Corl Lynn Keith to stand trial over false rape claim.
The woman who reported a false rape in March to cover up an affair, will stand trial after waiving her right to a preliminary hearing today.
Centre Hall resident Corl Lynn Keith faces two misdemeanor charges of making a false report to police. The standard sentence for those charges is probation.
Keith, 22, is accused of putting Innovation Park student and Penn State campus police on high alert after reporting she was raped and beaten by a masked man in a parking lot. Less than 24 hours into the investigation, Keith admitted to doubtful police that she created the charade to cover up an affair and get medical treatment for a possible pregnancy, court papers say.
Evidence at the scene and inconsistencies in her story had already led police to believe the rape didn't happen.
Keith told police she thought she may have gotten pregnant or contracted a sexually transmitted disease while having an affair, so she "used the incident report to obtain medical treatment and provide alternative explanation to her partner, if she had become pregnant," court papers said.
Keith, 22, is accused of putting Innovation Park student and Penn State campus police on high alert after reporting she was raped and beaten by a masked man in a parking lot. Less than 24 hours into the investigation, Keith admitted to doubtful police that she created the charade to cover up an affair and get medical treatment for a possible pregnancy, court papers say.
Evidence at the scene and inconsistencies in her story had already led police to believe the rape didn't happen.
Keith told police she thought she may have gotten pregnant or contracted a sexually transmitted disease while having an affair, so she "used the incident report to obtain medical treatment and provide alternative explanation to her partner, if she had become pregnant," court papers said.
Posts
16 comments:
Good police work.
Why are law enforcement offices not complaining about the false rape culture that has developed over the last 15 years??
I have a theory, its because alot of federal pork dollars are coming their way because of it.
"I have a theory, its because alot of federal pork dollars are coming their way because of it."
Except that it's a crackpot theory. How many times do we have to go over this?
Before you read this, some of you may want to take high blood pressure medication.
http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/2034772-Beyond-absurd-Analyzing-the-IPADV-training-guide/
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf
It's a very good article, and I especially like how he uses feminist advocacy research against their own agenda. However, I do not agree with this:
"I agree that if a domestic violence incident involves a “single or isolated injurious beating or episodic psychological battering,” for at least temporary safety an arrest needs to take place regardless of the desires of those involved. This should be true even for incidents lacking specific probable cause concerning who is the offender and who is the victim. "
And what the heck is "psychological battering"?
Anonymous - "I have a theory, its because alot of federal pork dollars are coming their way because of it."
Of brother, not this again?
As I'm stated and provided links to evidence of, very little federal money is available to LE specifically for sexually based crimes (not limited to rape). There is simply NO practical incentive to try to "up" the rape number sin hopes of getting more money.
Surely, anyone who's spent a moment or two considering such matters will realize that far more money goes into the wars on drug, guns and gangs than into the war on rape (the former three are, after all, far more pervasive crimes that put far more people in jeopardy).
In instances when LE does ignore FRA and/or fail to act properly on them, it is far more likely that it comes down to either misguided white-knighting by those involved, or simple laziness on their part. There are also instance of rogue behaviors on the part of members of LE, but even these seem unlikely to be motivated by any belief that their is a potential federal "pay-off" (nor any other financial windfall) for their doing so.
It's one thing to have theories about what's going on (I've proffered more than my own share); but do try to show how they might be playing out (ei suggesting specific modes of money-making conduct, and then explaining how those efforts will get money, and even what money they could get. Then, investigate if those supposed financial sources actually exist, and the what any local LE agency would have to do to be in line for even a pittance of those funds.
If the practices of ignoring FRA and even fabricating statistics (if you are who I believe you are, you've claimed that one with some frequency), and thus profiting, SURELY by now you'd have found at least one example.
[my apologies to everyone else for, once again, veering off-course to address this nonsense]
False Allegations: An Assault on Justice by Dr. Bruce Gross can be linked here: http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/
I noticed in your informative sources that it is not linked or that the link needed to be restored.
Anon at 10:08: THANKS. I was in the processing of posting that article in our archives so I could link it, but the paragraphing got jumbled, and you just saved me a lot of time!
From the "Maine Predominant Aggressor Report":
"Many times, victims of domestic violence are in fear of imminent bodily injury and they defend themselves either by striking first"
Then it only gets worse from there...
"Less than 24 hours into the investigation, Keith admitted to doubtful police..."
I do hope our anti-LE contingent caught that. The doubtful police!
Here, LE did everything correctly, and by the book. They took her statement (a reminder to some of you that they MUST take statements - they cannot reject anyone's claims out-of-hand. And, the simple act of taking the statement IS NOT an effort to facilitate nor encourage FRA's), and they investigated, although they were clearly dubious of her claims from the outset.
[rant]
Rather than continue (as some seem to wish) to view LE as one enormous massing of “clones” marching in lock-step to the beat of the feminist’s drum; it is my contention that we out to make an effort to point out (if not praise) those instance wherein LE does the right thing, and acts to do the most good for the most people and spare innocents from the taint of such claims. As with almost every other aspect of life, praise and, alternately, condemnation, when accurately employed, can help to steer things towards desirable ends. Pointing out the differences between when LE gets it right vs. those instance when they screw it up serves that very goal.
