rape, including false rape claims. Unfortunately, even though the vast majority of people of people are outraged by false rape claims, we have no cabal intently committed to spreading the word aside from a few of us. The other side has a militant cult of "true believers" at its disposal who have made the very idea of rape the central sacrament in their church of victimization. That is why we all need to keep speaking up to make our voice heard.
Here are the comments and the news story:
". . . . This poor boy has to live with this hanging over him for the rest of his live. He may now suffer depression, lost of confidence, mental health and hate of women. This girl should never be let off why should she get away with this? someone will come back and tell me is only 14 so what the boy is only 14/15. . . . ."
". . . any female who is proved to have lied and cried rape should be named publicly and be brought to court. The accused should be able to sue. "
"Can you imagine what that poor boy has been through. His teachers being told he was arrested for rape and no doubt the news would have spread around the playground with parents gossiping about the poor lad. Did the police follow procedure and do an examination on the girl or did they just go on her word? Three things I would like to know is 1. Why she did it? 2. Why say it was a Black kid (is she racist/does she date Black boys etc)? 3. Will the police do the decent thing and remove any records of his arrest so this does not show on an enhanced CRB check and also destroy his DNA samples? Regardless of her age she should have been prosecuted. A 14 year old girl knows exactly what she is doing... "
"Anyone found of crying rape should be named, shamed and prosecuted."
"Researchers found that the three main motivations for reporting false rape are to provide an alibi where the accuser believes she may be pregnant or has had illicit consensual sex, revenge against a partner, and a desperate attempt to seek sympathy or attention. I wonder which one it will turn out to be being a Whitley girl?????"
"What a stupid girl. The problems are endless : for both real rape victims and then for other men who have been falsely accused. Don't get me wrong, real rapists are lower than scum which is what makes stories like this make me seeth. I think TilehurstSouthBanks idea of visting real rape victims is a very good idea... but I think the PC brigade will put their foot down. Anyway I just hope the lad is ok and never got beaten up etc. for his non-crime."
"That poor boy who was arrested will have this hanging over him forever. Say he wants to be a teacher or social worker later on; this arrest will remain on his record and show up in an enhanced CRB check. This idiotic girl,and others like her whose lies cast into doubt the accounts of real victims, should have their punishment reflect the terrible impact their actions have on others lives."
"I think she should get the punishment that the man would have had to do if he had been found guilty."
"This makes it all the more difficult for genuine rape victims to be believed. This girl should be made to visit real rape victims to listen to real accounts of this most dispicable crime."
"Stupid girl ! She should be prosecuted for this."
Heavy cost of rape claim lie
By Anna Roberts June 12, 2009
A teenage girl who cried rape only to be found to be making it up has been branded an “attention seeker” by police.
Five detectives, a detective inspector, a chief inspector and medical staff investigated the ‘incident’ over six days after the 14-year-old claimed a schoolboy had attacked her in a Whitley alleyway.
According to the officer at the heart of the investigation, Detective Sergeant Mark Heybourne, scenes of crime officers visited the site of the ‘rape’ between Whitley Wood Road and Hilary Close. Police even put out an appeal to the media with a description of her ‘attacker’ and arrested the innocent lad who matched her account.
Det Sgt Heybourne has dubbed the girl, who was spared a criminal record by being given a caution, as “an attention seeker”.
He said the girl, who has not been named, had clearly spent time orchestrating a bogus tale claiming she met her ‘attacker’ at shops in Northumberland Avenue before the rape.
The schoolgirl only told her mum it was all a lie after a 15-year-old, also from Whitley, was questioned and arrested.
The boy closely matched the description she gave of the ‘offender’ as black, aged 15 to 16, around 6ft tall, as well as some other details.
The boy’s Reading school was warned of his arrest and they were forced to consider if he was a danger to other pupils – now they have been told it was all a mistake and he is entirely innocent.
DS Heybourne said Reading Police’s Major Crime team were leading the investigation. He told getreading: “She reported to her school who told us that she was raped by a stranger.
“She is 14 and she did not realise the full implications of what she was doing. We decided a caution was the best approach because we did not want to take her through the courts and her end up with a criminal record.”
However, he said the girl’s crime was too serious just to ignore. She said: “It started at school and it came to us from there. I was called into investigate how it happened.”
DS Heybourne continued: “It’s a horrible event. He [the arrested boy] is of school age himself. When he got arrested she realised we were taking it seriously and it started to get a bit out of hand.
“From my point of view a lot of time has been spent investigating this incident. It is frustrating. It is difficult enough to prosecute a genuine rape claim where the victim is telling the truth.”
Rarely do police candidly speak to reporters about the epidemic of false claims in our society. When they do, their words command our attention the way thunder does. Here is one such example.
In the case described below, the police saw through the lie. The man's murderer won't be able to forever tarnish his name with a rape lie.
Update: Male suspects in Forest Park murder turn out to be female
By Melina Ann Collison
St. Louis – Willard Bryant Payne’s body was found earlier this month in Forest Park. He was wearing nothing but tennis shoes and a pair of white shorts. Two suspects were later taken into custody.
The first reports are that these suspects were male. Upon police identification of the two it is now realized the suspected killers are female.
Mellonie Jones, 20, and Dawn Fulks, 25, were arrested June 16 in connection to the death of Payne. Payne’s death was found to be caused by a blunt force trauma to his head as reported by police.
In the beginning the women told police that Payne tried to forcibly rape one of the females. After further investigation the evidence did not corroborate the women’s claims.
Fulks, who lives in North St. Louis, was already on probation for felony abuse of a child. She was sentenced March 2009 for a abusing a child in June 2008. Fulks is serving 5 years probation for her crime. Jones has no known criminal record in St. Louis.
Police are stating that Payne, Fulks, and Jones were smoking marijuana together in Forest Park when Payne attempted to flirt with one of the women. The female rejected his advances and the other female started hitting him. Both females then chased Payne and proceeded to beat him to death before fleeing the scene.
