Once again, it appears to be a case of crying rape to get out of trouble for another crime.
Amy Leann Bryant charged for filing false rape accusation.
A woman who claimed her boyfriend raped her is charged with fabricating the story, according to an affidavit filed in Sumner County General Sessions Court.
Amy Leann Bryant, 28, of Lebanon, was pulled over by Gallatin police on Jan. 21 for DUI. At that time, she told officers that her boyfriend had raped her.
She was transported to Sumner Regional Medical Center, where she submitted to a rape kit. According to the affidavit, Bryant then went to the Gallatin Police Department, where she allegedly admitted that she might have lied about being raped. According to police, the investigation determined that no rape occurred.
Bryant was charged with filing a false report. Her bond was set at $1,000. She is scheduled to appear in Sumner County General Sessions Court on March 16.
Link:
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100203/GALLATIN01/100202074/2138/Woman+charged+with+filing+false+rape+report
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
42 comments:
Tennessee is a woman's state, she will ge given the infamous vagina pass.
It is sick the amount of false rape accusations there now are. Gender / Raunch feminists should be ashamed of themselves for fostering this false rape accusation culture. I believe the new law enforcement policy is to no longer keep records of false rape accusations..This is probably because of their gender feminist bosses telling them not to. Get gender feminist hysteria out of our legal system, their misinformation is inflaming a prejudice that is turning an otherwise sound legal system into a type of "Klan court".
"I believe the new law enforcement policy is to no longer keep records of false rape accusations."
Well, that's better than accusing them of deliberately manufacturing false statistics, so maybe we are getting somewhere.
As Archivist has mentioned before, people lie about everything under the sun for all sorts of reasons.
Questions:
* How will/should the boyfriend continue the relationship with his girl-"friend"?
* What would the regular readers here do in his situation?
* Will the DUI actually help her defense in regard to her false accusation?
* Will the boyfriend be subject to scrutiny by authorities regardless of the recantation and lack of evidence?
* Does the accuser suffer from mental illness such as a cluster B (borderline, histrionic, narcissistic) personality disorder as AFoR and others have mentioned previously here at FRS? Many of those diagnosed with such disorders are also substance abusers.
As Dr. Hall states in his article
on Patients Who Make False Allegations:
http://www.drrichardhall.com/allegations.htm
"False allegations of abuse occur in a variety of contexts; the most frequent being 1) disputed and ugly divorce cases; 2) in custody disputes involving children; 3) by angry borderline patients; 4) by patients with Munchausen's syndrome by proxy; 5) by psychopaths against authority figures; 6) by inadequate patients with strong needs for recognition and attention; 7) by patients with personality disorders; 8) by substance abusers, particularly alcoholics; 9) by patients with paranoid psychoses; 10) by patients with paranoid personality; 11) by patient with "multiple personalities"15; 12) by passive patients urged to file complaints by their therapists to meet the unspoken needs of the therapist.
Knight16 notes that "the fact is that a significant proportion of allegations of rape and indecent assault reported to the police are found to be untrue. This is often hotly denied by women's groups, but is an indisputable fact, proven by many subsequent admissions by girls that no such attack took place.""
"I believe the new law enforcement policy is to no longer keep records of false rape accusations."
It might vary from agency to agency, but we cite evidence on this site (specifically, statements made by police officers who deal with rape claims in the trenches) that the bulk of false rape claims are dealt with, and are disposed of, informally by police immediately after they are made. Most of these claims are informally made, with the police counseling the caller about the propriety of making a formal complaint. Disposing of rape claims early on, in this informal stage, is generally accomplished by exposing the claim as unbelievable, and emphasizing the seriousness of lodging a formal complain and of lodging a false claim. This very often prompts the claimant to withdraw it, or not to make a formal complaint.
This approach is inconsistent with the notion that every claim results in an arrest.
Despite the utility in handling claims in this informal manner, there are important drawbacks. First, they are permitted without serious repercussion so long as they are immediately withdrawn or so long as there is no formal complaint lodged. Second, far more false rape claims are made than the public is aware of because there is no uniform, systematic method to keeping track of the number of likely false rape claims.
Anon at 8:46: Thanks for your comment and for the great source.
It would be nice to track several police forces to see every call that came in or every in-person visit. See how many involve accusations of some sex crime against a male. Track each of them to see what ever came of them.
