A TEENAGER who made a false rape complaint has not been punished by the courts as Teesside's top judge said she needed help.
Kirstie Hodgson’s claim led to the arrest of two men, one held for 18 hours amid extensive police inquiries with high-profile media appeals.
Yesterday Hodgson, 19, pleaded guilty to attempting to pervert the course of justice.
She still says she has been the victim of another sex assault, Teesside Crown Court heard.
She went to the front desk of Middlesbrough police station and reported she had been raped on October 19 last year.
She said she was attacked by an unknown man as she returned home from a night out in the early hours of that day.
She claimed the man told her he had a knife, forced her to perform a sex act then stole her mobile phone on Borough Road, Middlesbrough.
She pointed out the location of the alleged incident and gave a video interview to the police.
Six detectives and specialist telecommunications officers were assigned to the investigation, with more police resources deployed for searches, reassurance patrols and to prevent more attacks in the area of the bogus assault.
Forensic samples were sent off costing thousands of pounds, as well as protracted CCTV inquiries, phone tracing and eliminating potential suspects, referrals to support agencies and a “comprehensive forensic strategy”.
A 26-year-old man was arrested, held in custody for 18 hours, interviewed and medically examined. A 32-year-old second suspect was held for two hours.
Discrepancies in Hodgson’s story came to light and she was arrested herself five days after her original complaint.
She admitted she lied about the location, description of the assailant and some of the details of the alleged attack.
She maintained she had been raped but at another place, in different circumstances and by another perpetrator.
She says she told untruths and altered details in her report to police because she was afraid of her attacker.
Deborah Sherwin, defending, said: “There are grounds for believing that this quite conceivably is a girl who has been the victim of a sexual assault.”
A psychological report said Hodgson needed help, referring to physical and psychological disabilities and symptoms consistent with a victim of sexual abuse.
Hodgson, formerly of Wellington Street, Middlesbrough, had no previous convictions.
Judge Peter Fox QC, the Recorder of Middlesbrough, said: “It’s a very unusual case.”
He told Hodgson: “At least one man was taken into police custody for a significant period of time as a result of your dishonesty.
“Whatever has happened to you, you’re not the only victim in all this. A perfectly innocent man was arrested and taken into police custody and interviewed at length. And that’s what happens when you tell lies to the police.
“You must leave this court realising that it was a very grave wrong that you did. And two wrongs don’t make a right. It mustn’t happen again.”
With few NHS resources to deal with Hodgson’s problems, the judge could only suggest her GP be given a copy of her psychological report.
“You certainly need the help, and that’s the reason why you’re not going to be punished or penalised today,” he added, passing a three-year conditional discharge.
Detective Inspector Andy Greenwood from Middlesbrough CID said today: “Whilst we would always urge people who are genuine victims of a sexual assault to come forward, anyone who falsely reports such an assault should be aware that their actions can waste a massive amount of police time and resources, diverting officers away from genuine crimes.
“They should also remember that in some cases, a malicious or false allegation could even result in the complainant receiving a custodial sentence.”
Posts
12 comments:
It's peculiar how police are so forgiving of female dishonesty - it's almost as if they themselves believe women can't tell the truth, so there's no point in punishing them for it.
There is a bit missing from the comment by Detective Inspector Andy Greenwood.
What he actually meant to add was that a false rape accusation creates huge anguish and torment for innocent men, who thus become genuine victims themselves of a criminal act. As clearly happened in this case.
He did go on to say that, did he not?
Please tell me that he said that.
It is vitally important that he said that, because if he didn't, then it would imply that the police are failing to recognise the perpetration of a crime against a victim who suffers damage. It would imply that the police are not doing their duty in upholding the law. It would imply that the police do not care about real victims, and are prepared to see more innocent men being damaged in the same way. It would imply that the police are not concerned about being manipulated by a liar. It would imply that the police have more interest in promoting the welfare of a lying criminal than in protecting the innocent. It would imply that the police are easily swayed by the relative sexes of the criminal and her victim(s) so as to give females an easy ride even when they are guilty of crimes, while giving men a rough time even when innocent.
So in order to prevent any possibility of our concluding that the police are useless, lazy, incompetent, corrupt, sexist and on the side of the criminal rather than the innocent, we badly needed to hear those additional words from Detective Inspector Andy Greenwood, do we not?
