Britain pays crime victims, including women who claim they've been raped, substantial sums of money as "compensation." The alleged rapes need not have involved violence to trigger the payments. The compensation system has been subjected to rampant fraud, and women have falsely cried rape in order to collect. In one well-publicized case, a false accuser was compensated substantial monies for her lie.
But it was affirmed yesterday: Britain does not compensate men for the harm they suffer after being falsely accused, no matter how egregious. The double-standard is stark, and morally grotesque. It tells us much about how our society regards the victims of false rape claims.
After winning the right in court to apply for the same sort of monetary compensation as other crime victims receive, Clive Bishop, who lost his taxi business and was shunned by the community as a result of a false rape claim that sent his false accuser to jail for ten months, has been denied compensation for his ordeal by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) because he was not the victim of a violent crime. "It's just ripped the heart out of me and the last three-and-a-half years have been a total nightmare," Mr. Bishop said. See the story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/england/somerset/10465915.stm
Earlier this year, Mr. Bishop told False Rape Society: "It is not about the money for me it is a recognition of the horrific consequences it brings." He added: ". . . sexual offences that are alleged are the only crime where innocent people are arrested locked up without any evidence to back up what someone has alleged. . . . Don't forget while I was arrested for a crime that never occurred and locked up, my freedom and liberty denied, she was in a comfortable suite being befriended and pandered. My emotions were ignored and I was arrested, judged and convicted without any compassion or evidence. Believe me when I say that I am still suffering!"
Who Is Covered?
The CICA, funded by the Ministry of Justice, pays victims of “violent crimes” according to an established scheme of tariffs. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (2008) sets forth the standard amounts paid for each category of crime. The Scheme is found here. A payment will be made if the alleged violent crime was more likely than not to have occurred. (Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (2008) ¶20) There is no necessity to prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard for conviction in UK criminal courts.
While the Compensation Scheme is designed to cover crimes of violence, an exception is made for non-forcible rape and other sexual crimes not involving violence. Payments are made for mental injury, including “temporary mental anxiety,” suffered by non-consenting victims of sexual offenses. (Criminal Injuries Compensation (2008) ¶9.) Under the compensation scheme, non-consensual penile penetration warrants UK £11,000. (Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (2008) Page 34.) Greater sums are allotted depending on the severity of the injury inflicted. A non-penetrative sexual physical act “over the clothing” warrants UK £1000. (Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (2008) Page 34.) This, presumably, includes a single instance of inappropriate touching.
In the UK during 2008-2009, 1,938 payments were made to "victims" of rape for a total of £30,197,619. See here: http://www.equalities.gov.uk/pdf/Stern_Review_of_Rape_Reporting_1FINAL.pdf
Who Is Not Covered?
The UK does not compensate men who were falsely accused of rape, no matter how terrible their victimization. To verify this, I previously wrote to the CICA and asked if a false rape claim would be covered, noting that such claims often have the effect of mentally (not to mention financially) destroying the falsely accused. We received a prompt and professional response that included the following:
"Under the terms of our scheme unfortunately this would not be covered. Under the terms of our scheme for eligibility, applicants need to be the victim of a violent crime."
It is important to underscore the terrible double-standard here: the victim of a single instance of a sexual act over the clothing is entitled to compensation, but a man falsely accused of rape who is arrested and jailed for weeks, months or even years, who is subjected to untold mental agonies, who loses his friends, the esteem of his community, his job, his business, and his good name, is entitled to nothing.
The victimization of men falsely accused of rape, no matter how egregious their injuries, is regarded less worthy of society’s protection than the victimization of non-forcible rape victims, no matter how slight their injuries.
Also not covered are the vast majority of boys who are statutorily raped by adult women. This is because victims of sexual offenses are not covered if they “consented in fact.” (Criminal Injuries Compensation (2008) ¶9(c).) This effectively rules out virtually all claims involving the statutory rape of a teen boy by an adult woman because the boy is typically a willing participant. The fact that the law has determined that boys are incapable of giving valid consent to engage in sexual acts with an adult is of no import to the CICA.