I had a comment deleted from a previous thread. Since I don't see how it was abusive, or inconsistent with stated policy, I'm re-posting it here because I took the time to write it, and it concerns other comments that have been reposted here several hundred times. Further we should have the ability to clarify views expressed from being distorted, inadvertently or otherwise.
Regardless, if this blog is going to have a comments policy, then it should follow that comments policy.
"Despite the utility in handling claims in this informal manner, there are important drawbacks. First, they are permitted without serious repercussion so long as they are immediately withdrawn or so long as there is no formal complaint lodged."
I agree, but increasing the repercussion for the false accuser, would also greatly increase the repercussion for the falsely accused. If she is prosecuted, then his name gets dragged into it.
"Second, far more false rape claims are made than the public is aware of because there is no uniform, systematic method to keeping track of the number of likely false rape claims."
That is true, but due to the complexity of the situation it is very difficult to shoehorn the amount of false rape accusations into a number. Technically, making a false rape accusation isn't even a separate crime to be counted from false reporting in general. The previously generated police statistics weren't based on that, but rather reports of rape that were cleared for various reasons that were not consistently defined. Although, even considering that, I disagree that such statistics were entirely useless. They should have been reformed, not eliminated.
This is disgusting. She not only lies about rape to get out of a DWI but she accuses her own boyfriend of it!
". . . increasing the repercussion for the false accuser, would also greatly increase the repercussion for the falsely accused. If she is prosecuted, then his name gets dragged into it."
This is a common concern that is ecchoed here a lot. I understand the concern, I share it, but ultimately I reject it. False accusers need to be sent a powerful message before they lie that they can't destroy a man's life by falsely accusing him of rape, and if they do, the punishment will be severe. The only powerful message is a punishment. To allow women to lie with impunity to police runs the grave risk that police can't dispose of the false claim. Too many falsely accused men have sat in prison waiting for the recantation that never came, and it's time to stop depending on the good will of rape liars by hoping, often in vain, that they show mercy to the innocent men and boys whose lives they've already destroyed by not pursuing it.
What prior practice are you referencing? Police always keep track of rape claims and we ought to be able to see what happens to them.
"It would be nice to track several police forces to see every call that came in or every in-person visit. See how many involve accusations of some sex crime against a male. Track each of them to see what ever came of them."
That's similar to the Kanin study. Unfortunately, that study, while still extremely valid and useful in explaining why some women make false accusations of rape, is getting old as far as determining how many women make false accusations of rape. What would be extremely helpful are new studies that reflect all the changes in the law over the last thirty years.
Anon at 9:31: write to me at thefrs@ymail.com and we will discuss this. You are out of line suggesting that I misquoted you. I quote you correctly and you answered, "Come again."
I proceeded to cite examples which were logical extentions of the quote to which you stated "come again." Those examples were not quotes, as any reasonable person can see.
I am not going to allow you to continue this discussion on this thread. You have now highjacked three threads -- and frankly, the reason is that you are pissed that, you claim, a long time ago I called you an extremist about something or other. Remind me what it was. Maybe I was out of line, but probably not.
You want a dialogue, write to me right now.
"What would be extremely helpful are new studies that reflect all the changes in the law over the last thirty years."
The problem now is that pretty much the only persons who study this issue in academic settings have an ideological agenda that is bent on finding rape oozing from every crevice.
UGH! I'm going to confer with Steve about whether we need to go back to comment moderation. I just deleted a comment from one of our better commentators that insulted another reader. Between this and that other commentator, who started by taking umbrage at one of our faithful readers, Scott, and then it became clear he was pissed because a long time I called him an extremist, supposedly . . . . hey you know what? Maybe Glenn Sacks has the right idea in eliminating comments. He sure as hell knows more about blogging that I do. Somebody sees the past several threads and they're not going to know what the hell is going on here. Enough.
I apologize for my language earlier, Archivist. I hope you don't eliminate comments because I think it hurt Glenn Sacks' site.
Anonymous - "This is disgusting. She not only lies about rape to get out of a DWI but she accuses her own boyfriend of it!"
[Wow! looks Like I missed a whole lot being gone for a few days]
Anyways, the thing that jumps out at me about this particular story goes to your comment - she named her own boyfriend.