Both Fulks and Jones are being held in jail without bond. They face charges of filing a false police report, armed criminal action, and first degree murder from the St. Louis County Attorney’s Office.
Ridge Road woman faces charges for false police report.
A 45-year-old Ridge Road woman faces charges for filing a false police report after she told officers May 28 that an acquaintance raped her in her apartment. The woman was taken to Fairview Hospital where she later admitted that no attack occurred. Police interviewed the man who said the woman offered him sex in exchange for drugs and alcohol.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Did you get that? Women are the "victors." Over men, that is. Men are losing their jobs at an unprecedented pace and these clever Pulitzer wannabes have even concocted a delightful little word that manages to pull off the seemingly impossible trick of both belittling men and trivializing the recession at the same time -- "mancession." You know, like a "manwich." Or the "manscaping" that women features writers find so fascinating, in a junior high girl kind-of-way. Or Seinfeld's "manzier."
Never mind that this talk of women's "victory" blinks at the fact that the genders are so interwoven that what hurts a man generally hurts one and usually more than one females, not to mention little males. You see, that level of nuance muddies up a perfectly good tale for the gender divisive crowd who prefer their narratives black and white with the oppressed and subjugated females coming out on top at the end.
Let us be perfectly candid: to many of these folks, the recession is payback time -- hapless and usually blue-collar men (who never heard the word "misogyny") and their collateral damage-families paying for the sins of the patriarchy; the free market's way of leveling the playing field.
But lets not assume features writers are the bottom of the barrel when it comes to capitalizing on the misfortune of men in this recession. That distinction is, of course, reserved for the radical feminists who, as usual, stand at the forefront of having no concern for the suffering of anyone born with a Y-chromosome. As reported last week: "'In times of economic crisis, when the size of a woman's paycheck is highlighted, the focus on pay equity can become more striking,'" said Julianne Malveaux, president of Bennett College for Women in North Carolina."
See? Another benefit of the "mancession" -- it can be used as an occasion to justify pay equity! Gasp! Isn't that just fabulous? (And don't get me started on the reasons for the gender pay gap -- which have essentially nothing to do with discrimination.)
And, of course, we all know about their selfish, hateful efforts to siphon substantial stimulus monies away from the group that needs them most -- men who've lost their jobs -- in an effort to create a feminist nirvana. This is akin to taking money from breast cancer research and transferring it to research for a disease that is almost non-existent and that doesn't need it, such as cancer of the penis. (But please don't get me started on the asymmetrical government funding that favors female cancers over male cancers that really do need more funding, such as prostate and testicular cancer -- that's a related, but different topic.) As one of these selfish women clucked, "We don't want this stimulus package to just create jobs for burly men."
"Burly men." Nice. You see, it's not enough to insist men's suffering doesn't deserve to be alleviated, it's also essential to demean them in the process.
Every man and boy in the world could contract a fatal disease that only strikes the Y-chromosome and features writers and radical feminists somehow would spin it to be about women. They never miss a chance to advance their agenda, especially if it means kicking men in the balls when they're down.
We will provide follow-ups regarding sentencing, when available.
Kinsport man, Joshua Morrison, filed false rape accusation.
A Kingsport man falsely reported a rape to authorities, police said.
Johnson City police said Joshua Morrison, 30, 227 W. Carters Valley Road, Kingsport, reported a rape to them Saturday. The following investigation led police to think Morrison was lying about the rape.
He was charged with filing a false police report. He was being held in the Washington County Detention Center on $5,000 bond.
His hearing was scheduled for Monday in Sessions Court.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Chilling: man's fate rests on credibility of girl who had previously recanted another rape claim and waited two years to report this 'rape'
And if she's a good little actress -- the man will go to prison for many, many years. She's certainly had experience crying "rape" in the past and might well be called an expert.
Let us be blunt: if you girls want to destroy the life of any man or a boy, just do what this girl did. Angry at your father? Did your brother make fun of you? Did your uncle slight you on your birthday? Just accuse them of rape. If it turns out you lied, you likely will be chided and nothing more. At the very least you will give them the scare of their life, probably cause them to be fired from their jobs and any number of other indignities.
The bottom line, ladies and gentlemen: the system is broken. For what other criminal allegation would we allow a grown man's fate to rest in the hands of a girl?
False accusation of rape to cover theft.
PUNE: An 18-year-old girl from Manipur was detained and later let off with a reprimand after she registered a false case of rape and theft.
The girl, who was four months pregnant and was working as a maid servant at the residence of a software engineer in Fatima Nagar, was asked to go after she tendered an apology to the police.
The family had appointed the girl last month for taking care of their infant child. Inspector Vishwas Bendhbar of the Wanowrie police station said, "The girl telephoned the couple's sister in-law to inform her that two people had raped her and had stolen two tolas of gold from the house while she was drying clothes in the balcony on May 26 at about 7.30 pm."
The family members rushed home and took the girl to the police station for registering a case of rape and theft. However, the police suspected the girl was lying since she did not appear perturbed. Besides there were no apparent marks of rape which heightened their suspicion.
The police questioned the security guard and neighbours, but all of them denied seeing any unknown person entering the building premises on the given day and time. "The girl was examined by a woman police constable in the presence of a woman family member, but no signs of rape were found," Bendhbar said.
She was later referred to the Sassoon general hospital for medical examination, but the doctor's report confirmed that the girl was not raped. However, they told the police that she was four months pregnant.
On questioning, the girl admitted her lie. She admitted of having an affair with a boy and said that she cooked up the story because she wanted to go back to Manipur with the boy and the stolen booty.
The police have recorded the girl's statement and recovered the ornaments from her. The ornaments were returned to the couple.
One of the family members told TOI that the girl will be handed over to her parents who are coming from Manipur on June 8.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
We offer no comment, except to note that we have seen some similarly sensational figures quoted in the US and especially the UK, which are simply reiterations of urban myths and are clearly fabrications, or were drafted by decidedly biased, and hence unreliable, persons. For this particular South African poll, we suspect that there is a fair amount of "bragging" by the men polled going on in this one, given the hypermasculine culture, and that it likely is not at all reliable.
