It is open season on young men in one American city. The police department there has given women license to destroy any man they want by falsely accusing him of rape. When that happens, the police have suggested, they will sit back and do nothing. The falsely accused will be treated as collateral damage in the more important war on rape.
Richmond, California, is a small city near San Francisco with a population of approximately 100,000. Last October, it was the scene of a brutal gang rape that is still prominent in the news. What is not much in the news, and what you might not have heard about, is that the gang rape seems to have inspired two other girls to falsely cry rape. Richmond police have taken exactly the wrong approach: they have openly announced that they don't charge females for making false reports for fear of discouraging legitimate rape complaints. Armed with immunity from prosecution, young Richmond women will have free reign to falsely accuse their boyfriends, husbands, fathers, teachers, brothers and male classmates if any of them does the slightest thing to anger the young women. Without any deterrence, young men in the Richmond area ought to be prepared for more false rape claims against them.
The first false claim involved a 17-year-old girl whose rape lie landed the suspect -- the accuser's boyfriend -- behind bars for three days. She was angry at him for something. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, a gang rape is a terrible thing. So is being jailed for three days and not knowing if you are going to spend years in prison for a crime you didn't commit -- where you likely will be the victim of the very thing you did not do.
The second false claim occurred just last week when a 15-year-old girl falsely cried rape. Fortunately no one was jailed for that one. According to an initial news report shortly after the incident: "A 15-year-old girl was raped by two men Friday night after the assailants and two other men forced her into a car at gunpoint in Richmond, the same city where a high school student was gang raped after leaving her homecoming dance in October, police said Saturday." See here Note the news report does not say "police say a girl claimed she was raped." The entire article is written as if a rape definitively occurred -- and it attributes the certainty to the police. It ends with this: "The worst thing for a student to feel," [teacher Jessica] Price said, "is that they're not safe in their community." (It seems that the young men in the community also have reason to feel unsafe.) Another article on the same incident again quotes police as saying a sexual assault had definitely occurred. See here. "Obviously we're saddened by the fact that this has happened yet again and that it involves several suspects again," said a female police sergeant.
So what is the reaction of the police? Their reaction is to somberly note that some poor guy's life might have been destroyed by the rape lies, and then to tell the news media that the Richmond Police Department has never charged a person for a false report in an effort to avoid creating an environment where people with legitimate claims hesitate to report crimes.
Because, we all know how women are in fear of being jailed for making a false rape report. Right.
Richmond is Exhibit "A" for why false rape claims are America's taboo epidemic.
READ THE NEWS STORIES:
Two False Rape Reports in Months After Brutal California High School Gang Rape
In separate incidents, two California teens reported rapes that never really happened and which, if proven true, could have landed the accused in prison for life. Once again, to cover up why she she didn't come home. And once again, we see she isn't named.
And once again, worries about rape victims not coming forward, takes precedence over the fact that innocent people could have been arrested and jailed over her lie.
The false police reports were filed at the very same police department that, just three months earlier, handled the now notorious gang rape of a 16-year-old high school student at her homecoming dance.
Now police in Richmond, Calif., say they have spent tens of thousands of dollars investigating the supposed crimes before the accusers admitted that they made them up.
A 15-year-old girl told police last Friday that she had been kidnapped at gunpoint and raped by four men.
Lt. Mark Gagan of the Richmond Police Department in California said the teen offered detailed descriptions of her assailants, including tattoos and hairstyles, before confessing that she'd fabricated the rape to avoid punishment for missing her curfew. The sex, she said, had been consensual.
"She called police Sunday and recanted the story, explaining that she had left school early and had been with a few people consensually," said Gagan. "She explained she had made up the whole scenario to cover up why she was not home on time."
Gagan said that the teen initially made the police report by flagging down a bus operator at around midnight Friday wearing only her underwear. She later told police where she hid her clothes to make her story more believable.
"Fortunately, no one was detained or harmed because of this teen's false report," said Gagan.
Three weeks earlier, one suspect in an alleged rape spent three days behind bars after a 17-year-old girl claimed that he had raped her, according to Gagan.
That rape, too, ended up being a false report, said Gagan, who told ABCNews.com that the teen later told police the suspect was her boyfriend and the sex was consensual, but that a fight had led her to lie and accuse him of rape.
Gagan declined to speculate whether these teens were inspired by October's gang rape that attracted national attention.
On Oct. 24, 2009, a 16-year-old girl was sexually assaulted by at least seven males ranging in age from 15 to their mid-twenties outside her school's homecoming dance. The assault lasted for two-and-a-half hours while onlookers did nothing to help her and some took pictures.