The Compensation Scheme Exacerbates the False Rape Epidemic
The premise of those who assert women don’t lie about rape is that women have no incentive to lie, and that the criminal ordeal a rape accuser is put through outweighs any possible benefit from lying. This, of course, is not true, and the Compensation Scheme indisputably furnishes a monetary incentive to lie about rape. It is well to note two things: (1) the compensation paid for sexual offenses is scarcely insignificant; and (2) women lie about rape for far less rational reasons. In Professor Eugene Kanin’s landmark study of a mid-size Midwestern city over the course of nine years, he found that 41 percent of all rape claims were not just false but actually recanted. Two of the three principal motivations for false claims identified by Kanin are the following: women lie to obtain attention/sympathy, and for revenge. If significant numbers of women are willing to lie about rape simply to get attention or revenge, is it not all the more plausible that some women will lie for the more rational reason of obtaining a significant sum of money? The question scarcely survives its statement.
Remember Grant Bowers? He was just an ordinary teenager when a 20-year-old woman named Sarah-Jane Hillard decided his life didn't mean as much as the £7,500 she would collect from the CICA if she claimed he raped her. She was caught, but Grant's life was destroyed. "I don't know why she did it but her lies have ruined my life," he said. Grant had to move out of his hometown because of threats against him. People were kicking the door of his flat in and shouting "rapist" though the letterbox. Someone offered a reward to learn his whereabouts. He was chased through town with a knife. Is it surprising that for a time, he was physically sick with worry and constantly teary? All because a woman wanted to collect money from the CICA. See here: http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2009/08/woman-destroys-teens-life-with-false.html
The problem of fraud in the Compensation Scheme has been evident for years. In 2001, the chief executive of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board blamed the growth in false criminal claims in general on a compensation culture. A CICA report published that year highlighted rampant fraud in the compensation system: “Among the [fraudulent] cases is that of a woman who has been asked to repay £7,500 after falsely claiming she was raped by a tramp. Last year, a court found that Natalie Knighting, a 21-year-old with three children, had made up the story. She was jailed for six months. Ms Knighting had won compensation from the CICA for the second time. She had been awarded the same amount of compensation for sexual assault as a child. So far, the authority has been unable to recover any money from her.” See here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/britain-now-the-worlds-compensation-capital-with-payouts-set-to-keep-rising-689105.html
But, of course, the government denies that the Compensation Scheme breeds false rape claims even though the CICA itself has acknowledged rampant fraud as a result of this compensation culture, and even though we know significant numbers of women lie about rape for far less rational reasons.
In a 2007 debate in the House of Lords, Lord Campbell-Savours questioned the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State on this subject:
“My Lords, is it possible that one reason for high rates of false allegations and low rates of conviction for rape is that a minority—I stress that—of women make false allegations in order to win compensation which, in the case of rape, is £11,000? Why do we not move to the German system, where the state does not pay and where compensation follows civil action, as against the state paying? Surely the trauma of rape requires not state-funded windfalls but counselling services that really help victims.”
The Under-Secretary rejected the question out of hand:
“My Lords, a victim of rape should get both compensation and counselling and support. It is not either/or; it is both/and. As the noble Lord will know, it is very important that we make sure that where convictions are made, people can get some kind of recompense for the trauma and injury that they may have received. As for the reasons why people make false allegations, I do not agree that one of the primary objectives is to get £11,000. There may be very serious reasons why people do that, which we need to consider.”
See here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70515-0001.htm
While suggesting that the government should at least consider the reasons for false rape allegations, the Under-Secretary stuck her head in the sand and flatly refused to entertain the notion that women would lie about rape for anything as crass as money. It would have to be a more “serious” reason than that.
If someone wanted to do a study of the false rape problem in the UK, he could use the CICA’s Compensation Scheme as a microcosm: the government enables women to lie about rape and then wonders why the attrition rate for rape is so abysmal. And no matter how terribly men suffer from false rape claims, the government thinks they deserve nothing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
24 comments:
A false rape accusations IS a violent crime.