But the thought has often occurred to us that if reports such as these were even partly true then a huge percentage of the male population should be jailed -- which, among other things, would destroy the economy and permanently disrupt mating patterns.
In fact, if such reports were even partly true, the conduct complained of must be considered in some sense normalized and likely would not be criminalized.
If that strikes some people as shocking, think about it: activity is classified as "criminal" by legislatures -- political bodies acting at the will of the people (or at least acting in a manner to garner sufficient votes to be reelected next time around). Pretend that 28 percent of all men actually were rapists -- the men who rape, and likely other men, too, would not want rape to be classified as a crime, and the women whose lives would be devastated if their husbands, fathers and boyfriends were imprisoned for such activity, would agree. Perhaps only certain egregious rapes involving physical force and requiring corroboration would be criminalized.
Interestingly, this South African report goes halfway in acknowledging that if rape were as prevalent as they claim, then any desire to change the behavior would need to occur through means other than the courts: "You can't change behavior practiced by one quarter of the population if the main strategy is through the use of police and courts. The police and courts are important but they are only part of the solution."
The fact is, if there were as many "rapists" getting away with it as the radicals claim, they would be able to control any election and would insure that the laws would be changed to avoid being sent away to prison for 20 years.
Sexual assault reported near Largo High was a false alarm
High school student not attacked, police say; Girl will not face face charges
by Liz Skalski Staff Writer
A 16-year-old female Largo High School student who said she was sexually assaulted Tuesday afternoon near the school was in fact not sexually assaulted, according to Prince George's County police.
Prince George's County police concluded their investigation into the alleged incident and concluded that the sexual assault did not occur.
Police determined the girl was lying but she will not face charges, said Capt. Mistinette Mints, a police spokeswoman.
Police encourage victims of sexual assaults and rapes to report the crime to police.
"Unfortunately, it does happen," Mints said of false reports. "We don't want to sent out the message — we're afraid that will hinder [victims] from coming forward in the future."
Police continue to urge women not use wooded paths as a short cut.
The student had told police she left the school in the 500 block of Largo Road of Upper Marlboro at about 3:45 p.m. and said she had been walking with a male friend on the path behind the school when she was approached by two teenage boys and assaulted.
E-mail Liz Skalski at email@example.com.
FALSE RAPE SOCIETY COMMENT: Infuriating: a teenage girl lied that she was raped by two boys. A crime, right? Of course it is. But she won't be charged, and the police spokeswoman quoted in the story goes out of her way to note that "we don't want to sent out the message — we're afraid that will hinder [victims] from coming forward in the future." And then -- incredibly -- she uses the occasion of the girl's lie not to warn women they shouldn't lie about rape but to engage in a little old-fashioned fear-mongering about an entirely different crime -- rape -- urging "women" not to use wooded paths as a shortcut. (Never mind that men are assaulted by strangers at least 150% the rate females are assaulted.) Did you get that? The police admit the rape claim was a lie, but they use that very lie to scare women about rape -- as if the lie had been true.
So thank you, madam -- you and your police force don't want to discourage rape victims from coming forward, but you don't a damn about the men and boys who have fallen and surely will fall prey to rape lies because police forces like yours enable liars by refusing to punish them. On behalf of all falsely accused men and boys, thank you.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
The story gets worse: upon Ms. Winfield's release she re-initiated the relationship with her victim. For reasons nowhere explained in the news account, we went along with that. But it didn't go well, for either one of them. Just weeks after her release, Mr. Peacock flipped and stabbed her 30 times. She survived the attack, but now he'll spend four years in prison. Oh, and she's still in love with him.
We don't know what prompted the attack. Unlike news reports covering false rape claims, the triggering event for Mr. Peacock's criminal act isn't specifically noted. It certainly is not a stretch to assume it was somehow related to the false rape claim. If so, it is just another example of how such claims can destroy lives.
Man jailed for at least four years over 'frenzied' stabbing
Published Date: 19 June 2009
Friday, 4.15pm - A MAN who stabbed his partner 30 times just weeks after she was released from jail for making a false rape complaint against him has been jailed for at least four years.
Richard Peacock, 29, carried out the "frenzied" knife attack after getting back together with long term girlfriend Tracey Winfield.
Miss Winfield, 21, persuaded Peacock to resume their volatile relationship after serving a four-month sentence for the false rape allegation, Lincoln Crown Court heard.
But within weeks Peacock flipped and attacked Miss Winfield with two kitchen knives after a row at her home in Grantham.
Yet despite her horrific injuries Miss Winfield continued to write to Peacock while he was on remand in prison and spoke of her "love" for him in a television interview.
Winfield was jailed in July 2008 after accusing Peacock and one of his friends of rape.
The pair, both innocent, were forced to undergo medical examinations and give intimate samples before being released on bail.
The investigation was closed only when Miss Winfield confessed the incident never took place.
Michael Cranmer-Brown, prosecuting, told the court Peacock began his attack on Miss Winfield in the kitchen after pulling a vegetable knife out of his trousers.
"He ran at her, cornered her and started to stab her to the chest and abdomen," Mr Cranmer-Brown said.
"She had cuts to her hands and arms as she tried to defend herself. Suddenly the frenzied attack came to a halt."
The court heard Peacock offered Miss Winfield some towels but then resumed his attack with a steak knife after she retreated to her bedroom.
During the second attack Peacock told Miss Winfield: "I've got to finish you off."
Mr Cranmer-Brown said: "She was begging him for three hours to get her an ambulance, but he wouldn't."
Peacock eventually relented and Miss Winfield was taken to hospital where an examination revealed 30 stab wounds, although some were superficial.
In a victim impact statement which was read to the court Miss Winfield said: "I thought he really going to end my life. I know Richard is in prison, but it doesn't stop me being scared of him."
Noel Philo, mitigating, told the court it was in fact Miss Winfield who re-initiated the relationship after her release from prison and she continued to write to Peacock while he was on remand for the knife attack.
