In a nutshell, as more fully set forth here and here (both news reports are reproduced at the conclusion of this report): On June 4, 2010, Sabrina Johnson, an expectant mother, was out drinking before she met several men in the street. They invited her in for a drink and they began playing drinking games, then sex games. She ended up performing oral sex on three of the men.
According to the judge who sentenced Johnson for her rape lie: "One of the males – a prudent gentleman – recorded your consent on his mobile phone, including your image." And note the Judge's chilling words: "But for his doing so he would have been very likely in deep trouble."
Johnson awakened the next morning at 5 a.m. with a hangover. She was due to start work at 6am, but didn't show up until 12.45 p.m. She had already received a warning from her boss over being late for work, so she phoned him and told him she had been attacked. He asked if she had reported the attack to police, and for the crime report number she had been given. Johnson then decided to lie to police.
Johnson told police that two men had dragged her into a nature reserve and raped her. She was given a medical exam and a video interview. She even took police officers to the park to show them where the "attack" had occurred. She appeared distressed as she told them how the rapists forced her to perform oral sex. She showed them a path where she claimed a group of women passed by scaring her attackers off.
Twenty-one officers spent 311 hours investigating at a cost of £6,753 to the taxpayer. Work on other investigations was put on hold, officers were diverted to work on this case. Signs were posted appealing for the public's help, and undercover police were sent to patrol the park to allay community fears.
Three men traced by police gave statements and DNA samples to officers. Two of them resembled e-fit descriptions Johnson had given police of her supposed attackers. Police said that one of the men in the e-fit would have been arrested if he hadn't come forward with the recording of her consent.
Listen to the Judge's take on it: "The men had to make statements and supply their DNA to police officers, and it must have been a frightening experience, particularly for the man you identified. All he could say was that you had consented, but defendants often say so in rape cases, and juries are often invited not to believe them. The effects on the victim wrongly accused can be appalling, and might well have been in this case."
Defense counsel claimed that Johnson's behaviour had been affected by her diet, which restricts her to 410 calories a day and prohibits solid food.
Johnson admitted that she was angry with herself – admitting that when she drinks she gets flirtatious. She proceeded to apologize to -- can you guess who she left out? -- Essex Police and all the real victims of rape. No mention of the men she nearly destroyed.
___________________
Let us put this case in perspective, because it points up some crucial lessons for our false rape culture.
Even when a woman is charged and convicted of false rape reporting, it is not uncommon for defense counsel or some purported expert to insist that the rape liar was merely confused, or that she was immature and did not appreciate the gravity of her lie, or that she shouldn't be charged because someone must be "pretty distressed" to make such a claim, or that she didn't understand the full implications of her lie, or that she had poor thinking skills or a personality disorder or had suffered a traumatic experience or that she was a single mother who should not serve a custodial sentence or that.
Now we can add this one to the list of lame excuses for rape lies: diet. Imagine if that, or the aforementioned, lame excuses had been trotted out by counsel for a convicted young rapist. Even if an attorney could even bring himself to posit such an excuse, would the mainstream news media deign to dignify it by reporting it in a news story? The question scarcely survives its statement.
The fact is, the crime of false rape reporting is often among the cruelest, and most vicious, on the books. This blog is a cavalcade of real world examples of cold-hearted vindictiveness; day after day after day we chronicle instances where the offender's desire to punish and inflict extreme pain on her victim is the overriding motivation for the offense. Other times, as in this case, the offender's callousness to an innocent male life is so extreme and heartless that it is unspeakably appalling.
In this case, Sabrina Johnson was willing to sacrifice three innocent lives to save her job. Add this to the parade of recent false rape cases where similar cruelty was on display.
Remember the case where a young woman had her boyfriend arrested for rape because he took too long to buy cigarettes? Remember the women who didn't want to pay cab fares, so they accused innocent cab drivers -- working class nobodys -- of rape, just to hurt them? Here and here and here. How about the girl who wanted to get back at her teen ex-boyfriend: her rape lie not only got him arrested and convicted, but two of his friends as well. Or the woman who wanted to get back at her ex-boyfriend for breaking it off, so she falsely accused him of rape, and candidly admitted: "I just wanted him to be hurt because of what he’d done." Or the women who called the police and falsely claimed her ex was having sex with a minor. Or the young woman who told a rape lie about her young ex-boyfriend "because she wanted him to feel extreme pain"?
