Nineteen-year-old Jade Brooks, who has recently given birth, broke down in tears at being separated from her baby daughter and was taken into custody still protesting her innocence.
Brooks, of Sherborne Road, Bury St Edmunds, had denied a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice by making a false rape claim in July 2008 but was found guilty by a jury after a trial at Ipswich Crown Court in May when she was heavily pregnant.
The case was adjourned until yesterday for a pre-sentence report and to allow her to recover from giving birth.
Sentencing Brooks to 15 months detention in a young offenders’ institution, of which she will have to serve half, Judge David Goodin said that as a result of her making a “wicked” false rape claim an innocent man had been arrested and spent a number of hours at a police station.
During that time he had been subjected to an intimate examination by a doctor, interviewed under caution and following his release on bail had the matter hanging over him until he was told by police a couple of months later that no further action would be taken against him.
Judge Goodin said that as well as the damage to the wrongfully arrested suspect false rape claims did a huge disservice to women who were genuine victims of rape.
During the trial the court heard that Brooks was seen kissing and cuddling the teenager she later accused of raping her.
One of Brooks’ friends said that before disappearing into bushes in Haverhill, Brooks had allowed him to touch her breasts and had not seemed uncomfortable with what was going on.
The witness said that Brooks had been tipsy, but not drunk, and there hadn’t been any screams, cries for help or raised voices during the time Brooks was alone with the man in the bushes.
The same witness said that later the same evening she had gone with Brooks and the 18-year-old man to a house in Duddery Road, Haverhill, and claimed she had seen Brooks perform a sex act on him.
The court heard that after complaining to police that she had been raped she had subsequently refused to be video-interviewed about the allegation and the man was told he wouldn’t be prosecuted.
Shereen Dyer, for Brooks, said her client accepted the jury’s verdict but stood by her version of events which was that she had been telling the truth.
Miss Dyer urged the court to consider passing a suspended sentence on Brooks because of the damaging effect an immediate sentence would have on her and her baby.Link:
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/false_rape_claim_mum_jailed_1_544715
Posts
17 comments:
Amazing the number of false accusers who are pregnant at time of trial.
Considering they would have known that charges were pending against them well before they fell pregnant, and that there was a possibility they could serve a jail term, the fact they still go ahead and expose unborn children to this abuse shows just how reckless they are. They're probably hoping for a sympathy pass, and just don't care who and how many they hurt in the process.
But what am I saying. We already know that. That's the essence of a false accuser.
I think you will find a strong correlation between FRA's, the abortion clinic, and equally casual and deliberate pregnancy for whatever reason du jour, entrapment or escape
"Miss Dyer urged the court to consider passing a suspended sentence on Brooks because of the damaging effect an immediate sentence would have on her and her baby."
It is astounding that an attorney feels it is acceptable to even whisper this argument. She is able to do this because she knows that false rape claims generally are not taken seriously; that women are generally afforded leniency in sentencing, even when they destroy men and, as here, men who are barely more than boys; and the "baby card" -- which is never available to men -- is generally successful.
Archivist,
Maybe you should put some sort of counter on the front page indicating the total FRAs this site has to date... I think seeing the number grow daily - would be impressionable to lurkers....
TMOTS
Women accused of murder have a tendency to be pregnant while on the stand as well.
It doesn't seem to work - after all, a pregnant woman/mother to be is supposed to be the only hope for society.
No one wants to hand over an innocent baby to a criminal - male or female.
It sadly goes to show how heartlessly a woman would use a child to save her own skin, or use a child to make false accusations.
It happens ALL the time.
Agree with TMOTS. A counter of the number of 'recorded false rape claims since 2008' or whenever this blog started. Plus a note that there are many more false claims reported that don't make it onto FRS simply because you guys get overwhelmed with the number of them, and that these are still only a small fraction of the total number of false claims made - the ones which result in a charge, and where the woman is found out.
There are surely plenty more where the woman never did get found out. After all, you've reported many times on men freed from prison after years or decades based on new evidence.
Strictly non scientific and back of the envelope...
But in the past 12 months say, I can guarantee that I have seen more FRA's imprisoned for Perverting the Course of Justice than men Convicted of Rape, in my local media and Court.
This excludes men exonerated of rape in Court.
This excludes FRA's that never make it to Court, which is 80% of them according to official UK police statistics.
Rape is therefore a very rare crime, probably on a par with murder around here.
FRA's are on the other hand an extremely common crime, probably on a par with car theft around here.
YMMV
AfOR - "I think you will find a strong correlation between FRA's, the abortion clinic, and equally casual and deliberate pregnancy for whatever reason du jour, entrapment or escape"
Yup! As Pierce put's it, "the "baby card"
It's not just false rape charges that women seem to want to play the "baby card" for. Prosecutors I know will tell you that they regularly have the women they are taking to trial show up pregnant.
I think it would be enlightening to calculate approximate conception dates and to see if those dotes don't strongly correlate with the date's they learned they would be tried.
Another thing prosecutors will tell you is that there are many people, women and men, who will bring their young children with them to court when they are to be sentenced - as if that will earn them leniency. But, since judges see it so routinely, they are mostly just angered by the transparent attempts.
Anyway, getting back to the story,it seems a rather obvious example of a women consenting to sex (more than once, even) and then feeling regrets afterwards. Perhaps she didn't mean to get him into so much trouble nor to tarnish his reputation. Perhaps she meant only to repair her own reputation. Perhaps her (female) peers were starting to call her a slut. Never-the-less, it is very important that it be made clear that such actions will not be tolerated.