Passing an indeterminate sentence for public protection Judge Michael Heath told Peacock he had considered the background to the case, but he added: "You are in my judgement dangerous.
"This was a dreadful incident. She suffered 30 stab wounds. What makes it was worse is that she was begging for help and you refused."
Peacock, formerly of Hawthorn Court, Grantham, admitted wounding Miss Winfield with intent to cause her grievous bodily harm on 30 November.
He will have to serve four years imprisonment before he is considered for parole.
Marybeth Baker arrested for false rape claim.
Gloversville Police arrested a city woman last week for lying to them about an alleged rape she reported back in April.
According to police, 40-year-old Marybeth Baker filed a complaint on April 26th of being raped by someone she knew while on the Rail Trail.
During police investigation, though, Baker admitted the complaint was false and that she'd lied as retaliation against the suspect.
Baker was arrested June 12th and charged with misdemeanor falsely reporting an incident.
H/T to one of our posters for the story.
Friday, June 19, 2009
A young Russian woman, a devoted collector of horror films and spiders, is on trial for sedating and raping ten men.
The police were shocked that 32-year-old Valeria K., a quiet good-looking woman from the city of Tambov, was the mysterious rapist who abused ten local men after poisoning them with clonidine, Life.ru reports.
Valeria, who has already been nicknamed the Black Widow for her love of spiders, would get acquainted with men and invite them to her place.
She gave them drinks with clonidine, which almost immediately sent them to sleep for almost 24 hours.
After that, she undressed her victims and raped them, tightening a rope on their male organs to kep them erect.
Waking up in hospital with clonidine poisoning and penis trauma, all the victims could remember was a friendly brunette who gave them drinks.
Finally, local police identified the offender and arrested her.
At present, the police know about ten of Valeria’s victims, although one of them refused to file a complaint against her.
“It was great,” the unnamed man said.
“I like hot women. I only wish she hadn't use the clonidine on me.”
Several things immediately come to mind. Why isn't the accused referred to as an "accused rapist"? Why isn't the boy referred to as the 'victim'? The only difference I can see in this case, is that the supposed 'rapist' is female, and the 'rapee' is male.
The one question that isn't answered, is why did the roomate lie/change her story? What prompted her to give the wrong information in the first place?
"Accused rapist", has charges dropped.
Everything was in place to prosecute Catherine Cates — except a solid case.
Attorneys spent all morning picking a jury to hear the case against Cates, 30, accused of having sex with her neighbor, a 13-year-old boy. The boy and his mother were waiting in the wings to see whether she would be convicted. Cates was brought into court in handcuffs.
But before the judge arrived, a witness came forward to disclose new information behind closed doors.
Within the first few minutes of the trial, the case was dropped.
Cates was caught breathless and began to cry, said her defense attorney John Walsh.
She had been charged with four counts of child rape, a first-degree felony, and sexual abuse of a child, a second-degree felony. Behind closed doors, one of Cates' female roommates arrived at court with new details about her previous testimony.
The roommate previously said that she had walked in on the woman and the boy having sex in her Millcreek home. But on Monday afternoon, she changed her story.
"She never walked in," Walsh said. "She never believed or heard that they were having sex."
Defense attorneys speculated that the whole case was nothing more than a revenge plot — the boy's mother wanting to get back at Cates after a fight they had. During a preliminary hearing, when the boy stumbled over dates and couldn't describe details about Cates' body. The roommate's changed testimony was apparently the final nail in the coffin.
Walsh decried the idea that Cates had to suffer indignity and imprisonment for accusations so quickly dropped.
"To go from grave consequences to nothing, it's alarming enough," he said.
Since the case was dismissed after a jury had been selected, the prosecution cannot bring the same charges against Cates in the future, even if new evidence or witnesses come forward.
Outrage when women are forced to pay for rape kits; yawns when men are denied DNA evidence to prove they aren't rapists
This is a tale of stark, contrasting attitudes that underscores a bleak reality for men and boys wrongly convicted of rape: many people are more concerned about preserving evidence to convict men and boys of rape than they are about providing wrongly convicted men and boys access to what is often definitive evidence to prove they didn't commit the rape.
This attitude is symptomatic of a mindset that manifests itself in innumerable ways, and that we have written about here many times: men and boys falsely accused or convicted of rape are treated as unfortunate but necessary collateral damage in the "more important" war on rape. The fact that this attitude is diametrically opposed to the Blackstone formulation, which holds that it is better that ten criminals escape punishment than for one innocent men to be punished, is of no moment to the persons with this mindset. Let us briefly explore:
During last year's presidential election campaign, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the GOP nominee for Vice President, came under media assault because it was alleged that while she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, the town began charging rape victims or their insurance companies for costly emergency-room rape kits, which some call the "black box" of sex crime investigations. The accompanying outrage condemned the fact that women should be forced to pay for such kits.
Fast forward to yesterday. In the case of District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne, a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court held that prisoners have no right to DNA testing that might prove their innocence, even if they pay for it. The New York Times reported: "The court divided along familiar ideological lines, with the majority emphasizing that 46 states already have laws that allow at least some prisoners to gain access to DNA evidence."
"The case before the court concerned Alaska, which has no DNA testing law. Prosecutors there have conceded that such testing could categorically establish the guilt or innocence of William G. Osborne, who was convicted in 1994 of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a prostitute in Anchorage."
In his dissent, Justice Stevens (joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer and, in part, Souter) summed the the fundamental unfairness of a law that withholds such evidence: "The State of Alaska possesses physical evidence that, if tested, will conclusively establish whether respondent William Osborne committed rape and attempted murder. If he did, justice has been served by his conviction and sentence. If not, Osborne has needlessly spent decades behind bars while the true culprit has not been brought to justice. The DNA test Osborne seeks is a simple one, its cost modest, and its results uniquely precise. Yet for reasons the State has been unable or unwilling to articulate, it refuses to allow Osborne to test the evidence at his own expense and to thereby ascertain the truth once and for all."