So where are they?
Paul Parmenter
You know, in Europe there are areas w/ a large immigrant population referred to a "no-fly zones" even for police.
Is it getting to the point that there are going to be known uber misandry/feminist like cities/states/countries(?) that are simply no-fly zones for @ least all men ages 12 and up? Sigh
"He told Hodgson: “At least one man was taken into police custody for a significant period of time as a result of your dishonesty.
“Whatever has happened to you, you’re not the only victim in all this.""
Eh?
Not 'the only victim'?
She's not a victim AT ALL, she is the criminal. When are these people going to get their heads out of their asses?
For the record, I do not buy her story that she was raped anyway just by someone else.
That's base-covering on her part. And she doesn't exactly have a good track record now, does she.
She's a malicious little cunt who deserves to receive a long prison sentence.
Another insult added to the injuries on men in this war on/against men. Jane Velez-mitchell, blow it out your backside! The only war I see on women is cases like this and every other case where women/females lie and cause harm/destruction in an innocent human being's life
Not all males are persecuted equally by the gender feminist "construction". Its just them nasty hetero-sexuals.
Anonymous - "It's peculiar how police are so forgiving of female dishonesty"
I'm pretty sure you meant to write judges, instead of police. The police arrested her, and referred her case for prosecution. It was the judge who "passed" on punishing her, although she plead guilty to Perverting the Course of Justice, a felony charge in the UK (which will be on her permanent record, despite the "suspended sentence" which kept her from incarceration).
At least the judge remembered to include the men unjustly detained as victims in his remarks to her.
Perhaps the biggest issue which seems to be unaddressed is the actual costs (to both the victims - 18 hr likely means at least a day of work missed, and to LE). Fines should have been ordered, even if she could not pay them. She should have been placed in a position of being in debt for the costs, so that if she ever did come into money, it would go to pay for the reckless harms she had done. Instead, by not fining her, she walks away free and clear. She could win millions in a lottery tomorrow, and would not (automatically) be liable for any of the costs she caused to be incurred.
At the very least, fines should ALWAYS be ordered (with interest accruing). If more women had to forgo certain luxuries because their wages were being garnished to pay off their damages, then word would spreads much more quickly amongst women about the real and "terrible" penalties should they might face should they be caught making and FRA.
Given the severe financial calamity their lies often cause for their victims, women who've made FRA's should not have their finances left untouched so that they can go on fancy vacations, drive nice cars, nor by excess clothing and shoes (etc.).
We often demand that teh penalty for a woman making an FRA be the same as what her victim faced. But, in that, we are usually only considering the criminal penalty he faced, forgetting the often much more serious financial penalty he has already received, even when cleared of the alleged crime. In order to truly and effectively punish those making FRA's they need to be equally "ruined" financially. After all, their is nothing more important to the typical woman than money.
"She says she told untruths and altered details in her report to police because she was afraid of her attacker.
Deborah Sherwin, defending, said: “There are grounds for believing that this quite conceivably is a girl who has been the victim of a sexual assault.”
Wow, I can smell that putrid sh*t all the way from NE England to Colorado.
Now, it's possible that a victim of a vicious attack might fear repercussions from her attacker. It might be why a woman would choose not to report a crime. However, it makes absolutely zero sense that a woman would falsify the details of a real crime (putting innocent men in harms way) just so that her attacker would not be caught, while she could still go through the indignity of the investigatory process (including intimate medical examinations, etc.).
Seriously, does that make any sense to any of you?
I'm curious. In a case like this, where there is some indication of an actual rape and the possibility of mental health issues, does the FRS community think she should have: legal consequences, mandated to mental health treatment or just released?
In many of the cases reported here, the woman just recants and that's the end of it. Much clearer case for sentencing.
This is an informal poll to get an idea of what type of response should be promoted.
Just respond: legal, mental health or none to keep it simple. We don't have to go into details of what type of sentence, etc.
Some people have already weighed in, so I'll count those as well.
I'll post the results after a few days to allow time to reply.
Social Worker - "I'm curious. In a case like this, where there is some indication of an actual rape and the possibility of mental health issues, does the FRS community think she should have: legal consequences, mandated to mental health treatment or just released?"