Then there was the woman who sent a man to prison for five years because she was bored. And the woman out for revenge after a road rage incident. And the woman who tried to destroy the life of a man she didn't even know because he wouldn't give her a beer. And the maid who accused her employer of rape because she didn't like her workload. And the girl who accused a man of rape for throwing a flower at her. And the woman who falsely accused her lover of rape because he had the bad manners to go speak with a roommate after having sex instead of staying with her. And the woman who caused three men to be interrogated for rapes they didn't commit, all because she wanted a day off from work.
Some women need no excuse at all. An 18-year-year-old boy was hauled out of class and arrested on a random false rape claim by a girl he'd never met. He was jailed for a month.
Oh, and let's not forget the serial false accusers: here and here and here and here and here and here and here.
Rape lies generally are not cries for help, nor are they the innocent "white" lies they are made out to be. They often are coldly and calculatedly designed to achieve a very specific, cruel effect. Too often they succeed. David Copperfield's attorneys claimed that the famous magician's false accuser "bragged to one of her closest friends that she could make up allegations against a guy to 'take a guy down' if she wanted to. She said this before she even met Mr. Copperfield." See here. Another woman launched a vicious, methodical campaign centered around a false rape claim to get back at her boyfriend, and told a friend that he "wouldn’t know what had hit him." See here. And there was the New Zealand woman who was arrested for drunk driving and told her friend she was going to go to the media with the names of the arresting officers and be "bigger than Louise Nicholas," a woman who famously alleged several police officers had raped her. See here.
___________________
Here are the two news reports about Sabrina Johnson:
Mum-to-be Sabrina Johnson jailed for a year for crying rape
MUM-TO-BE whose lies wasted hundreds of hours of police time has been jailed for crying rape.
Sabrina Johnson, 25 – who grew up in Maldon – fabricated a detailed story about being raped to protect her job after taking part in drunken sex games with three strangers and turning up to work with a hangover.
But she was forced to admit her lies after one of the men she had sex with revealed she had instigated and consented to the orgy – and had recorded her saying so on his phone.
Judge Anthony Goldstaub QC jailed her for 12 months at Chelmsford Crown Court on Friday after she had previously pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice.
"This was an allegation of a terrifying nature," he said.
"There was heightened public fear of rapists – an atmosphere of fear that was created wholly unnecessarily."
Judge Goldstaub told Johnson: "You have discredited justice, the truth has been violated and the moral fabric of the community has also been damaged.
"Bogus allegations worsen the plight of genuine rape victims and deter them from coming forward.
"Every false accusation of rape has an insidious effect on the public, and allows doubt to creep into juries where no doubt should exist."
Prosecuting Samantha Lawther told the court that on June 4 Johnson had downed five gin and tonics, a glass of wine and sambuca shots on a night out in Chelmsford before she met several men in the street.
They invited her in for a drink and played drinking games before she performed oral sex on three of the men.
"You had sexual relations with them and played some kind of sex game," said Judge Goldstaub.
"One of the males – a prudent gentleman – recorded your consent on his mobile phone, including your image.
"But for his doing so he would have been very likely in deep trouble."
She woke with a hangover at 5am the next morning.
She was due to start work at 6am, but didn't turn up until 12.45pm, which is when her lies began.
She told police that two men had dragged her into the Marconi nature reserve in Central Park, Chelmsford, and raped her, and was given a medical exam and a video interview.
Johnson took police officers to the park to show them where the "attack" took place, and even appeared distressed as she told them how the rapists forced her to perform oral sex.
She also showed them a path where she claimed a group of women passed by scaring her attackers off.
Twenty-one officers spent 311 hours investigating at a cost of £6,753 to the taxpayer.
Yellow witness boards were put up appealing for the public's help and undercover police were sent to patrol the park to allay community fears.
Forensic samples were taken at the scene, CCTV footage was obtained, and an e-fit of one of the "rapists" was even prepared, which resembled one of the men.
Police said that the man in the e-fit would have been arrested if he hadn't come forward with the recording of her consent.
"The men had to make statements and supply their DNA to police officers, and it must have been a frightening experience, particularly for the man you identified," said Judge Goldstaub.
"All he could say was that you had consented, but defendants often say so in rape cases, and juries are often invited not to believe them.