Why is there no outrage over Alaska's failure to provide the wrongly convicted with the evidence to prove they didn't commit the crime (at the accused's own expense) akin to the outrage we heard last year over one Alaska town's policy to charge women for rape kits?
And please, please, don't try to dismiss this point by telling me these are two different things. Of course they are two different things -- any comparison involves two or more different things. But regular readers of this blog understand that outrage for the one thing and yawns for the other spring from a common mindset -- a mindset that says we care more about nabbing rapists than about protecting the innocent from wrongful arrest and conviction.
There is nothing inconsistent about supporting both the free availability of rape kits (while tempering some of the other problems that pose risks to innocent men and boys when it comes to rape kit procedure) and a law that makes DNA evidence freely available for testing.
Unfortunately, "rape" has become so terribly politicized that few who were outraged about the Palin rape kit controversy will be outraged about the possible injustice to Mr. Osborne, which the highest court in the land yesterday refused to correct.
Extortionist in rape allegation goes to trial.
FARMINGTON -- A woman accused of blackmailing a man at Hill Air Force Base over a rape allegation will go on trial next month.
The 31-year-old woman appeared in 2nd District Court on Monday where she was expected to tae a plea deal. However, her attorney announced that she would like to take the case to trial.
Judge Michael Allphin scheduled a one-day bench trial beginning July 14.
The case is complicated, with the woman charged with second-degree felony theft by extortion.
Her attorney said she is the victim of a rape and filed a police report in Seattle. Davis County prosecutors said any rape investigation has no influence on their case against her.
KSL does not generally name alleged victims of a sexual assault.
Court documents say the woman blackmailed the man out of nearly $50,000 by saying she would not report the alleged sexual assault to military authorities in exchange for the money.
The man initially paid, court documents say, but went to police when she asked for another $5,000.
The woman has insisted she is innocent, telling KSL NewsRadio at her last court appearance the allegations are "a false charge."
Thanks to one of our readers for the story.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The underlying message is that boys who are raped are not totally innocent. The law considers them in some sense culpable. But this rule only applies to boys.
The prohibition against "victim blaming" has no application to them.
In the case of County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843 (Ct. App. 1996), a thirty-four-year-old woman had sex with a fifteen-year-old boy and became pregnant. The woman was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor -- commonly called statutory rape. SHE decided to have the child, and after she gave birth to her daughter, she received Aid for Families with Dependent Children -- and the county sought reimbursement for the AFDC payments from the father, the 15-year-old boy. The court held that the boy, a statutory rape victim, was financially liable for the child that resulted from his victimization.
This case is not alone: "Two state supreme courts and several state appellate courts have ruled that male statutory rape victims can be financially liable for supporting a child resulting from their criminal victimization." R. Jones, ARTICLE: INEQUALITY FROM GENDER-NEUTRAL LAWS: WHY MUST MALE VICTIMS OF STATUTORY RAPE PAY CHILD SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN RESULTING FROM THEIR VICTIMIZATION? 36 Ga. L. Rev. 411 (2002). (I do love the title of that law review article -- it correctly asserts that the boys are the victims.)
There are no reported cases where female victims of statutory rape have been held to a similar support obligation, obviously because THEY have the option of an abortion.
A long night at a Santa Clara bar led to a scary situation for senior Melissa Somero, who got more than she bargained for when she decided to stay the night at a male friend's fraternity house in August.
She remembers falling asleep in his bed and then waking suddenly as he joined her. He fondled her breasts and forced her hand on his genitals. When he tried to push her head below the sheets, she fled. She said she confronted her friend about the incident later, and he labeled it a "misunderstanding."
Let's state the obvious: if a woman is asleep without anything more, a man isn't allowed to force her into engaging in sex acts.
But that's not exactly what happened here, is it? We need to know more, don't we? For example, what went on before she got into his bed? What exactly was their relationship? And how drunk was she? How did she end up in his bed? Did she just pass out on his bed, or did she consciously decide to get in?
But just on the facts presented, the presumption has to be that it was not rape. Any other presumption is grossly unjust to the young man. Please understand, a full development of the facts might prove that presumption to be wrong. That includes knowing his side of the story -- because all we hear in this excerpt, as is typical in these gynocentric rape articles, is from the accuser.
In any prior era of the history of the world, to even suggest from these sketchy facts that this "must" have been rape, and that he "must" be a rapist for "taking advantage" of her, would be ludicrous on its face. And I would guess that if these facts were presented to a random sampling of modern adults of both genders, the overwhelming presumption would be that it wasn't rape.
She decided to spend the night in his house, and she was sleeping in his bed. And he's not supposed to think that she is inviting sexual activity? The implicit suggestion from the tone of the article -- which was written by a female and is wholly sympathetic to the position that any assertion of impropriety by a woman must actually have been impropriety -- is that the young man's assertion that it was a "misunderstanding" is bullshit.
You know what? It sounds to me that, at best, it was a misunderstanding for which he was not culpable. More likely, she invited sexual activity and then chickened out when her boyfriend actually had the balls to initiate it.
VIDALIA — A Monterey woman who filed rape and kidnapping charges against a former boyfriend was arrested and charged with felony false swearing by the Concordia Parish Sheriff’s Office.
Paula W. Green, 26, 9171 Louisiana 129, reportedly told CPSO deputies April 11 a former boyfriend had forced her into a truck at gunpoint and taken her to his Tensas Parish residence, where he raped her, according to a statement from the CPSO.
Warrants were issued for the former boyfriend’s arrest, and the man was arrested in Tensas Parish, but later investigation — which included witness statements and a surveillance tape from a Clayton convenience store — did not support Green’s claims, the statement said.
“Making accusations like this against someone is an extremely serious matter,” Sheriff Randy Maxwell said. “We take this very seriously.”
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
First, what is there to ponder? She committed a crime that caused another citizen to be taken into custody and she needs to go to prison for it. Period.
Second, in what other situation do we freely allow one class of citizens (females) to use the power of the state to deprive members of another class of citizens (males) of their liberty, usually without any penalty?