"A psychological report said Hodgson needed help, referring to physical and psychological disabilities and symptoms consistent with a victim of sexual abuse."
I don't accept that indicators of sexual abuse are consistent with a single instance of stranger-rape. As I understand it, such things develop in response to repeated abuse, often by a loved-one.
that said, if a person does truly suffer from psychological disabilities as claimed here, then yes, they should be given treatment - but not just released (back into public, where they can do the same thing again).
But, you'll have to excuse my skepticism of that report.
For many of us men, who saw Mary Winkler be essentially excused from any responsibility in the cold-blooded murder of her husband due to a similar report regarding her mental health, due to likely falsified claims of abuse (note - her own older children testified that they had never witnessed anything even suggesting that she had been abused as she claimed to have been); that a woman who gets into trouble of her own accord is declared to have mental issues, is typically now met with such skepticism.
Of note, Danmell Ndonye (of Hofstra infamy) who seemed to be the epitome of an empowered young women, sexually liberated to do as she pleased - including engage in group sex, suddenly became a "troubled" young woman when it became clear that she had lied to try to cover up her antics from her boyfriend.
It seems that the "mental health card" is now (over)played almost any time a woman has to face possible consequence for her crimes.
Granted, this is an unfair view for those that truely suffer from such issues. But, it's really not all that unlike the way having many women lie about being raped leads to the disbelief of real victims. Thus, I would suggest that the best way for those concern about real victims and real suffers of mental issues to help ensure that they are believed would be to "call out" those who are lying (about either) as opposed to always blindly believing all who make the claims of either.
Social Worker, I have had more than enough of malicious women who commit the most extreme acts of barbarity, depravity, violence and evil being written off as 'troubled' and 'in need of help'.
@Social Worker:
In response to your query:
legal and mental health both. Nothing is not an option.
To elaborate:
Unfortunately, the prisons are filling up with individuals that need serious psychiatric care. Those with schizophrenia who simply need their meds are put in with the general prison population. Off their meds, it becomes obvious that many schizophrenics cannot function adequately in society and become frequent fliers in mental health settings and/or jails. The are in part responsible for their condition, but often, due to poverty, they cannot get access to the meds they need and end up in a revolving door of jails and mental health hospitals. HOWEVER, Those most likely to make false rape allegations are those with cluster b personality disorders. Those in cluster b: borderlines, histrionics, and narcissists can function well in society without needing medications usually and are fully capable of knowing right from wrong and adhering to social norms -- they simply choose not to do so. Borderlines and those with fibromyalgia have higher statistical chances of making false claims of all sorts, as well as having higher instances than the general population of being subject to valid, extant sexual abuse (usually due to lack of impulse control, personal boundaries, and emotional reactivity). The question becomes: is this person a danger to themselves or others and are they capable of functioning well? Those that are NOT dependent on medications for maintaining their neuro-psychiatric health, and generally function well in society should be made accountable for their actions with both custodial sentences and mental health screening/monitoring. Borderlines are one group I would like to see receive IPP sentences like they have in the UK.
Links:
http://www.a-team.org/borderline_person_disorder.html
http://www.a-team.org/borderline_person_disorder_02.html
http://www.a-team.org/borderline_person_disorder_03.html
http://www.a-team.org/borderline_person_disorder_04.html
http://www.outofthefog.net/Disorders/BPD.html
http://www.jwoodphd.com/borderline_personality_disorder.htm
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder
So, those in cluster b should definitely not be released without punishment or medical/psychiatric treatment. The legal, moral, and ethical problem is that the people who evaluate these disorders in legal/criminal/court settings may either be incompetent or have vested interests that lead to incorrect, inappropriate, unjust or inadequate diagnoses, treatment, and legal outcomes.
So, as a falsely accused, if you are using the accuser's mental health status as a factor in your case, make sure that you get the best expert witnesses and evaluators that you can -- somebody like Demosthenes Lorandos
http://www.psychlaw.net/ (not affiliated with him in any way, but he does outstanding work, as in the Tonya Craft case); or the links to the A-Team as shown above; or Allen Cowling Investigations http://www.allencowling.com/ .
That's my take on it.
Post a Comment