It's official: the western nations have been castrated. "Equality" is now more important than truth and "victims" are more important than equality.
If any feminists or other misandrist trash -- including the prosecutors who willfully enable false rape accusers -- are reading this, I want you to know one thing:
We'll never, ever forget or forgive this. Not in a million years.
And we will support a pro-male agenda as long as we live.
Once the truth gets out society will change, and then we'll never, ever return to the days of feminism. Take heed.
Here is the situation:
-The prosecutorial profession has a consensus: false rape accusers are either to be treated as above the law, or given the absolute minimum the law allows. They are doing this both in deference to the feminist freak groups, and to make things are easy as possible for themselves: if they can have a system in which men are second class citizens who are not entitled to legal redress when they have been assaulted through the legal system, then they can throw all of the mud they want at male defendents without having to worry about eating crow later on. (The problem is the prosecutorial profession in general, not just a handful of rotten apples.)
-The politically correct media also has a consensus: the names of anything making a rape accusation are concealed, sometimes long after they have been proven to be liars.
-The feminist movement is 100,000% on the side of false rape accusers; it is a rare occasion when the freaks don't come out to rationalize a liar's actions or to claim even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the victims must have done something to deserve being nifonged. Their collectivist mentality leaves no room for individual justice, and they have absolutely no real interest in "equality" -- a word that really means, "female supremacy."
-The false rape accusers themselves aren't slowing down. We have seen time and again that as long as they remain unpunished, they will continue to make false rape accusations for the pettiest of reasons.
Here is the question: at what point does awareness of the systematic persecution of males reach critical mass, and generate enough outrage to cause meaningful and lasting changes?
How substantial will these changes be, and will this change our feminist/misandrist culture permanently?
Will we ever know how many men have been falsely convicted?
Until it happens to one of them, a FRA, they will never understand.
Mr Bishop could appeal to the EU Courts, if he feels up to it.
Incidentally the £11,000 compo figure is for a SINGLE rape only, if it happened more than once, eg you had a threesome or you had sex twice the same night with the same guy, then it is £22,000 compo.
Still, Mr Bishop has made progress for us here in the UK, now we know we need to file with CICA and file with Brussels.
The interesting thing here is the feminazis will have to either support such a claim, that Mr Bishop was "raped" by his experience, or they will have to move the goalposts yet again.
Between this story, and the PM's anonymity backpedalling, and British Airways' unapologetic misandry, and the retirement age differential -- one must wonder: why does the UK hate men so much? That might sound over-the-top, but I am serious. There is a clear and unmistakable pattern of misandry there.
"There is a clear and unmistakable pattern of misandry there."
Yes, though remember, Britain is where feminism came from.
And we just finished 13 years of New Labour, which apparently still exerts such a hold that our new Prime Minister was cowed into backtracking.
Maybe he's just afraid of strong, independent women like Harriet Harman. LOL!
The femmorhoids seem to think that men are, anyway, and they shouldn't be.
I agree - Mr Cameron should have told Harriet Harman, unequivocally, to fuck off!
But I guess that would have been domestic violence.
@Anonymous @ Jun 30, 2010 11:32:00 PM
100% agreement on your appraisal of the situation. You nailed it.
"Here is the question: at what point does awareness of the systematic persecution of males reach critical mass, and generate enough outrage to cause meaningful and lasting changes?"
The key phrase here is "systematic persecution." It will only change when the system changes, which will require nothing less than a civil rights campaign for men that rivals that of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s civil rights efforts in the last century.
"How substantial will these changes be, and will this change our feminist/misandrist culture permanently?"
If this change comes it all, it will be part of a greater revolution. Nothing is permanent, not even misandry and feminism.
Men who are falsely accused can turn neither to the courts nor to "compensation committees" for recompense.
The "right of private action" remains open to them if they choose to use it. I would, despite the cost.
What "right of private action"? If you mean violence, that's the stupidest thing an FRA victim could do.
he means taking them to court.
In the UK a private individual can take legal action against someone else, for anything, even criminal actions, right up to murder.