And third, for what other crime are we so lax in holding authorites accountable for the decision to not charge a criminal with a crime? We rarely hear of any follow-up to these stories where the authorities ponder whether to bring charges. If the public knew of all the false rape claims that the police just quietly drop, men, especially, would be stunned. Stunned. And that is a fact.
HERE IS THE NEWS STORY:
Police: Alleged Rape Victim Made Up Story
HOLLYWOOD (CBS4) ― A Hollywood woman has recanted her story that she was raped after accepting a ride from a stranger on Tuesday, according to Hollywood Police.
Police initially took someone into custody, but by Tuesday evening when the victim recanted, the person was released by Hollywood police.
Hollywood Police Lt. Manny Marino initially repeated what the woman told police, saying the story began at a bus stop in the 24-hundred block of Johnson Street.
"The victim was sitting a bus stop, obviously waiting for the bus," explained Marino. "The suspect asked her if she needed a ride, unfortunately she got in the vehicle with this person. (He) didn't take her where she needed to go, took her to another location where the sexual battery happened."
By Tuesday evening, the story came apart and the victim admitted to police investigators she had made the whole story up.
Investigators will now check with the State Attorney's Office to see if charges of filing a false police report will be filed.
The injustice that was perpetrated in this case should result in severe prison sentences for the prosecutor, as well as the witnesses who lied to get this man convicted.
The greatest casualty is the relationship between Mr. Baba-Ali and his daughter, who will have nothing to do with him. The mother of this young woman deserves to rot in prison for the rest of her life for what she has done to this man and his daughter.
He has lived in the shadow of this monster for 21 years, serving time in a maximum security prison, and — even after his conviction was overturned and he was released in 1992 — carrying the taint that comes with being accused of child abuse.
This week, the State Court of Claims recognized his decades of suffering and awarded him a large settlement.
But he still has not seen his daughter, and so he has not fully regained his former life.
Amine Baba-Ali, a father wrongly convicted of raping and molesting his 4-year-old daughter, is the first person ever held by a state court to have satisfied every facet of the unjust-conviction law that he sued New York State under, according to the court’s decision. His lawyers proved that the Queens district attorney’s office fraudulently prosecuted him for a crime he did not commit. The court awarded him $2,093,428.
But Mr. Baba-Ali, 52, cannot shake the sense that this case will haunt him for a lifetime, not least because his daughter, now 26, was forever removed from him once he was convicted. He has not seen her for two decades, and has no idea where she is living.
“Though I am thankful, the fact of the matter is that I’ve lost my daughter,” Mr. Baba-Ali said in an telephone interview from his Manhattan apartment on Tuesday. “I’ve lost the most important part of my life.”
The state attorney general’s office, which represented the state in Mr. Baba-Ali’s lawsuit, said it was examining the judgment closely and could appeal it.
Mr. Baba-Ali and his lawyer, Peter Wessel, fought his conviction for 20 years, beginning when Mr. Baba-Ali was in an 8-by-10-foot prison cell in the Catskills.
In the late 1980s, in the midst of a nasty divorce, Mr. Baba-Ali’s wife had accused him of raping their daughter during a custody visit at his Queens apartment. At nearly every turn, Mr. Baba-Ali’s case became a study in the miscarriage of justice, according to the Court of Claims. Under District Attorney John J. Santucci, Queens prosecutors obtained an indictment of Mr. Baba-Ali in 1988 on charges of rape, molestation and incest, and he was convicted in November 1989. But prosecutors ignored medical evidence that appeared to prove his innocence, then failed to disclose it to the defense until a few days before the trial, the courts have said.
The conviction of Mr. Baba-Ali, Judge Melvin L. Schweitzer of the Court of Claims wrote in his decision, released on Monday, “was procured by prosecutorial misconduct that was tantamount to fraud.”
The assistant district attorney who tried the case, Elizabeth Loconsolo, is now a deputy attorney for the Nassau County comptroller. She said on Tuesday that she has no second thoughts about her actions in the case.
Dr. Nadine Sabbagh, then a city health department employee, was the chief medical witness against Mr. Baba-Ali during his trial. She claimed to have found evidence that Mr. Baba-Ali had raped his daughter multiple times, breaking her hymen. Her testimony was essential in gaining a conviction and a prison term of 8 1/3 to 25 years.
Mr. Baba-Ali also suffered from poor representation by a court-appointed public defender, who failed to subpoena two doctors who would have testified that their earlier examinations of the girl found no evidence of sexual abuse, according to a state appeals court, which overturned his conviction in 1992, and ordered a retrial. That lawyer was later barred from the public defender’s program.
Before deciding whether to retry Mr. Baba-Ali, Queens prosecutors asked a doctor at a New York hospital to conduct a second examination. That doctor found that the child’s hymen was intact and saw no evidence of abuse, the Court of Claims said in its decision. Prosecutors quickly dropped the case.
Judge Schweitzer was scathing about Dr. Sabbagh’s testimony: “The only witness who provided evidence of such abuse had lied, and in fact there was no credible evidence his daughter had ever been molested.”
Dr. Sabbagh is now in private practice in Queens; a call placed to her office Tuesday afternoon was not returned.
Mr. Baba-Ali said his time in a maximum security state prison continues to haunt him: He stayed in his apartment for many weeks after his release from prison. A book editor and a translator before his conviction, he now works as a supervisor for a car parking concession.
Mr. Baba-Ali, who has remarried, lives with the knowledge of something else: no matter how many judges declare him flatly and unequivocally innocent, he will remain shadowed by child abuse charges for the rest of his life. As the Court of Claims noted in its decision, the Census Bureau turned him down for a job because of the conviction.
And despite a ruling in his favor in Family Court, he never succeeded in seeing his daughter again. Her court-appointed law guardian reported back, after all those years and accusations, that his daughter no longer wanted to see him.
Judge Schweitzer’s decision is nearly poetic in its description of loss.