Why might this be? Why name someone you care about, apparently have no ongoing quarrel with at the time, just in the faint hope of receiving mercy for being caught committing a crime oneself.
My supposition is that she, like many women, are becoming a bit more (shall we say,) sophisticated about the workings of rape claims.
I guessing she was aware that rape claims are going to require submission to a rape kit if they are to be given credibility (by the contacting officer - who she was seeking mercy from). She also likely new that this would also involve the DNA testing of any suspected semen found.
With this more sophisticated understanding of what was going to happen, she knew that the old "some random average black guy" wouldn't stand a chance.
yet, she knew all too well that the only thing that could possibly rise to the level of getting her driving while drunk ignored would be for it to be believed that she had been raped (medical needs and escape from personal harm can be used to mitigate DUI's).
So, in her desperation, she realized that the only person who could reasonably be determined to have had sex with her (and, thus, have rape her) was her own boyfriend.
That's right! She had no reason to seek ant for of revenge on him, she was just trying to avoid DUI charges herself - so, if he's the only one who can be named, why not.
Like most young women these days, she likely grown up on a steady diet of being told men don't matter. They're expendable and replaceable. But, on the other hand, women matter above all, so men should be happy to fall on their swords for their women.
There are two significant things to note here: 1) modern young women think so little of men that they will gladly sacrifice them for even the most minor of personal conveniences. And, 2) with the advancement of not only the bio-medical technology, but also the growth in the understanding of their application, I believe it is likely that we will be seeing a rise in the incidents of women naming (specifically) their own sexual partners when they are making self-serving FRA claims.
Now SEE THIS -- slwerner's comment? THAT'S a commment! His comments are always interesting and thoughtful, even when I don't fully agree with them.
You didn't miss anything, slwerner. Somebody was pissed at Scott for talking about his "alliance" theory, and then, it turned out, at me, for supposedly calling him an "extremist" long ago. Then Axel insulted that same commentator. You know, business as usual at FRS. Several threads filled with incomprehensible crap.
But when we go to comment moderation, your comments will get a special pass.
I dunno about google blog, but if you port over to wordpress on your own domain you have access to all sorts of neat things, like comment moderation and also comment rating.
Best of all, it's all free, once you have the domain and hosting package.
If it's money or whatever I'd be happy to pay for it and set it up and hand over the keys, by way of thanks for all the good work done here.
Axel, apology accepted.
In regard to tracking claims, I found this comment below on an article I had read back in October:
http://www.caaflog.com/2009/10/04/interesting-slate-piece-on-the-percentage-of-rape-allegations-that-are-false/
"Anonymous says:
October 6, 2009 at 4:37 pm (Quote) In a prior life, I was an attorney in the Violent Felony Bureau of a relatively large Public Defenders office. I “tracked” rape cases for a year coming out of the Grand Jury. Admittedly it was a non-scientific basis and my criteria were simply these:
1) No physical/medical corroboraton – Defendant did not testify at the Grand Jury – the GJ “no billed” 50% of them;
2) No physical/medical corroboration – Defendant DID testify at the GJ – GJ “no billed” 85% of them;
3) Physical / medical corroboration [injuries / sexual activity] – Defendant did NOT testify – 98% indicted for some felony level sexual assault;
4) Physical / medical corroboration [injuries/sexual activity] – Defendant DID testify – 75% indicted for some felony level sexual assault.
Now, I realize that (a) the level of proof ["reasonable cause to believe"] does not equate to the “truth” of what really happened; and (b) other factors [lack of preparation by DA's; alibi's, etc.] could cause a GJ to “no bill” a rape case.
We also excluded cases where the dude was caught in the act or confessed. Our purpose wasn’t to conduct a scientific study, but for training young attorneys in evaluating how to defend these cases, e.g., if there was no “corroboration,” you almost always want the Defendant to testify as to his version of events.
But for whimpish Convening Authorities, it’s hard to beat the Article 32, system in the military for flushing out those cases where the evidence simply is not there.
And, as most competent forensic medical people will testify, if it’s truly a non-consensual sexual assault, there’s corroborative evidence if you look hard enough."
The police have their own biases just like every other human being or group. How often those cognitive, decision-making, and behavioral biases (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases ) result in unjustified detention, wrongful prosecution, conviction, and imprisonment is up for debate. There need not be a consipiracy or an "alliance" in order for there to be injustice, even if everyone in the law enforcement process follows the law, since everything is open to perception and interpretation. There can be no doubt, however, that if all reports to the police were tracked in detail and subject to scrutiny, justice would be better served and we would be basing our debate and decisions on reality versus perception.
