Gemma Louise Scoones is back in the news. Never heard of her? I am not surprised. It's not the kind of story the mainstream media likes to report, so pay attention.
Last year, on the basis of nothing more than Ms. Scoones' say so, her 27-year-old ex-husband was arrested and subjected to naked indignities for a rape that never occurred. The man was watching television in bed when police banged on his front door and took him to the police station where he was told to hand over his clothes for forensic examination. “I was stood there naked, with two police officers at one side of me and a doctor at the other side having swabs taken from all over my body," the innocent man said. "It was humiliating and degrading."
It turns out that Gemma Scoones falsely accused the man she had once vowed to love of raping her because she sought revenge over an acrimonious break-up. It is the sort of revenge only available to women. When Gemma was told her ex-husband had been arrested, she declared, "It’s not enough.”
The police treated Gemma as the victim based solely on her say-so right up until the time the truth came out. From the news story last year: "PC Elizabeth Graham, of Durham Police’s domestic abuse investigation team, said the force was very victimfocused and that the allegation of rape had been taken seriously and fully investigated." Of course, if the accuser is the "victim" to police, then the accused must be a rapist. And the innocent ex-husband certainly was treated that way. Gemma was given a twelve month sentence. Here is the news report from last year: http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4266802.Ex_wife_jailed_for_false_rape_claim/
Well, Gemma is out of jail, and she's back at it. On April 18 of this year, Ms. Scoones reported to an ambulance crew that she had been raped. She was taken to hospital where she repeated the allegations, despite being challenged about her account. Medical examinations were carried out at the hospital and police searched her home, but they were unable to find any evidence that the attack had actually happened. When police asked her again about her story, she told them she had made it up.
Her previous custodial sentence did not deter her in the least. She was no sooner out of jail than she did it again. Typically, first-time offenders are afforded more lenient sentences than recidivists. When criminals prove that they haven't learned from an initial sentence, they are typically given a more severe sentence.
That's what should have happened here, but it didn't. Gemma Scoones was given another 12-month sentence, but this one was suspended for two years. The Judge told her that it was a serious offence that deserved an automatic custodial sentence because she had made an "atrocious allegation." But he did not send her to jail.
What spared her from a custodial sentence? "[W]hat saves you from an immediate sentence," the judge explained, "is that I see you are heavily pregnant and it would not be fair on your child to be born in prison."
Gemma's womb, her ability to get pregnant, became a "get out of jail free" card. If a teen male had lied that he'd been statutorily raped, the pregnancy "defense" would not be available to him, and he would be given a harsher sentence than a similarly situated pregnant female rape liar solely because she got pregnant and he couldn't.
And while it certainly isn't fair to any child to have a parent in prison, is it more unfair to Gemma's child than it is to the child of man in prison for committing a crime? Yet, that "defense" never works when the genders are flipped.
It's not enough that society has handed women the power to destroy the life of any man or boy merely by crying "rape," but it insists on doing essentially nothing to deter women when they abuse that power.
The judge did not think this particular rape lie was quite as serious as the previous one because it did not target a specific male. With all due respect, the judge should spend several weeks reading through the actual news stories on this site. As we've reported here time and time again, even rape lies that do not target a specific male often end up causing an innocent man or boy to lose his liberty, fairly destroying his life in the process. There is no such thing as an "innocent" rape lie. Once unleashed, it takes on a life of its own, and it can quickly and unexpectedly destroy the life of an innocent male.
Gemma's second rape lie was akin to firing a loaded pistol into a playground full of children. That act's reckless indifference to human life should not be considered any less serious than if the shooter had taken aim at a specific child.
In words that ring especially hollow, the judge warned Gemma: "But make no mistake, do this again and it will be 12 months to start with, and another sentence on top."
We aren't holding our breath.
Links: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299310/Woman-admits-SECOND-rape-offence-spared-jail-heavily-pregnant.html and http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/08/01/baby-spares-mum-prison-115875-22455603/ and http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/190582/Woman-who-cried-rape-is-spared-jail
Here is one of the news stories after the jump:
Woman admits SECOND cry rape offence... but is spared jail as she is heavily pregnant
A woman who falsely cried rape for a second time has been spared jail because a judge deemed it 'unfair' for her child to be born in prison.
Heavily pregnant Gemma Scoones, 27, stood before Judge Michael Taylor in the dock at Durham Crown Court on Friday to be sentenced for perverting the course of justice.
Last year, Scoones was given a 12-month jail sentence by the court after she admitted a similar offence involving a false rape allegation against her estranged husband, Anthony Scoones, following the break up of their relationship.
Mr Scoones was arrested, held in a police cell for a day and was only released after his former wife admitted she had made the story up.
In her latest allegation, no one was arrested, and she eventually admitted making up the rape after police questioned her story.
She was given another 12-month sentence, but this was suspended for two years and was accompanied by a supervision order involving the Probation Service.
Judge Taylor told her that it was a serious offence that deserved an automatic custodial sentence and said that she had made an 'atrocious allegation'.
He said: 'But what saves you from an immediate sentence is that I see you are heavily pregnant and it would not be fair on your child to be born in prison,' he said.
He said it was fortunate that no one had been arrested in the latest case.
Lesley Kirkup, prosecuting, gave a brief outline of events, saying that on April 18, Scoones reported to an ambulance crew that she had been raped.
She was taken to hospital where she repeated the allegations, despite being challenged about her account.
Ms Kirkup said that medical examinations were carried out at the hospital and that police searched her home.
However, the officers were unable to find any evidence that the attack had actually happened.
When officers asked her again about her story, she told them she had made it up.
"At the end of the day, she has accepted she was never raped," Ms Kirkup told the court.
Scoones, of Horden, County Durham, admitted the offence at a previous hearing.