“For claimant’s mental anguish and degradation occasioned by being labeled a child molester of his 4-year-old daughter; for the irretrievable loss of his relationship with his daughter promixately caused by his conviction; for his loss of liberty into the most fearsome maximum security prison environment that an innocent man may be thrust,” the judge said, he was awarding him $2 million.“I read that decision and I began to cry,” Mr. Baba-Ali said. “I don’t think the loss is ever going to fade away.”
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Note that if the genders were reversed, this arrangement would be considered severely politically incorrect; some gender feminists would classify it is a kind of rape.
But since the oppressed party is a male, it's not rape -- it's a romantic comedy.
On the comment section for this film at the Internet Movie Database, the following appears:
I Love the age difference!
by celine285 1 day ago (Sat Jun 13 2009 23:07:59)
UPDATED Sat Jun 13 2009 23:09:37
I know theres a few debates on the board here, but i think its awesome theres 13 years between the grown actors. She's turning 45 next month, he's 32 (and married to a 24 years old!) I'm tired of seeing old men with younger hotter women. Have you guys seen NEXT? Jessica Biel was 25 and Nicolas Cage was 43, can you say ew? But no one blinks an eye? But what i really love about the age difference: at 45, she's playing roles that are usually reserve for girls 20 years younger than she is. Not since Kate Hepburn can an actress play a romantic comedy to a younger man without it being a part of the plot. Cameron Diaz is 34 and she's playing a mom to a teenager in her latest movie. It's just a good image, or counter-image coming out of hollywood - So, I say, go sandra!
Read it again to catch the full flavor of it.
Did you get it? When the male is older, there is an "ew" factor (this is so despite the logical reasons why older men hook up with younger women all the time: men can produce sperm long after women have left their child-bearing years; women often look for financial security from men and older men are generally far more financially secure (and, yes, some of the women are gold-diggers); and young women often believe that men their own age lack maturity).
But when the genders are reversed and the female is older, that doesn't carry an "ew" factor; that's empowerment.
It's a "you go, girlfriend!" moment.
The older women doesn't need to financially rely on a man, so we applaud her for having her very own "boy toy" that she can toss away when she tires of him or realizes that she has nothing in common with an early-20s-something guy who'd rather play video games than paint the nursery.
Older man-younger women: disgusting; older woman-younger man: a sign of progress.
The object of disgust for an older man-younger woman tryst is usually not the young woman who, truth be told, might just be a gold-digger. Gold-digging is perfectly acceptable. The object of the disgust is usually the middle-aged man, who is disgusting precisely because he's a middle-aged man.
Now let's be clear. Adults should be able find love at any age. But why not leave it at that? Why can't we just say "it's great that older women and younger men can hook up!"
Why must we always take that extra step to slam males? Here is the bottom line: male sexuality that women don't approve of is regarded as disgusting, depraved or evil. And neither women nor men hold women to the same standard.
This is symptomatic of a larger, nefarious trend.
Adult males having sex with children are viewed as the lowest form of life. In contrast, adult females who molest boys are seen as "mixed up" and emotionally immature. They are given notoriously light sentences because their disorders are seen as more pathetic than evil. (But a female teacher's callow male lover is lucky if the teacher doesn't sacrifice him to save her skin by accusing him of raping her -- one such teacher recently tried that to no avail.) Reverse the genders and assume a girl accuses an adult male teacher of rape -- he will be sent away for years, without question.
But it doesn't stop there. Who, for example, is considered the greater criminal, the hard-working, saintly prostitute or the evil businessman who frequents her? The question scarcely survives its statement.
Strip clubs are viewed as places frequented by dirty old disgusting men who objectify women. Civic groups want to impose "sin" taxes on them, and nobody complains except the strip club owners. But enjoying naked male dancers and explicit penis cakes that depict ejaculation at raunchy bachelorette parties is viewed as "empowerment" for the liberated young women in attendance.
The rape of a woman or a child is second only to murder on the scale of acts considered to be evil. In contrast, the rape of a man in prison is a punchline. And sometimes the men who are raped are only in prison because they were falsely accused of rape or some other sexual offense -- the ultimate tragic irony.
Men who suffer from premature ejaculation are "selfish." They, too, are a punchline. Or worse: after her arrest for mutilating her husband with an 8-inch knife, Lorna Bobbitt told police: "He always have [sic] [an] orgasm and he doesn't wait for me to have [an] orgasm. He's selfish." Mrs. Bobbitt was hailed as a feminist heroine.
Men who don't wear condoms are "pigs" in TV ads. Some feminist legal scholars want to go so far as to subject any male who has intercourse without a condom to be jailed as a kind of lesser form of rape (the burden would be on the male to prove that the woman consented to sex without a condom). Never mind that a woman can see if the guy is wearing a condom and that she can say "no." In contrast, when a female lies to a male that she's on the pill -- he has no way of knowing that, nor does he know that she intends to get pregnant without the man's knowledge. Guy not wearing condom: selfish pig. Woman who lies about being on the pill: not selfish in any manner because, you see, it's her right to do as she pleases with her body. The fact that she will saddle the guy for child support for 18 years because of a lie is neither here nor there.
When two underage teenagers have consensual sex, usually only one is considered a statutory rapist, and only one will be classified as a "sex offender," possibly for the rest of his life. Can you guess his gender?
Feminists tout the glories of the "hook up" culture -- except if any obligations are expected of the female. If both the guy and the girl purposefully get drunk intending to have sex, she's a rape victim who retains her anonymity. He, on the other hand, is a rapist who goes to prison for years, his name is splashed all over the news, and his reputation is destroyed forever. And in prison, he'll probably have done to him what he did NOT do to her.
And it goes on and on and on. Women believe this nonsense, and men are taught to "take it like a man" because they, too, have been brainwashed by the feminist urban myth that there are sex double standards that favor men and boys.
It's time to inject some balance, some fairness, some facts into the discourse. Because right now, men are regarded as pigs, and women are regarded as oppressed, regardless of the circumstances, and usually when it's simply not so. And some of us have grown mighty weary of it.
The jury's still out on hopes of rape victims for justice.
IT has been specially designed to resemble a normal living room with comfortable furniture and low-key decor rather than the inside of a police station.