"The effects on the victim wrongly accused can be appalling, and might well have been in this case."
Mitigating Peter Barlex said she remembered giving oral sex the next morning, but couldn't remember how it came about, and only made the complaint after being encouraged to by her ex-partner and colleagues.
He also claimed that Johnson's behaviour had been affected by a diet, which restricts her to 410 calories a day and prohibits solid food.
In a statement, Johnson admitted that she was angry with herself – admitting that when she drinks she gets flirtatious – and apologised to Essex Police and all the real victims of rape.
Link: http://www.thisistotalessex.co.uk/news/Undefined-Headline/article-2959648-detail/article.html
Second false rape claim woman jailed
A SECOND Chelmsford woman has been jailed for making a false rape claim.
Sabrina Johnson was late for work after a late night drinking binge and told her bosses she had been attacked.
Police launched a rape investigation after Johnson claimed she had been raped by two men in a Chelmsford park.
Police had called in extra CID officers from Braintree, Dunmow and Maldon to investigate the claim.
Work on other investigations was put on hold, officers were diverted to work on the matter and appeals for witnesses were issued by police.
Part of Central Park, in Chelmsford, was cordoned off, while local press and television as well as forensic experts were called in.
Chelmsford Crown Court heard on Friday how police spent 311 hours investigating the bogus claim at the cost of £6,753.
Three men traced by police gave statements and DNA samples to officers. Two of them resembled e-fit descriptions Johnson had given police of her supposed attackers.
Johnson, 24, was told by Judge Anthony Goldstaub: “The consequences could have been appalling.”
Johnson, from Rooks Crescent, Chelmsford, was jailed for 12 months after she admitted a charge of perverting justice.
Her solicitor told the court she was ashamed of what she had done and was very sorry.
The court heard Johnson, who is expecting a baby in May, had been out drinking with a friend on June 5 this year.
Later, she visited colleagues at the Co-op store in Moulsham Street, where she worked, before heading home.
As she was walking along Parkinson Avenue, she saw a group of men and was invited to a nearby flat.
Samantha Lowther, prosecuting, said Johnson agreed to take part in a sex game with three of the men.
One of the men, described by the judge as “very prudent”, recorded Johnson on his mobile phone giving her consent to the game.
Johnson woke the following morning and realised she was late for work. She had already received a warning over this from her boss, Miss Lowther said.
She phoned her boss to tell him she had been attacked. He asked if she had told police and for the crime report number she had been given.
Johnson then decided to lie to police. The court heard how police doubts about the claim began when the three men were traced and the voice recording of Johnson was discovered. Later on, she admitted her claim was a lie.
After she confessed, Johnson told police: “Things just started getting bigger and bigger and I could not stop it.
“I realise what I have done. It’s appalling, I’m ashamed of myself. I’m really sorry.”
Her solicitor, Peter Barlex, told the court Johnson’s memory of the night was a little vague as she had been drinking.
“It was a situation that got out of hand and she could not get out of it,” Mr Barlex said.
Samantha Merry, 21, of Bells Chase, Great Baddow, was jailed for 18 months at Chelmsford Crown Court on Friday, November 19, after admitting trying to pervert the course of justice.
She also made a false claim that she had been raped.
Link: http://www.chelmsfordweeklynews.co.uk/news/8714013.Second_false_rape_claim_woman_jailed/
Posts
23 comments:
I believe "being late for work", as ridiculously silly as it sounds to most men (outside the lace curtain), was in fact one of the top 5 reasons cited in Dr Kanins study on false rape accusations.
Why in the world was a pregnant woman on such a restricted diet?
And drinking heavily?
That was child abuse in itself she didn't get charged with.
I wish someone would interview the "ex-partner and coworkers" just to see how they feel about their suggestions after-the-fact.
Anyone notice the plus side in these articles? I didn't see the names of the accused men.
”She had already received a warning from her boss over being late for work, so she phoned him and told him she had been attacked. He asked if she had reported the attack to police, and for the crime report number she had been given. Johnson then decided to lie to police.”
Isn’t this so often the way these things get started. A woman needs and excuse or alibi, but those to whom she tries to given them press for her to report to police, which they then do, so as to try to convince their initial audience that they are not lying. This is just what Danmell Ndonye did, and we know what became of that. Biurney Peguero as well. Women are far too willing to see innocent men suffer complete ruination that simply admit that they are lying. [Note to feminist trolls, I am trying to bait you into trying to speak up in defense of what these women, your sisters, do. Their behaviors are a reflection on all women, especially those who give tactic approval by their silence.]