Again, the UK is showing the rest of the world the way in how to deal with the FRA epidemic. As the cases of FRA's here in the States "pile-up", it becomes increasingly clear that we too need a Perverting the Course of Justice type of felony charge that can be used to provide some deterrent.
The only way to temper the now culture of false rape accusations, is to return to charging false rape accusers.
Agree, slwerner, the UK is, in some respects, better at dealing with FRAs than the US.
In some respects.
What both - nay, all - countries need, though, is for FRAs to be a special category of perverting the course of justice. Otherwise it's in the same category as e.g. lying on the stand to cover up for your friend who stole a DVD.
Since FRAs are different to false accusations of every other kind - the evidence is so much more difficult to prove in every way (since the evidence for rape can be identical to the evidence for consensual sex; how do you falsely accuse someone of murder without producing a body, etc.), far far more frequent, used as a political weapon, with far worse consequences in terms of assumed male guilt, vigilante 'justice', and abuse in prison.
FRAs need to be understood as a crime in their own right - a subcategory of perverting the course of justice, yes, but one understood to be a much more serious violation, with much more potential for harm, and thus carrying a much greater penalty (10 years minimum jail time, all rights to anonymity withdrawn, and sex offenders' registration for life).
Snark said...
Agree, slwerner, the UK is, in some respects, better at dealing with FRAs than the US.
In some respects.
What both - nay, all - countries need, though, is for FRAs to be a special category of perverting the course of justice. Otherwise it's in the same category as e.g. lying on the stand to cover up for your friend who stole a DVD.
Since FRAs are different to false accusations of every other kind - the evidence is so much more difficult to prove in every way (since the evidence for rape can be identical to the evidence for consensual sex; how do you falsely accuse someone of murder without producing a body, etc.), far far more frequent, used as a political weapon, with far worse consequences in terms of assumed male guilt, vigilante 'justice', and abuse in prison.
FRAs need to be understood as a crime in their own right - a subcategory of perverting the course of justice, yes, but one understood to be a much more serious violation, with much more potential for harm, and thus carrying a much greater penalty (10 years minimum jail time, all rights to anonymity withdrawn, and sex offenders' registration for life).
Aug 23, 2010 11:05:00 AM
"how do you falsely accuse someone of murder without producing a body"
See the Perry March case
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&rlz=1W1ADRA_en&q=perry+march+case&revid=1333648539&sa=X&ei=wqVyTMWHJMO78gaO9KH1Cw&ved=0CE0Q1QIoBQ&fp=e6c57a2ab5279010
He was convicted of murdering his wife although her body has never been found. For all anyone knows, she could have fled the country.
Anonymous - "The only way to temper the now culture of false rape accusations, is to return to charging false rape accusers."
At no point in history have women making false allegations of rape been charged for doing so. It something that still relatively new (novel), almost never heard of ten years ago.
So, with due respect, it's not something LE needs to return to, but rather something they need to become more consistent at starting to do. To that end, it would be helpful to provide them with a felony level charge that can be applied. When the white-knighting (that police, by the very nature of those who chose to become police officers, are prone towards) is mixed with possibility of only low-level misdemeanor charges, there can tend to be an attitude of "why bother?" when deciding if it is worth the time, effort, and expense of pursuing a case against a woman making an FRA. A felony charge for that particular crime not only serves to highlight that it is, in fact, more serious (Police officers could well stand to have such a reminder before them during their investigation and charge recommendation processes); but also provides something meaningful for prosecutors to pursue. [I'd also note that a prosecutor also needs to consider the likelihood of a jury being willing to convict a woman who's going to cry and be very apologetics, and thus, be very sympathetic - think about that "baby card" they try to pull - when considering if the possible punishment of a small fine and a scant few hours of community service is worth the time and expense, not only to them, but also to jurors who would be called to serve for a trial.]
In any case where a woman is considered to be the victim of a crime, here in Tennessee, the "law" sides against the man unless (in rare cases, there is undisputable evidence [such as videos, pictures, slideshows, handwritten hand signed(in the witnesses's own blodd), etc., the man will be convicted for the crime he is charged with. This IS WHY men with everything/anything to lose; will plead guilty to anything because they know the state WILL NOT STOP until they find/prove/set him up to be guilty of something/anything. Ther are no laws against entrapment in that state.
blodd should be blood
As you can see, many young women today see falsifying a rape as an opportunity and a right.
Their twisted thinking comes from conditioning early on in their lives that women hold the patent and own the word rape.
In other words, all rape claims from women are to be believed because a woman would never lie about rape.
Therefore, falsifying a rape will carry no consequences to them whatsoever.
This is direct fallout from 40 years of organized academic feminism upon society.
Off topic: Domestic Violence- An Introduction
http://news.mensactivism.org/node/15581
How Women Batter Men and the Role of the Feminist State
http://news.mensactivism.org/
What many of these articles fail to mention, but do so in a roundabout way in mentioning the stigma of a false rape claim hanging over this mans life, is that his job prospects will be forever affected by the misplaced and feminist driven CRB checks in place in the UK. Any Enhanced check will now show this rape charge on his record. And what employer in their right mind would employ a man who has ever been accused of rape?
The anger I feel over this subject is beyond words.
Post a Comment