AfOR, you are very generous. We've actually planned to switch over -- Steve is an IT guy, and it shouldn't be expensive. Your support, and slwerner's and Scott's and several others, is very important to us.
If you notice the comments policy -- I made a mention that we welcome off-topic comments specifically because of you. You are a treasure trove of useful information.
Anon at 10:58, thanks very much for that.
Break the gender feminist / law enforcement misinformation Alliance.
"What prior practice are you referencing? Police always keep track of rape claims and we ought to be able to see what happens to them."
That is true. The police still keep track of rape claims, and reports of rape are still counted by UCR/NIBRS, but not in the way that they did before.
Back in the 90's, there was this scuttlebutt regarding the geographical consistency of the number of "unfounded" reports of rape generated from the old UCR system. I remember Philadelphia's finest getting a federal valentine from Janet Reno. It might be online somewhere. Regardless, the FBI no longer tallies numbers for "false" or "unfounded" reports of rapes for their ever-popular Crime In the United States.
According to the the current UCR Handbook, whenever a department determines that a complaint of a crime is "unfounded or false", it eliminates that offense from its crime tally. Then crimes are counted as "cleared" or not for one of two reasons: the alleged perpetrator is identified, arrested or able to be arrested, and turned over to the prosecution; or by "exceptional means". That's where the numbers get fuzzy. Exceptional means is sort of a catch-all that includes a number of possible circumstances, which can include the alleged victim's recantation or refusal to cooperate, but also includes long list of situations that might prevent the alleged perpetrator from being arrested or able to be arrested, and turned over to the prosecution (the other criteria for being counted as "cleared").
So not only can either subcategory of those cleared include rape accusations that eventually turn out to be false (while the FBI also counts convictions, it doesn't break down non-convictions), reports not cleared (such as claims of an imaginary perpetrator that was never identified), or those eliminated from the tally of crimes (because the police didn't believe a crime occurred), can also have been false reports.
I think Dr. Gross explained very well the use of the word "unfounded" -- how it is essentially meaningless due to lack of consistency. (I'm going to link that article in the next couple of days.)
I thank you for your comments.
"This is a common concern that is ecchoed here a lot. I understand the concern, I share it, but ultimately I reject it. False accusers need to be sent a powerful message before they lie that they can't destroy a man's life by falsely accusing him of rape, and if they do, the punishment will be severe. The only powerful message is a punishment. To allow women to lie with impunity to police runs the grave risk that police can't dispose of the false claim. Too many falsely accused men have sat in prison waiting for the recantation that never came, and it's time to stop depending on the good will of rape liars by hoping, often in vain, that they show mercy to the innocent men and boys whose lives they've already destroyed by not pursuing it."
While I agree with you in principle, imho, there is a significant difference between situations where the accused is arrested and named in the press, and situations where the police dispose of the false claim quietly.
The gender / raunch community which usurps alot of power over campus / societal politics because of "Rape hysteria", is the leading cause of the law enforcement perversion of "WE NO LONGER KEEP RECORDS", of false rape accusations. This is another convenient "protocol perversion tool" to again "manufacture and feed" the public the misinformation that only 2% of rape accusations are false.
The gender / Raunch perverts are not gonna give up their hysteria power very easily, thats why i say there needs to be a civil rights lawsuit that separates gender feminist misinformation and our law enforcement.
P.S. the UCR handbook is put out by the FBI, right? It is my understanding that they stopped tallying even unfounded rape stats several years ago.
"While I agree with you in principle, imho, there is a significant difference between situations where the accused is arrested and named in the press, and situations where the police dispose of the false claim quietly."
Hmm. I think you may be onto something there.
"There are two significant things to note here: 1) modern young women think so little of men that they will gladly sacrifice them for even the most minor of personal conveniences."
I don't think it's fair lump all modern women together. Most women would never even consider doing such a thing.
"And, 2) with the advancement of not only the bio-medical technology, but also the growth in the understanding of their application, I believe it is likely that we will be seeing a rise in the incidents of women naming (specifically) their own sexual partners when they are making self-serving FRA claims."
That could be true.