”Defense counsel claimed that Johnson's behavior had been affected by her diet, which restricts her to 410 calories a day and prohibits solid food.”
I apologize in advance for this, but…are they saying that oral sex was her way of supplementing her caloric intake?
”In this case, Sabrina Johnson was willing to sacrifice three innocent lives to save her job.”
This is exactly how flippant FRA can be. Thank you for making that point again, and recounting some of the many other examples. It cannot be stressed enough.
Nor can the need for men to protect themselves by getting evidence of consent on video or audio recording.
Anonymous - ”Why in the world was a pregnant woman on such a restricted diet?
And drinking heavily?
That was child abuse in itself she didn't get charged with.”
I believe this is simply a matter of dishonest and manipulative reporting. Consider these two statements:
”On June 4, 2010, Sabrina Johnson, an expectant mother, was out drinking before she met several men in the street.”
”The court heard Johnson, who is expecting a baby in May”
To be expecting in May (2011), she would have had to have gotten pregnant in August (2010).
This was likely an attempt to gain undue sympathy for the criminal by pointing out that she was pregnant at the time she was tried and convicted.
"She appeared distressed as she told them how the rapists forced her to perform oral sex."
I'm no dentist, but I don't think that is physically possible.
"Defense counsel claimed that Johnson's behaviour had been affected by her diet, which restricts her to 410 calories a day and prohibits solid food."
I'm no obstetrician either, but neither that nor excessive drinking sounds the least bit healthy for her unborn child. So I'm thinking there at least four victims here.
Also, kudos for the great round-up of false accusations for incredibly petty reasons.
That's a good point, but who knows how many times she has been pregnant? She is obviously a very irresponsible person with extremely poor judgment. There is no mention of her having a husband, either.
Anonymous - "That's a good point, but who knows how many times she has been pregnant?"
In having seen many of these stories here on FRS, it's actually rather typical for a woman who learns that she will be facing charges to show up to court pregnant.
It seem little more than another attempt at manipulating sympathy's her way - not unlike the motivation of many FRA's in the first place. Women...
"Women..."
If male criminals could use false rape as an alibi, or show up in court pregnant, they would do it too.
It's like that Rodney Dangerfield joke, the only reason prostitution is illegal is because the other criminals are jealous...
Regardless, let's remember that as big a problem as false accusation is, we are still talking about a tiny minority of women. Just like rapists are a tiny minority of men. The root of the problem is that one is treated like a serious crime, and the other isn't.
Anonymous - ""Women..."
If male criminals could use false rape as an alibi, or show up in court pregnant, they would do it too."
While I realize that some men will also try to manipulate sympathies as well (taking their young children into court on the day of their sentencing is a common one); I was expressing a certain amount of exasperation for the much more common tendency expecting to receive "special treatment".
You and I both know it goes well beyond matters such as making false reports and looking for leniency in court.
Ever had a male co-worker come up to you, batting his eyes trying to look cute and pitiful, and whine that he just could do some job function of his, followed by asking you to (pretty please) do it for him?
Neither have I.
Woman have far more avenues available to them to try to manipulate sympathies. I wasn't attempting to deny that some will also do it, but simply noting that it's rather typical for a woman to try to do so.
Anonymous - "The root of the problem is that one is treated like a serious crime, and the other isn't."
I was just noting that on the older Another day, another round of presumptively innocent men declared to be rapists by our impartial news media thread, where some troll was trying to call Peirce out for suggesting that FRA's need to be taken seriously.
"Regardless, let's remember that as big a problem as false accusation is, we are still talking about a tiny minority of women. Just like rapists are a tiny minority of men. The root of the problem is that one is treated like a serious crime, and the other isn't."
Right.
I think the owners of this blog should contact this prosecutor:
http://rogercanaff.com/site/2010/11/a-letter-from-a-prosecutor-to-a-young-woman/
From what I've read, he sounds like a male Nancy Grace. Regardless, he is sadly misinformed. Although perhaps he is not as completely batshit as this perennial asshat:
http://www.amplifyyourvoice.org/u/Yes_Means_Yes/2010/11/29/Come-and-See-the-Violence-Inherent-In-the-System
Why doesn't it occur to these people that maybe it didn't go any further because the police found exculpatory evidence that outweighed her story?