The CPS has the right to "take over" such an action once started, but they cannot take it over and drop it, they must continue with it.
My apologies; I misunderstood.
Back to the topic: another day, another blast of warm spit in the faces of men.
My false rape accuser also got a hardy sum of victim dollars from the Rape crisis center, because as they tout in thier advertising they "Always believe the women", and i would add EVEN WHEN THEY ARE LYING!!.
Giving women state and federal money for drugs when they say they have been raped (when they have not) is a perversion!!
Meanwhile, confusion about what rape is continues among feminists:
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/06/26/jesus-was-such-a-cockblocker/
Now there's no doubt that this was NOT the ideal way of having sex, nor that pressuring ones partner in extreme manners can't be wrong or very hurtful. But even though I can applaud the evenhandedness -because men can be raped or sexually assaulted - this wasn't rape.
Anyway, if some feminists have their way all a woman will have to do is say he "PRESSURED" me into having sex..and then he can go to jail and they can collect this bounty.
Clarence
This whole concept floors me on many levels.
I had no idea there even WAS a state compensation system for crime in Britain, much less for one that wasn't proved.
We live in a world where bad things will eventually happen to any of us, sometimes BY one of us. That's life.
I don't expect the government to PAY ME for some horrible crap that another person does to me.
If the other person broke a law and I can prove it in court, THAT'S the compensation.
Then I can sue them for personal damages.
Social Worker, in the UK, the taxpayer is responsible for the crimes the bad people commit. Since the taxpayer is going to pay, the public should insist that people take all reasonable measures to reduce their chances of being victimized. I, personally, would not want to pay for a rape that occurred after a night of drinking and sex play with strangers. Call it "victim blaming" if you like, it's just that, if you expect ME to pay for your loss, you need to abide by MY rules in how you conduct yourself.
um .......... like stay home and lock the doors?
That's right, Anon. If you expect me to pay for your "victimization." If you don't, then go get drunk with a stranger for all I care.
I love the self-righteous tone of Anon 10:24. There really is an attitude of entitlement among some people when it comes to these issues, isn't there?
Newsflash: why should innocent people pay for the private acts of a criminal? Honestly!
10:24: Typical feminist bullshit; any expectation of reasonable behavior applied to women is tantamount to ordering them back to the kitchen. Right?
WRONG. All he was saying is if you get drunk and have sex, don't expect Joe Taxpayer to empty his wallet paying for a rape trial if you wake up and suddenly "decide" due to your regrets that you were raped.
Drunk sex is a CHOICE, and not an advisable one. We shouldn't have to pay for the consequences of that choice, even when you wake up with regrets.
Isn't this absurd? We have a legal system that begins and often ends with the willfully idiotic assumption that the woman is always right.
Even when she drank just as much vodka as he did; even when she has already filed three false rape reports; even when her testimony reads like a shitty romance novel that stank up the Harlequin slush piles before being mailed back two years later after the editor wiped her ass with it -- she's still right.
If she's lying, she's right; if she can't remember what happened, she's right; if "He said it was okay," she's right, and she's the victim, and some man is to blame for her troubles no matter what the situation.
If you have a pussy you're a human being; otherwise you're a scapegoat.
I agree with the last two Anons.
But it goes beyond that. When my house burns down, the government isn't there to give me "compensation." When my car suddenly accelerates I crash and destroy my car and someone eles's, same thing. When I'm defrauded by an unscrupulous partner, same thing.
When a client stiffs you -- and I had a client stiff me one time for a ton of money - the government doesn't bail me out.
Bad things happen. But it's not EVERYONE'S fault. It's the fault of the person responsible. Rape is no different. We are not collectively guilty for rape, and there should not be "compensation" for it or any other crime.
Which was exactly my original point.
I don't pretend to understand the laws of other countries regarding rape and false accusations, but I've never heard of a public pool for paying out a private citizen.
Unless it's a government employee who commits the crime, but that's only when it's related to the job they are performing.
That is just heart breaking. Those men deserves a criminal injury Claim because they are hurt emotionally.
Post a Comment