I agree with AfOR. Porting to a hosting service and having a falserapesociety.org/.com/.info domain has many advantages. As mentioned, Wordpress and the add-on tools that go with it would make your jobs easier! Also, you can move all of the prior FRS posts (comments and all) to Wordpress
http://www.scottnesbitt.net/samples/bloggerWP.pdf
It's definitely a move that will take FRS to the next level.
Whatever you do, please continue to allow comments!! Conflict is good! It means that people are emotionally invested in the issue. Stating specific commenting policies and procedures will help with moderation as will going to a more feature-rich set of web tools.
Some of the things I post here may ramble, contain too many links, or may be off topic altogether. I treat this blog as the "stone soup" that it is. I also keep in mind that, at least in the short term, our audience is really the thousands of young men and boys (and even occasionally women) that will be falsely accused this year and will turn to us for information and support. As a falsely accused, I know they will need all the help they can get. Eventually, I hope that FRS can be a springboard to influence the media, legislators, and law enforcement to bring reason, equal protection, and accountability back into the process.
You have my thanks and support, whatever you may choose to do, Archivist.
I know a guy that had sex with a girl, and she went the next morning and got a semen swab ???Rape kit?? done, and she's putting it on the shelf to accuse him later when he will not be able to defend himself.
False rape accusers can now do this. F@@CKIN PIGS!!! and its a perversion of our legal system that is letting them do this!!
Archivist - "Now SEE THIS -- slwerner's comment? THAT'S a commment!"
Gee Pierce, I feel kinda like the kid who the teacher is praising in front of the class - a moment of smug satisfaction, followed by getting soundly beaten up by the other kids on the playground later.
But, getting back to being serious, I do find it highly unfortunate that the issue of law enforcement culpability in any alliance with radicalized gender-feminists has become so heated amongst those who SHOULD be looking for commonality well ahead of disparity.
The concerns some have regarding the behaviors are certainly not entirely unfounded. As one who tends to come down on the side of LE, I know that I all too often find myself eating some crow in those instance where Police and/or DA's have clearly screwed-up.
While I would hope that LE could be trusted to do the right thing, such hope clearly is not universally answered in the observable practice of LE.
On the other hand, we see plenty of examples (as in this case above), where LE DOES respond correctly, and where the truth is found out. Here, for example, not only did the truth come out, but the perpetrator was both named and charges for her criminal conduct in making an FRA.
I would hope that those who remain wary of LE would at least acknowledge that we could be better served if we clearly differentiate between those times when LE gets it wrong and those time where they get it right.
I'm quite willing to acknowledge those times when they fail - and even to take them to task for those failures myself. It would be nice to see a bit of reciprocity - even if it is expressed only in the form of NOT posting the anti-LE boiler plate responses to discussion threads in which the lead story is one in which LE acts appropriately.
I don't mean to be insulting, as I understand that those boiler plate responses are born from legitimate concerns; yet, I'd prefer to see comments tailored to fit the accounts of the story at hand - or at least be somehow related.
"P.S. the UCR handbook is put out by the FBI, right?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Crime_Reporting_Handbook
Anonymous - "I don't think it's fair lump all modern women together. Most women would never even consider doing such a thing."
Fair point. Also, a mistype on my part. It should have read "modern young women all too often think so little of men that they will gladly sacrifice them for even the most minor of personal conveniences."
I had no intention of suggesting that it applied to all, most, nor even a majority of modern young women; but rather that it did apply all too often - even if the application is to a very small percentage.
Readers, we've got a nasty troll lurking on our site, so I'm implementing comment moderation
Good call, Archivist.
It says a lot about certain people, that they would go out of their way to disrupt a site drawing attention to injustices.
Btw, I sent a message to the FRS email. Get back to me if / when you can.
Just responded to your email, Snark. Thanks.
By the way, Steve might overrule me on the comment moderation -- won't be able to speak with him until tonight.
". . . increasing the repercussion for the false accuser, would also greatly increase the repercussion for the falsely accused. If she is prosecuted, then his name gets dragged into it."
I pray for the day my husband's name is publically cleared and hers is made public and her lies exposed. I welcome it!! Front Page Center, headlines, just like the FRA was!!!
-----------------
I missed all the excitment! You know sometimes I can kick some feminist ass!! ;)
CBGirl
Post a Comment