And why should an athlete be benched pending an investigation? Would a female athlete ever be benched on the mere word of some male student?
Anyway, I would love to see what Lizzy Seeberg allegedly wrote the night before she went to the police.
"Not long after the semester began, on the evening of Aug. 31, Seeberg told her friends at St. Mary's College, the all-women's school across the road from Notre Dame, that she had been assaulted but not raped in an attack that was interrupted by a knock on a dorm-room door. That same night, she sat down and hand-wrote an account of all that had happened, and the next day made a full report to the Notre Dame cops."
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/25/notre-dames-shameful-punt-in-the-probe-of-lizzy-seebergs-sad-d/
Googling her name yielded this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabrina_Johnson
Now the Sabrina Johnson in this case is 25, the porn actress 33, so they can't be the same person. I found it comical nonetheless.
She is obviously a stupid and selfish woman. But then again so are most people. The women who lie about men doing these things all are, so are the men who actually do rape women. To be honest I can sort of understand some of the excuses that are listed, e.g. a boyfriend breaking your heart and you wanting to make him understand how much you are suffering. however if those girls really do care about the guy they were with and they are genuinely hurt they should handle it themselves instead of getting other people to do the dirty work of upsetting them for them and lying like that.
Anon @ 6:24pm:
"To be honest I can sort of understand some of the excuses that are listed, e.g. a boyfriend breaking your heart and you wanting to make him understand how much you are suffering.
Ohhhhh no, you don't get away with that. It's been a while since I've posted here and I hope this Anon is a man, as I would be ashamed to think it's a woman trotting out this sorry excuse.
Most of you who know me here know I am both a feminist AND support what you do here.
This kind of statement COMPLETELY undermines the responsible stance of most true feminists. (I know you guys will argue with me on that comment, but my point is...)
I don't care HOW hurt, enraged, belittled, taken advantage of, etc, that a woman may feel from being dumped, it is ridiculous to suggest that it is in any way understandable for her to FILE FAKE CHARGES against a man.
There is a litany of ways that a woman can deal with this.
The first is: DEAL WITH IT! You get dumped; move on.
There are far less damaging (but probably equally psychotic) ways to "get back" if she really had the need to do that. Date his best friend, leave sexy notes on his door/car for the new woman to find...
I'm joking there, but to even hint that putting someone in criminal trouble over your hurt heart is somehow understandable is just stupid and dangerous.
Rant over; you may return to your regular programming.
I've come to the conclusion that if the word of the accuser that a rape took place is all that is needed to arrest a man on a false rape accusation, then the false rape victim's word that no rape took place and that it was consensual should be all that is needed to release him from custody.
Anon at 11:17: Do you mean to suggest that a "he said/she said" scenario, with no other significant evidence, should be regarded as a non-crime because we really can't tell what happened? Do you really mean to suggest that we shouldn't just roll the dice with the lives of presumptively innocent young men and hope, maybe, we'll get lucky and get a conviction even though it could go either way? Shocking!
SocialWorker,
AMEN!!!!
What happens to a society that has accepted and in institutionalised the faulty and inflammatory misinformation attacks on men who are heterosexual??
answer..Over time, it will be just (homosexual males and women) who rake in the capital gains dollars, while the heterosexual underclass labor.
To E. Steven Berkimer:
"SocialWorker,
AMEN!!!!"
Why thank you, sir. Validation is always nice, especially when some of my comments tick you all off once in a while.
To Anon @ 11:17pm:
"I've come to the conclusion that if the word of the accuser that a rape took place is all that is needed to arrest a man on a false rape accusation, then the false rape victim's word that no rape took place and that it was consensual should be all that is needed to release him from custody."
I'm almost, but not totally on board with this. I actually think no arrest should happen in the first place without some kind of evidence beyond someone's word. That should be a standard for all crime, especially one this controversial.
Validation is always nice, especially when some of my comments tick you all off once in a while.
Nobody agrees all of the time. Be a pretty boring world if we did.
And that is the one thing we will always agree on. Arrest without an investigation, or proof of a crime (and a person saying a crime has occurred, with nothing more than their say so just isn't enough), should be the last thing that law enforcement does.
"an expectant mother, was out drinking"
Classy.
Post a Comment