Here's a case where the decision to prosecute and the conviction were exactly right. The sentence was too lenient, but it was still enough to give the accuser and others pause. In too many cases, the false rape victim is jailed for longer than his false accuser. The judge properly recognized that the harm deserving of punishment here was the ordeal to the teenager who was falsely accused.
Here is the news story:
An east London woman has been jailed after making a fake rape allegation against a 17-year-old boy.
Joanne Parker, 30, of Boleyn Road, London E6 was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment at Snaresbrook Crown Court on Friday for attempting to pervert the course of justice following her report of a false allegation of rape on 5 May 2009.
A 17-year-old male was arrested as the result of her allegation made on 5 May 2009 to police in Dagenham and he was detained for some 16 hours. The subsequent police investigation identified that the account given to police was false.
Parker was charged with perverting the course of justice on 24 November last year following a further investigation and review of the facts by the Crown Prosecution Service. She pleaded guilty to the offence on 14 January 2011 at a pre-trial review.
Borough Commander Matt Bell said: "The sentence reflects the impact of the false allegation on the young man who was arrested, his family, and the confidence of other victims of sexual violence to come forward to police.
“Cases like this are very rare and I hope that those that suffer sexual violence will continue to have the confidence to come forward to police and allow us to provide support and take action."
"False allegations such as this are very damaging, to both the innocent victim in this case, and to those genuine victims who may, as a result of cases such as this, feel reluctant to come forward.
“I would like to reassure victims that they will be believed and supported and encourage them to continue to come forward, whilst reiterating the serious consequences of making false and malicious allegations."
Link: http://www.theenquirer.co.uk/Woman+jailed+for+15+months+after+fake+rape+claim%20id=4210
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Off-topic: More naming/shaming in the press based on accusation alone:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2011/02/02/79-year-old-man-charged-in-sex-abuse-of-child/
Gender-Raunch have devised this theory that effectively tells police to not charge false rape accusers.
gender-raunch have constructed their reasoning behind this theory; is ""that by charging false rape accusers, it somehow deters real victims from coming forward with their rape accusation accusation.
I say, where are the studies that prove this theory???
One very REAL CONSEQUENCE of law enforcement "not charging false rape accusers", is the now Culture of false rape accusations.
Their is only one way to protect real rape victims from not being believed, and protect the integrity of the rape accusation; and that is to deter false rape accusations.
Scott,
Take an English 101 refresher course that also includes spelling.
S - "Gender-Raunch have devised this theory that effectively tells police to not charge false rape accusers."
Are you ever going to start reading the stories?
The woman WAS charged, and WAS convicted, and IS going to jail. She will now have a felony conviction on her permanent record.
Plus, as is duly noted in the story, false allegations are held to be responsible for discouraging other victims from coming forward, not, as you suggest, the prosecution of those making FRA's.
You really should at least glance at the stories, or even just the headlines before you go off on your typical "cut-n-paste" rant and embarrass yourself and this site further
"The sentence reflects the impact of the false allegation on the young man who was arrested..."
It's actually encouraging to see that this was the first consideration mentioned. All too often, even when the real victims have been acknowledged, it has seemed to have been something of an "after thought".
Here, the victim's plight has gotten "top billing" - as it should have.
Hopefully, that one judge has now found the courage to put it in the correct order, hopefully others will follow suit.
It is of course, an injustice that an innocent teenaged boy was detained and questioned by police. Unfortunately, we are given too few details about the circumstances of the original allegation to know if the nature of her claim is what caused the police to feel that they needed to act hastily, or if they just did so simply because a woman made a claim.
At least they did a proper investigation and determined her story was a lie. And, as we see more and more of in the UK, having a felony charge which can be applied against those making FRA's seems to inspire police and prosecutors to actually go after these women.
Hopefully, stories about other women doing time (and having their criminal records reflecting just that) will begin to give women pause before embarking on their own selfish, self-serving FRA attempts.
I would also imagine that we will be seeing more stories about the “alarm” of the SGI that so many women are actually getting into trouble for doing something which had previously been a very useful “tool” for women, and which had held no real consequence for them.
Mr werner, the very small percentage of false rape claims that the public and even the false rape society hear about, are simply the tip of the iceberg of all the false rape accusations that are made.
aah Mr werner, claiming Scott is an embarrassment to the false rape society for his grammatical and spelling hastiness.
Sir, I can edit my work, but there is very little help for folks who have " linear thinking deficiency".
Yes, i do repeat myself, because i get right to the point.
"aah Mr werner, claiming Scott is an embarrassment to the false rape society for his grammatical and spelling hastiness."
Oh, I have no problem with spelling and grammar errors. I make a ton of them myself.
The problem I have is the repetition of BS in the hopes that it will eventually be believed. That may have worked for feminists and their BS, but not only are "we" going to be judged harshly for trying the same, we have absolutely no need to invent utterly inane and easily disproved nonsense to further our cause.
The stories, which you don't even bother to read, that are featured here tell an amazing story all on their own. They expose the actual truth to a waiting world.
They tell of how woman chose to make FRA's fro even the flimsiest of reasons, they tell of the roles that police, prosecutors, the press, and even the public often fail the real victims.
Gender-feminists and the SGI cannot, and never will be able to refute the truth being revealed here.
But, they can find ways to try to discredit the FRS so as to convince people not to bother reading and learning that truth. If the site is full of inane and crazy sounding personal beliefs, for which this no substantiation, and which are easily refuted, being proffered as "our collective beliefs" we risk being seen as a bunch of uneducated, tin-foil hat-wearing Yahoos.
Just because an idea pops into your head, it doesn't mean that it is correct. If you suspect something might be occurring, just take the time to do some basic research.
Your recent "revelation" that you've come to believe that women are being paid by LE to collect an save rape kits so that men can be prosecuted years later, aside from being entirely incorrect, doesn't even stand up to a common-sense consideration.
It's very easy to learn that women do not collect their own specimens, that no one is paying them to collect them, and that, in fact LE is incurring significant costs in having to store them (DNA degrades at room temperature, and cols storage is rather expensive).
If you keep posting that sort of unresearched nonsense, people passing through and reading are bound to quickly recognize that your new-found "knowledge" make little practical sense; and should they take the initiative to do a simple Internet search, they are then bound to conclude that this site is comprised of paranoid delusional nit-wits.
Even posting rants that bear no resemblance to the lead story is bound to have some wondering, "WTF is the matter with those people on the FRS, can't they even read and comprehend?"
That's how posting such stuff with bothering to consider if it is at all related to the story being featured can cause potential embarrassment. It doesn't matter if you have perfect spelling and grammar, and can state ideas eloquently, if, in the end, those ideas are just plain "nutty".
15 months may be satisfying to some people here, but really it is not enough.
There should be two felonies here:
1. Filing a false police report
2. Falsifying a rape
5 years minimum.
slwerner, I understand where you are coming from. I cannot help but shudder when I peruse other blogs/websites similar to FRP with similar goals that show a lack of concern for editing. Missing the mark once (extrapolating too far, exaggerating, etc) can do hard-to-reverse damage. Needless to say, this blog has greatly impressed me. Most of the posts are well-written and acknowledge counterpoints and subtleties. It is also updated frequently. Considering how unpopular and non-mainstream of a "cause" this is, I think we should be grateful for the service this blog does.
While I welcome your criticism and even encourage it, I do not think you should be so harsh on the writers.
Post a Comment