For many women reporting a rape in the Capital, the facility is where they will first recount details of the attack to specially trained officers from the Amethyst sex crimes team.
The rape suite at the unit's west Edinburgh base was created so traumatised victims could be interviewed with as much sensitivity as possible.
So, before any investigation is conducted, they are already "traumatized victims." Right.
It's here that officers gain as much evidence as they can to present in court, something they did 170 times in 2007/08. It is a time-consuming and complicated procedure, and one which new figures suggest is more often than not in vain.
Of those 170 cases, only 17 reached the inside of a court room in the Lothians, and just five saw the attacker found guilty.
Could it be possible, that only 17 reached the inside of a court room, because a majority weren't rapes? Or that in a he said/she said situation with no other evidence, that it SHOULDN'T be prsoecuted?
It is a common story. In the last nine years in the Lothians, there were 1546 police reports over alleged rapes handed over to the procurator fiscal but ultimately only 65 people were jailed – four per cent of the total number accused.
The number of prosecutions for rapes compared with the alleged crimes remains low, with Scotland showing one of the worst records in Europe.
Tory Lothians MSP Gavin Brown said: "These figures are shocking and a clear demonstration that far too few victims are getting the justice that they deserve.
Once again, this comment presupposes guilt for the accused, and that all complainants are "victims." It is breathtaking in its prejudgment.
"It is of little surprise that many instances go unreported and that itself is also a massive worry. The effects on the victim must be absolutely devastating."
More than a year ago, the Lord Advocate, Elish Angiolini, told a Rape Crisis Scotland conference that the country's rape laws were "among the most restrictive in the western world".
This started a massive overhaul of the sexual offences laws in Scotland which has sparked debate among legal experts.
Unveiled a year ago, the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill is currently making its way through parliament. Based on proposals from the Scottish Law Commission published in December 2007, it replaces the common-law offence of rape with a broader statutory offence of a requirement for "reasonable" consent.
"Reasonable" consent means a reasonable person in the situation of the accused male. There is a wide range of conduct that falls within the realm of "reasonable" under the law -- and it does not mean whatever the alleged victim says it means.
The new law specifies that there is no consent if someone is "incapable of giving consent" through intoxication with alcohol or any other substance or if the victim is asleep or unconscious.
At this point, if a man was drinking before the sexual incident, I expect to see law enforcement arrest the woman for rape, as he would be "incapable of giving consent," just as they will a man.
At present, an accused person must merely have an "honest or genuine" belief that a victim consented. In future, that must be a "reasonable" belief. It would not be enough that an accused in a rape case should be able to maintain that they had an "honest" belief in the victim's consent if that is not a reasonable belief.
But this cuts both ways: from now on, a man might actually believe he is committing rape, but if an average prudent person in his position would think otherwise, he must be cleared.
To aid juries, a list of scenarios where consent cannot be said to have been given would also be provided. In the past, juries have sometimes concluded that a woman gave implied "consent" to sex merely by wearing provocative clothes or taking a man back to her room.
Clothing isn't consent. That is a ridiculous idea. If she takes a man back to her room, without being forced to, and at no time does she say no or try to stop sexual activity from taking place, then yes, "consent" has been given.
But Rape Crisis Scotland said it was worried by the introduction into law of the concept of "prior consent" to sex.
Spokeswoman Sandy Brindley said: "If these provisions become law, there is a strong possibility that the Crown will also have to prove that the complainer didn't previously give consent. The notion that someone can give advance consent to sex at 6pm and that this consent should still apply at 1am when they are incapable of giving meaningful consent is absurd."
Shouldn't the state have to prove that consent wasn't given? Otherwise you are automatically presuming that it wasn't, and you have concluded that someone is guilty, without any form of investigation. And the implication that at 1 am someone is incapable of giving "meaningful consent" (whatever that is), is laughable. It automatically assumes that activity took place that incapacitates the individual. While I agree that someone can change their mind over the course of 7 hours, it doesn't automatically mean that they ARE incapable of giving consent, or that they DID change their mind.
Rape Crisis Scotland has maintained that an independent inquiry is needed to ensure every aspect of the system – from the police to the courts – was no longer failing victims. The Crown Office has carried out a detailed review into rape prosecution, while the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland undertook its own investigation. Both produced a list of recommendations which are being implemented. For example, prosecutors and fiscal service staff in Scotland have been undertaking training to boost the chances of rapes being successfully prosecuted.
By this summer, it is hoped that every Crown Office representative will have to complete the training before they can take charge of a rape prosecution.
Legal experts have argued that more needs to be done, and say a vast number of rape victims will continue to be denied justice unless the requirement for corroboration – two separate sources of evidence, for instance the victim's statement and forensic evidence – is removed.
So, lets get rid of those pesky little things called evidence, and just on the say so of one person, throw another person in prison. Any he said/she said scenario will need to go to the jury -- and if she's a good enough liar, he will go to prison for decades. This is possibly the scariest thing to be suggested in the western world, and paints a target on every man walking around today. Sadly, it is the law in the USA currently.
Indeed, Ms Angiolini suggested the need for corroboration should be watered down to boost the number of rape convictions while speaking at a major conference on sexual offences last year.
Watered down? As it stands now, simply someone's word is enough to get someone arrested and put on trial. How much more "watered down" can you make it?
Others in the legal profession are not so keen on the weakening of a central pillar of Scottish law, adding that such a revamped system would result in more wrongful convictions.
I don't think any "reasonable" person would disagree with this. These changes are ripe for an increase in false accusations. Hopefully, this won't make it into law in Scotland.
A Crown Office spokeswoman said: "The prosecution of rape presents specific challenges in Scotland due to the narrow definition of rape and the fact that it requires corroborated evidence.
"A number of strategies which aim to improve conviction rates in sexual offences are currently being pursued."
Whether the proposed changes will lead to an increase in convictions in the Lothians, the jury is still out.
I think it will increase the number of convictions. The only problem is, it will increase the number of innocent men (primarily) who are convicted, not necessarily those who are guilty.