The six suspects who have been charged have entered "not guilty" pleas.
Gagan said it is frustrating to pour resources into crimes that never really occurred.
"Our detectives put a lot of time and energy into trying to determine who these men were," he said, adding that a special team was assembled to take DNA from the teen who lied this past weekend.
"We put so many resources into this case and we are a small organization," he said. "This cost us 100 hours of staffing and tens of thousands of dollars."
Gagan said that the teen in this past weekend's incident "was not apologetic," despite how seriously her lie could have impacted another person's life.
"DNA could have seriously implicated these people," said Gagan. "The exposure for the crime she's alleged is life in prison. If someone's DNA had come and she stuck to her story, they could have been looking at life in prison."
The Richmond Police Department has never charged a person for a false report, Gagan said, in an effort to avoid creating an environment where people with legitimate claims hesitate to report crimes.
"It's a complex situation and there is still a lot of work to be done before the criminal justice system has a way to deal with these types of cases," the lieutenant said.
Link: http://abcnews.go.com/US/california-gang-rape-inspire-false-police-reports/story?id=9595269&page=2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
39 comments:
A false rape accusation, as well as false accusations of other types, is not only a perversion of justice and a crime, it is also an abuse of the law(s).
" Without any deterrence, young men in the Richmond area ought to be prepared for more false rape claims against them".
They should be running for their lives. This is a blatant example of misandry and disregard for the male citizens that live their. Open disCRIMINATION of males. We now know the modus operandi of law enforcement their. What if "one of their own" is falsely accused?
"male citizens that live their"
Their should be there.
Don't see how they can allow any false rape accusation,since when a man is convicted by rape falsely,he losses his job,his wife and children,friends,shunned by society and who knows how long he will be in prison and get treated by the prisoners.
Women that were raped have a chance of recovery,but that is dependable on each women.
Men who were falsely accused and still went to prison,can't recover since it will follow them forever in their lifes and will probably lead to suicide.
So there needs to be some kind of better proof for it,can't believe that words are enough for them,depending on how humans and women normaly lie.Or otherwise the future is gonna be on big brother where everybody will be protected by being monitored at their homes to prevent such false accusations.
If they will ever realize this.
It is young men, not young women, who should feel at risk as things currently stand.
I thought making false rape claims was legal everywhere in the United States.
"DNA could have seriously implicated these people," said Gagan. "The exposure for the crime she's alleged is life in prison. If someone's DNA had come and she stuck to her story, they could have been looking at life in prison."
Since there would be DNA evidence if the sex was consensual, then in that case, whether or not the accused gets "life in prison" would depend entirely on whether or not the accuser is a good enough liar.
"So there needs to be some kind of better proof for it,can't believe that words are enough for them,depending on how humans and women normally lie."
Exactly. The question I've been asking in another thread here, is what evidence should be required?
A false rape accusation, as well as false accusations of other types, is not only a perversion of justice and a crime, it is also an abuse of the law(s).
- try telling that to a "me-first-think-first-act-later-entitlement-princess".
They should be running for their lives.
Agreed. All men should jump ship from Richmond. Abandon it to the feminists and FRAs. Then will we see true drama.
"I thought making false rape claims was legal everywhere in the United States."
It's not legal, but the law against it is often not enforced.
However, afaik, there are no laws specifically against false rape claims, but only against making a false crime report to the police in general. Considering how uniquely damaging false rape accusations are, there should be a separate law making it a felony with everything that goes with that.
"Now police in Richmond, Calif., say they have spent tens of thousands of dollars investigating the supposed crimes before the accusers admitted that they made them up." &
"(Lt. Mark) Gagan (of the Richmond Police Departmen) said it is frustrating to pour resources into crimes that never really occurred.
"Our detectives put a lot of time and energy into trying to determine who these men were," he said, adding that a special team was assembled to take DNA from the teen who lied this past weekend.
"We put so many resources into this case and we are a small organization," he said. "This cost us 100 hours of staffing and tens of thousands of dollars."
& the admission that: "DNA could have seriously implicated these people," said Gagan. "The exposure for the crime she's alleged is life in prison. If someone's DNA had come and she stuck to her story, they could have been looking at life in prison."
Despite their "official" policy of not charging women fro false reporting, they are obviously well aware of the costs, both to them and (potentially) to those falsely accused.
