A female chaplain at a Roman Catholic college narrowly avoided jail after she admitted falsely accusing a parish priest of rape when he ended their affair.
Father Patrick Udoma lost his job and his home and his life was ‘completely devastated’ when Emma Templeton, 44, lied to police that she had been seriously sexually assaulted by him, a court heard.
The 45-year-old suffered the humiliation of being arrested by police at his church while conducting a funeral, had his home searched, mobile phone confiscated and was locked up for 23 hours in a cell and questioned.
Despite Father Udoma insisting that the pair had enjoyed a consensual relationship, officers refused to accept his protestations of innocence.
It wasn’t until five months later – when police discovered more than 200 intimate text messages between the couple on Templeton’s phone – that he was finally exonerated and she was arrested instead.
Templeton, who worked at Cardinal Newman University College, Birmingham, was sentenced to ten months’ imprisonment, suspended for a year, after admitting perverting the course of justice.
James Burbidge, QC, the Recorder of Birmingham, said he accepted Templeton had not acted maliciously when she made the rape allegation, but added: ‘You have committed a very serious offence.
‘It was created when your relationship with Father Udoma appeared to be coming to an end, and from what you said to him you knew you could cause him trouble.’
Birmingham Crown Court heard that Father Udoma started a relationship with Templeton in 2008 while based at St Rose of Lima Catholic Church, in Weoley Castle, Birmingham.
Shenaz Musaffer, prosecuting, told the court that Templeton first made an allegation of rape against the priest to colleagues in January 2009. She also claimed to have tried, on two occasions, to take her own life by taking an overdose of paracetamol.
However, it wasn’t until more than a year later, in April last year, that Templeton, of Northfield, Birmingham, made a formal rape complaint to the police.
Father Udoma was arrested and, under questioning, admitted he had engaged in consensual sex with Templeton on two occasions but said their relationship was over.
He told officers she had warned him that she would not be able to guarantee what she would do if he ‘hurt’ her.
Father Udoma was released on bail but it wasn’t until September, when police discovered hundreds of text messages on Templeton’s phone, in which she declared her love and respect for the priest, that he was finally told no further action would be taken against him.
Templeton was arrested and, the court heard, initially claimed she had lied because the priest had some kind of hold over her.
Eventually, however, she told officers she had made the allegations up.
Sally Hancox, defending, said Templeton was of previously good character but had ‘issues’ from her childhood and adolescent life which meant there was still an element of the ‘emotional child’ in her.
She added: ‘She allowed herself to become embroiled in a situation which for many reasons was inappropriate.’
Following the case, a former parishioner, who did not want to be named, told the Birmingham Mail that Father Udoma had been ‘tormented’ by Templeton’s ‘wicked’ claims and ‘didn’t deserve what happened to him’.
She said he was conducting a funeral at his church on April 15 last year when police arrived to take him into custody.
It is understood Father Udoma has since been reinstated in a different parish.
Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1356052/Female-chaplain-false-rape-claim-Catholic-priest-relationship-ended.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
Again and again. Claims of no malice yet it is there for all to see.. She even threatened him... It that isn't shades of malice, I don't know what it!
Then to pull out the tired old she had a sad childhood, she really is a good person crap... GESH!
TMOTS
It is a societal and judicial system breakdown that lets women and girls make false rape claims to get back at guys who break off relationships with them. It the long run, it "cheapens" the rape accusation, and can destroy an innocent man (now mostly young mens) life.
Where are the ACLU when men anbd boys are being struck with false accusations, oh i forgot they got bigger issues like liberating the upper white middle class who have been sexually oppressed for thousands of years.
Despite Father Udoma insisting that the pair had enjoyed a consensual relationship, officers refused to accept his protestations of innocence.
***
Do the police ever listen to a rape claimant and then to the target and then believe the man?
Do actual male rapists get to use the excuse they had a difficult childhood?
”James Burbidge, QC, the Recorder of Birmingham, said he accepted Templeton had not acted maliciously when she made the rape allegation, but added: ‘You have committed a very serious offence.”
No malicious intent?!?!? WTF?