[/rant]
[theory]
Once again, we have a case of a woman using a claim of a brutal stranger rape (kidnap/rape/beating/threats/weapons – you know the type) to cover for illicit activities. Given that women are locked into such drug-into-the-bushes-by-stranger scenarios in order to hide sexual peccadillo’s, I’ve had a growing suspicion that the numbers of this manner of false claims may actually be as greater (or even greater) than the actual number of violent surprise stranger rapes (a crime which is actually quite rare). Of course, getting evidence to back up my suspicions is rather difficult, but, it seems that every time I’ve tried doing a search (using the search function of the news articles web page) for other local rape reports (within a years period), I’ve seldom found more than one or two – and often those “unsolved” (may not be real, as women making this type of false claims will often give deliberately misleading descriptions of their “attackers” so as to avoid implicating their lovers).
Here, once again, I’ve had the same outcome. There is but one recent local rape report, an unsolved incident at that.
Of course, it doesn’t PROVE anything, but it does cause me further suspicion as to the frequency of real stranger rape vs. false claims of stranger rape made to cover-up consensual but illicit sex.
[/theory]
Is there a double standard here? I think so.
In California there are 33 state male prisons, and only 1 female prison. There is no doubt that men are intentionally victimized by a corrupt legal system.
Women know that they can game the system, in there favor.
Remember folks Women Never Lie. Not.
Court: Sexually dangerous can be kept in prison
May 17th, 2010 @ 10:29am
By JESSE J. HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered "sexually dangerous" after their prison terms are complete.
The high court in a 7-2 judgment reversed a lower court decision that said Congress overstepped its authority in allowing indefinite detentions of considered "sexually dangerous."
"The statute is a 'necessary and proper' means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned but who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others," said Justice Stephen Breyer, writing the majority opinion.
President George W. Bush in 2006 signed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, which authorized the civil commitment of sexually dangerous federal inmates.
The act, named after the son of "America's Most Wanted" television host John Walsh, was challenged by four men who served prison terms ranging from three to eight years for possession of child pornography or sexual abuse of a minor. Their confinement was supposed to end more than two years ago, but prison officials said there would be a risk of sexually violent conduct or child molestation if they were released.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., ruled last year that Congress overstepped its authority when it enacted a law allowing the government to hold indefinitely people who are considered "sexually dangerous."
Solicitor General Elena Kagan successfully argued the government's case in front of the Supreme Court. Kagan has now been nominated to replace the retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.
Kagan in January compared the government's power to commit sexual predators to its power to quarantine federal inmates whose sentences have expired but have a highly contagious and deadly disease.
"Would anybody say that the federal government would not have Article I power to effect that kind of public safety measure? And the exact same thing is true here. This is exactly what Congress is doing here," she said.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the court's judgment, saying Congress can only pass laws that deal with the federal powers listed in the Constitution.
Nothing in the Constitution "expressly delegates to Congress the power to enact a civil commitment regime for sexually dangerous persons, nor does any other provision in the Constitution vest Congress or the other branches of the federal government with such a power," Thomas said.
Thomas was joined in part on his dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia.
How States Make Money from Labeling People a Sex Offender
Wednesday, 05 May 2010 00:00 | excerpt:
How does it work? State officials report how many people they have on their sex offender registry. This report goes to the Federal Government. From those numbers, grants are issued. Real Money is sent to states based upon how many people they have on their sex offender registry. States report people who are DEAD, or Do Not Even Live in their State, People who live in other countries and people WHO HAVE NEVER COMMITTED A SEX CRIME IN THEIR LIVES...and get paid to do it!
It's kinda like a woman who is on welfare. She goes and borrows 7 children from her girl friend, takes those children to the Welfare Office and tell them that the 7 children are hers. The government then grants her 5-$700.00 a month in Food Stamps, 5-$700.00 a month for housing, money for utilities... then, a few months later, another woman takes those same children in to that same office and present that those children are hers.. and does the same thing... This is going on all over our nation.
Some companies are creating businesses completely off of sex offenders. What are these businesses?
* Electronic Monitoring Devices, i.e., ankle or wrist bands with GPS positioning to monitor where a person on the registry goes, and where they are at all times.
* Software to track anyone under these laws.
* Website scripting to track anyone under these laws, anyone branded a sex offender.
* More people branded sex offender means the states and cities get to hire more staff. More State Police, More City Police to check on, document and monitor these people.
* More money from the courts as more people are charged with, "Failure to Register as a Sex Offender" for simple things like, NOT being able to get a job. Not being able to get a place to live. Going to Church. Going anywhere where Children Congregate!
2
Kagan in January compared the government's power to commit sexual predators to its power to quarantine federal inmates whose sentences have expired but have a highly contagious and deadly disease.
"Would anybody say that the federal government would not have Article I power to effect that kind of public safety measure? And the exact same thing is true here. This is exactly what Congress is doing here," she said.
***
That's INSANE. Judges Thomas and Scalia are to be congratulated for opposing this abominable ruling.
I did just read, however, that the statute could still be found unconstitutional on other grounds. This may not be the Supreme Court's final ruling in this matter.
It can still be challenged on the grounds that it violates the inmates' due process rights.
We had better pray that is true. Otherwise - it's FEMA camp time FOR ALL OF US.
Post a Comment