Unless the force is entirely staffed with morons, knowing the costs should lead them to conclude that they will need to take each and every subsequenct claim much more cautiously. Their own policy IS going to create the ideal environment fro FRA's. And, God forbid, should some man comen to suffer any real harm as the result of a proven FRA, the departments publicly stated policy of not charging women so as to encourage reports, set them up nicely for a substantial civil suit - for having essentually invited the FRA that lead to the harm being done.
While I'd hate to see any innocent man be harmed by and FRA, it would take just one multi-million dollar judgement against a Police Dept to put every other deptmartment, nation wide, on notice that if they don't act to discourage and screen-out FRA's (i.e. do their due dilegence to investigate before subjecting a man to potential harms), they too can get sued.
Personally, I think the best way to address teh issue of Police (laziness/misconduct/lack of regard) is to make individuals "answerable" fro their conduct. As it stands, if an officer fails to take a claim seriously, and it turns out that it was true - or worse, there are subsequent victims - that officer is going to have to explain his (or her) choice not to act. [do note that this is precisely why even teh most implausible of FRA's will be treated as ligitimate - it's alsolutely CYA]
Likewise, when officers rush to judgement and attempt to push the boundaries of "probable cause" (PC) (hint to Marcella Chester* - an officers sincere beleif in a "vitims" statement does not sustain PC), and their ill-considered (or even malicious) actions harm an innocent person, they need to be made to answer for their choices.
And, as with a crime they might chose to ignore, harms done to innocents outside the constraints of due process should find their jobs and their careers on the the line.
*Who blocks my posts on her abysmal site.
Paying any attention to Marcella Chester seems like a waste of time. Just like there are crazy people in real life, there are crazy people on the internet. And her blog is the online equivalent of living out of a shopping cart.
I wrote the comment about it being legal to make a false rape claim anywhere in the United States.
I was kidding of course but it is just like you were saying it's not enforced.
Before I knew anything about making false rape claims I thought it was a very serious crime and definitely a felony....boy was I wrong...it's effectively legal.
slwerner
Don't I stopped posing on a forum a while back that had to do with finance when they deleted my post after some woman wrote some feminist crap and I responded with some facts.
I learned it is taboo to even talk about the other side of things.
the above post should say don't worry!
also slwerner I like your posts.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8472655.stm
Posted here because she also cried rape in the end in an attempt to evade justice.
probably already seen/mentioned:
http://jonathanturley.org/2010/01/19/england-arrested-forensic-experts-prove-false-rape-claim/
Mr. Turley shares the views of the majority of our readership.
This is not a story about a rape but about fraud but even here the female did once make a false rape allegation to try to cover her crimes.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/01/22/2010-01-22_mom_of_sickest_boy_in_britain_faces_jail_over_6year_scam.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/01/22/2010-01-22_mom_of_sickest_boy_in_britain_faces_jail_over_6year_scam.html
OK for some reason I can't paste that link but if you go to
http://www.nydailynews.com/
and scroll down to the story- Mom Put Healthy Boy In Wheelchair
Hayden-Johnson admitted at Exeter Crown Court child cruelty between February 2001 and October 2007 and perverting the course of justice in May 2007 over a false rape claim she filed as her lies unraveled and threatened to expose her, the Daily Mail said.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/01/22/2010-01-22_mom_of_sickest_boy_in_britain_faces_jail_over_6year_scam.html#ixzz0dMxNdjHH
Interestingly, that woman (cited in posts above) recanted her rape claim when a man was going to be arrested.
It appears that she was willing to lie and extort, but NOT to let an innocent man get punished to maintain it.
@ snark
No, what *actually* happened was (paraphrasing) the police said...
Look, we know you made up the illnesses, we know you faked your nursing credentials, and we also know this rape is just a lie, now... you're not getting away with what you did to your son, but if you recant the nursing credentials, the rape and these other 12 items, you'll only go to court on the one charge.
subtext is plod then counts all 13 items as separate crimes all cleared up and credited to the officers personally come annual review.
That, and there are a lot of edicts starting to filter down from the very top of the UK justice system at the moment, in areas such as family law, sexual offences, and suchlike.
Watch this space
Interesting. I did not know that.
The article I read gave the impression that she had recanted upon finding out that a man was going to be arrested / had been arrested.
But ... how many times have Steve and Pierce told us to be wary of journalism in these kind of cases?
Snark,
I would be wary of "journalism" in general.
:)
Pierce is already working on that story, as well as the new one from Pitt college. Should be great to read what he has to say. It always is.
@ snark
here is an interesting tidbit...