I had just typed up a response to poster Mag.G. when comments were suspended for that thread, but since it fits (mostly), I’ll just recycle it here:
Mag.G. - "Same goes for someone who has falsely accused someone of rape - they made a terrible decision, but they are not "evil.""
Sorry, Mag.G.,
But this is an ill-considered blanket statement.
No, not all false accusers are necessarily evil. Some, in a moment under pressure, simply blurted out what they knew would gain them sympathy, or buy them time. This much can be understood as not inherently evil.
But, it’s what transpires subsequent to the false allegation that will determine the level of evilness involved.
Many (deliberately) give vague descriptions, because, I believe, they do not intend to see any innocent men harmed, but are merely seeking to gain sympathy, attention, and/or alibi. In that they intended no harm to any individuals, the extent of their “evil” is confined to the facts that A) they will be causing the expenditure of resources, and B) they DO potentially place “targets” on any man unlucky enough to fit their vague description.
But, that is not the end of the consideration. Should some innocent man be caught-up, detained, arrested, interrogated, named in the press, and charged with the non-existent crime; it would absolutely contingent upon her to remedy that injustice (as best she can by that point) by recanting her claim, and confessing it’s fabrication. Should she fail to do so, she is surely slipping ever deeper into what can only be described as evil. Should she, as did Biurny Peguero, continue the lie to the point that an innocent man is convicted and sent to prison, how could you possibly argue that she has not been “evil”.
Likewise, not all rapes are as evil as others. The guy who persist against his dates (often poorly expressed, or even non-expressed) resistance might well be “a rapist”, but his intent was not so very “evil”. Yet, the man who grabs a woman, drags here into the bushes, rapes her at knife point, and beats her for “good measure”, has certainly acted from an “evil” intent. And, the rapist who also murders his victim…well that’s an “evil” worthy of the death penalty.
We simply cannot hope to describe all instance of either rape or false rape in one single way. The circumstance of each lie somewhere along a continuum of increasing “evilness”.
This is, in fact, the very reason why a “sliding scale” of punishments has been repeatedly called for in regards to false accusers. The woman who recants early on causes far less harm than the one who lets it go on to see men arrested, their lives and reputations ruined, the loss of jobs/careers, the destruction of families and friendships, the cost of criminal defense, and even unjust incarcerations.
This is another of those things that I must say, I would think should be self-evident.
”The 45-year-old suffered the humiliation of being arrested by police at his church while conducting a funeral…”
This is what I consider the worst form of the “White-Knighting” that certain police do [I call it the “Law and Order: SUV” effect, do it’s recurring portrayal on that television show]. Making a public spectacle of an person who posed no immediate danger to anyone else (even had the allegation been true), and was no “flight risk”, is a none-too-secret way in which the Wight Knights in blue uniforms seek to deliver “retribution” on a man for his alleged transgressions. They, in effect, make themselves “judge, jury, and executioners” in deciding that he is guilty, and that everyone should be made aware of it so that he can be publicly shamed and ruined.
There was clearly no need to disrupt a funeral, showing complete disrespect for grieving family and friends just to achieve the “effect”. Short of corroborating evidence, he should not have been arrested at all. But, even if they were set on arresting him, it should have been conducted quietly, after the funeral was completed.
In situations like this, the persons who sough the arrest warrant, the judge who issued it, and the officers who chose to carry it out in such a manner should not be allowed to slunk away without notice. Their names should be published as well, so that the public can ask, “what were they thinking?”. They need to feel some of the shame they felt that they should inflict upon the priest.
slwerner, please don't remind me of the joke of the show, known as SVU.
They somehow made it in a rape crime that a woman's memory is more reliable that DNA evidence that shows that it was 100% impossible that he raped her.
It is a very serious perversion of a law enforcement system to let the now "Culture of false rape accusations" to get so rooted into a society.
"There was clearly no need to disrupt a funeral, showing complete disrespect for grieving family and friends just to achieve the “effect”. "
A while back police arressted a bikee while he was acting as a polebearer at a gang mates funeral. A minor riot ensued with police ultimatley appologising for being dickheads.
Post a Comment