While the number of Judges in the UK has remained fairly constant in recent years, the number of family law (divorce / child custody / etc) cases has gone through the roof.
also, the proportion of these (family law) cases where offences of violent and / or sexual nature are claimed has also increased dramatically... eg no more "I want a divorce because he goes out drinking every friday night and leaves me at home", instead we get "I want a divorce and injunctions and all his shit because he is the reincarnation of Ed Bundy"
Like Justice Henriques last October stating that prison is now mandatory for FRA's in the UK, now a directive has come down in the family courts that the only allegations that will be heard will be those where the Judge stands a reasonable change of finding in favour of one party or the other, eg no more "he said / she said" allegations.
Interesting times people, the tide may not be visibly / evidently turning to the casual glance, but it is no longer rising, and shows all the signs of ebbing.
AfOR- "the proportion of these (family law) cases where offences of violent and / or sexual nature are claimed has also increased dramatically"
This has been going on for some time now in the US as well.
In fact, it is the way in which I came to be aware of the MRM.
Years ago, well before I became interested in MRM sites (I was aware of certain MRA’s, like Glenn Sacks, but, at the time, he was only posting his editorials – blogging wasn’t a big then), my wife mentioned to me that she noticed numerous cases where women were making DV and child abuse (even child sexual abuse) charges against their husbands either during, or just before initiating divorce proceedings.
She, and several of her fellow prosecutors who were handling “county court” cases at that time (and, this included some rather feminist-leaning women) began talking about how it often seemed quite obvious that some of these women were lying, and that it was equally as obvious that they were doing so in an attempt to gain an advantage in up-coming divorce, property distribution, and custody issues. Several of my wife’s colleagues actually encountered situations in which the women so much as told them so. Apparently, many women didn’t seem to understand that DA’s handling the cases were not “their” attorneys, and assumed that they were bound by attorney-client privilege, and simply came right out and stated that the made up the claims just to get restraining orders which would keep their husbands removed from their homes and children.
That these women were doing these things pissed-off even the most strident feminist DA’s, one of whom actually filed a false reporting charge on one woman who told her that the claim was a deliberate lie. This caused intense friction between the DA’s office and local woman’s advocacy groups, and the charges (misdemeanor) were ultimately dropped (as were the false charges made by the woman). Subsequently, the women’s advocate groups seem to have been advising women who were lying NOT to say so to the DA’s.
It was my wife relating these events to me that got me curious enough to search out more information on the web – which is how I stumbled upon the blog that Glenn Sacks had started several years ago – which, in turn, started me down the road to becoming an MRA.
Welcome to the new world order...matriachy!!
Not all patriarchies are being broken equally!!
Broken patriarchies are statistically where most violent crime comes from!!
slwerner, great comment.
And all that coincided with the "revelations" about male atrocities, so all men were painted as potential rapists and batterrers. Good men bought into it -- because, you know, with us men, we never think these laws, this zero tolerance for dv and sexual assault, could come back to bite us in the ass; we always think those things are directed at the "bad" men.
One of the main purposes of this site is to show good men (this site isn't for the bad men) and the women who care about them that, yes, indeed, these policies are out-of-control and they can very easily bite them in the ass.
Here is more education for you on what NYS law says about Consent and Lack of Consent:
http://www.svfreenyc.org/survivors_legal.html#A1
(Pertinent parts excepted below):
Some Factor Other Than Incapacity to Consent: Rape 3 and Criminal Sexual Act 3 have recently been modified with a “no means no” clause. In cases of intercourse only, if the victim expressed that he or she did not consent to the sex act in such a way that a reasonable person would have understood those words or acts as expressing lack of consent, this would be prosecutable as Rape in the third degree or Criminal Sexual Act in the third degree. This makes a case easier for the District Attorney to prosecute because it is based on a reasonable person standard, and not on the specific interpretation of a defendant.
What constitutes a sexual offense?
If any of the following acts are perpetrated against a victim “without his or her consent,” as defined above, it is a crime under New York State Law:
Sexual Intercourse: the penetration of the penis into the vagina, however slight– in other words, if the penis goes into the vagina just a little, not in its entirety, that is considered completed “sexual intercourse”. (There is no requirement of physical injury and usually there is no requirement that ejaculation or orgasm have occurred.)
AND/OR
Criminal Sexual Act (Oral or Anal Sexual Conduct): does not require any penetration and occurs upon contact between penis and mouth, penis and anus (rectum), mouth and anus, or mouth and vaginal area.
AND/OR
Sexual Contact: any touching of the sexual or intimate parts of the body whether over or under clothing:
done for the purpose of gratifying the sexual desire of either party
includes the touching of the victim’s sexual or intimate parts by the perpetrator AND the touching of the perpetrator’s sexual or intimate parts by the victim
AND/OR
Forcible Touching: the intentional and forcible touching of another
done for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person or done for the purpose of gratifying the defendant’s sexual desire
includes squeezing, grabbing, or pinching
AND/OR
Aggravated Sexual Contact: insertion of a foreign object (e.g. coke bottle, broom handle, etc.) into the vagina, urethra, penis or rectum.
Insertion of a finger into vagina, urethra, penis or rectum causing injury, constitutes 2nd degree sexual offense
If the insertion of the object causes physical injury, this constitutes a 1st degree sexual offense
If no injury occurs, this constitutes a 3rd degree sexual offense
This is not my language or “feminist language”; it’s the law.
No means no.
Off topic; if the roles were reversed, what do all of you think would have happened in this report?
Female reporter sexually assaults David Beckham - but it's him who's being controversial
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/people/goldenballs-groped-journalist-grabs-david-beckhams-privates-20100122-mom8.html?autostart=1
Anonymous above me...
If a guy did that to a girl he would be on a sex offender registry for life and be in prison.
It is perfectly legal for a woman to sexually assault a guy in any way she wants.
Denise Romano - "No means no."
Yes, Denise,
We are all perfectly aware than anytime a woman says no, and a man continues on with sexual activity, it's absolutely sexual assault/rape.
This point IS NOT IN CONTENTION.
So, let's reconsider this whole discussion in light of what NYS law says about Consent and Lack of Consent:
First we have to consider if the girl (in Richmond, CA) gave or denied consent to the four black guy's.
Well, of course she didn't - because there were no four black guys!!!!
Did you forget to read the story, Denise???
Have you bothered to look through the archive to see just how many instance of FRA's don't even involve a question of consent? Did you see how many FRA's don't involve any actual sexual activity by the named suspect?
Why would you post that on this thread? What point were you trying to make? That since the girl didn't give consent to the four fictitious black guy's, then it she was raped by them?
Please explain yourself here.
Looks like we have another man hating feminist troll here slwerner....just look at her site.
Anonymous -"Looks like we have another man hating feminist troll here slwerner....just look at her site."
I've had some exchange with her on The Spearhead.
I have no way to confirm it, but, several people have indicated that she is engaging in a campaign to to have web site shut down by claiming that they are promoting rape. Supposedly, she specifically targeted some sites which suddenly disappeared (those sites are, in deed, now gone).
Again, I have know way of knowing if she actually had any part in getting those sites shut down. But, Pierce and Steven might want to check into switching to Wordpress as an alternative should she actually be doing what is suggested (apparently most, if not all the sites shut down were on Blogspot), and they should most definitely ensure that they have a current backups of the site (which can be imported into Wordpress should that be necessary).
I wonder if the owners of those sites are covered under free speech?
Also it's a total double standard to shut down those sites and not others that promote false accusations... which would be thousands of sites as a guess.
I agree back this site up.
“Feminist language” and the law are not mutually exclusive. Take a look at the VAWA.
"I have no way to confirm it, but, several people have indicated that she is engaging in a campaign to to have web site shut down by claiming that they are promoting rape."
That is indeed unfortunate, as those claims were likely false. The irony of which does not escape me.
Feminism v. The 1st Amendment
http://manhood101.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1898
Pierce,
Could you call me?
Thanks,
Steve
All,
First, thank you for all of your support for this site. Without you, we couldn't do what we do.
Second, I would like to ask that everyone please refrain from responding in any way to miss romano. Ignore her, for everyone's sake.
Thank you,
E. Steven Berkimer
I agree with Ms. Romano's formulation and have long advocated a reasonable person standard for consent. This is the standard employed throughout the common law for all manner of determinations, and it should apply here. The placement of the comment on this particular post is troubling because it suggests that we don't agree with such a standard, and I suspect the writer has pegged us for something we are not -- a rape apologist site. We loathe and detest rape. Our heroes are ACLU-types like Dershowitz, and the Innocence Project people. Our goals are modest -- to address the special needs of the falsely accused -- the reputational harm, etc., and I have no room for misogyny (as some of our readers know -- they've experienced the brunt of my wrath in emails). I also will not tolerate being mischaracterized or -- and this is a warning to anyone who might try it -- libeled. Won't stand for it. If we say something wrong, email me and I'll correct it or explain why I'm not wrong.
Post a Comment