Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
OUR MISSION
Followers
Liberty Bell
AVfM Donations
Reforming the justice system
Defending rights in higher education
False Rape Activist Paul Elam
Links: Information About False Rape Claims
- ● RUSSLYN ALI: 'Dear Colleague letter (lowered standard of proof on campus for sex charges, etc.)
- -- Criticisms of 'Dear Colleague' letter
- ● ROY F. BAUMEISTER: Is There Anything Good About Men?
- ●EMILY BAZELON and RACHEL LARIMORE: How often do women falsely cry rape?
- ● CYNTHIA BELL: Rape should be tough to prove
- ●ROY BLACK: Why we should protect those accused of rape
- ●CAMPUS SAFETY AND SECURITY DATA ANALYSIS CUTTING TOOL
- ● PROF. ALAN DERSHOWITZ
- --The trouble with rape prosecutions
- --When the rape rap is phoney
- ●SUSAN ESTRICH: Discussing the Al Gore rape case
- ●FATHERS AND FAMILIES WEB SITE
- ●ZACHARY FOWLE: Accused often guilty until proven innocent
- ●EDWARD GREER: The truth behind legal dominance feminism's 'two percent false rape claim' figure (debunks two percent canard)
- ●BRUCE GROSS: False Rape Allegations: An Assault On Justice (overview of false rape studies)
- ●AYA GRUBER: Law professor says feminists should abandon tough rape laws and the war on crime
- ●STEPHANIE GUTTMANN: How date rape 'education' fosters confusion, undermines personal responsibility, and trivializes sexual violence
- ●PIERCE HARLAN and E. STEVEN BERKIMER: Don't forget victims of false rape accusations
- ●CHAD HERMANN
- --Men are From Wilkinsburg, Women are From Collier
- --One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Seven
- --The lessons of Michael Haywood
- ●AMANDA HESS: False rape claims and rape culture
- ●SANDY HINGSTON: The new rules of college sex
- ●JOANNE JACOBS: Rape and the bathroom wall
- ●KC JOHNSON: Durham-in-Wonderland (the Duke Lacrosse blog)
- ●KRISTIN JONES: A curious anomaly at UC Davis
- ●EUGENE J. KANIN: False rape reports
- ● RICHARD KLEIN: An Analysis of of Thirty-Five Years of Rape Reform: a Frustrating Search For Fundamental Fairness
- ●KENNEDY v. LOUISIANA (outlawed death penalty for child rape due, inter alia, to possibility of false claims)
- ●KOSS REPORT
- ●JIM KOURI: Duke rape case all too common
- ●JESSICA LACK: Playing the victim is overplayed
- ●JOHN LEO: A rape accusation at Brown
- ●PROF. ALAN LEVY: Political correctness is alive and well on college campuses
- ●CARRIE L. LUKAS: One in four? Rape myths do injustice, too
- ●HEATHER MacDONALD: Campus rape myth
- ●MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE: Recommendation for dismissal of Strauss-Kahn case
- ●CHARLES P. McDOWELL: 'False Alligators' and fuzzy data: a new look at crime analysis
- ●WENDY McELROY
- --Continuing to defame the 'Duke 3' as rapists
- --Duke rape case raises issue of protecting identity of accused
- --False rape charges hurt real victims
- --Rape scandal turns sympathy into skepticism
- --Treat accused, accuser alike
- ●MSNBC REPORT: FALSE ALLEGATION THWARTED BY POLICE CAMERA
- ●NATIONAL COALITION FOR MEN
- --False accusations
- ●NCHERM: THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR HIGHER EDUCATION RISK MANAGEMENT
- ●SARAH OVERSTREET: Coercion doesn't make sex a crime
- ●DR. TARA J. PALMATIER: Shrink4Men
- ●KATHLEEN PARKER: Picking up after the Duke debacle
- ●RADAR: Respecting accuracy in domestic abuse reporting
- ●RAINN: Reducing risk of sexual assault
- ●RAPE INVESTIGATION HANDBOOK: False claim red flags
- ●ANNA RITTGERS: Sometimes Women Lie About Rape
- ●KATIE ROPHIE: Date rape's other victim
- ●THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE: Dedicated to the defense of liberty and human rights
- ●SCIENCE DAILY: Women Have Not Adapted To Casual Sex, Research Shows
- ●SLATE DOUBLEX GABFEST: Jamie Leigh Jones and other high profile rape cases
- ●CHRISTINA HOFF SOMMERS
- --In making campuses safe for women, a travesty of justice for men
- --Researching the 'rape culture' of America
- ●JONNA M. SPILBOR: What If Kobe Bryant Has Been Falsely Accused? Why the Law of Acquaintance and Date Rape Should Seriously Penalize False Reports
- ●STATE PENALTIES FOR FALSE REPORTING
- ●STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS FOR RAPE
- --National Conference for State Legislatures
- -- Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN)
- ●STERN REVIEW (UK)
- ●SHAUN WEBB: A Motion for Innocence
- ●LAUREN WEEDMAN: I lied about being raped
- ●TOY SOLDIERS WEB SITE
- ●NAOMI WOLF
- --A tale of two rape charges
- --Why is rape different?
- ●CATHY YOUNG
- --Last cry for 'rape crisis' feminism?
- --The noble lie, feminist style
- --Sexual assault on campus--is it exaggerated?
- --The unique power of crying rape
- --Who says women never lie about rape?
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Search This Blog
Become a fan of FRS on Facebook
Buy This Book
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
Revolver Maps
Flag Counter
7 comments:
I live in Oregon. While there probably are some elements of the old guard racist attitude still prevalent in the state, the state government and population in the urban areas especially are going progressive. The state and bigger city governments are pro-illegal aliens, pro-feminist, and pro-welfare. The government attitude to taxing business and creating new regulations is socialist. Citizens complain that statewide, police officers are seldom prosecuted or found guilty of abuse of power.
Having written all that above, my take on it here is that the government is anti-male, embraces the feminist rape hysteria, and is out to protect its own government workforce from a whistle blower. Sure, racism might be part of the problem though I don't think the government is anti-black.
AL
No. Oregone does not hate black.
Oregon hates male people.
They aren't arresting and falsely convicting black WOMEN, are they?
So the APPROPRIATE question is Does Oregon's government simply hate black men?
Since many, many, many white men are falsely accused and wrongly convicted alongside their black counterparts that pretty much leaves us to conclude: no. Oregon does not hate black people.
The writer, Tim King, is also the founder of Salem-News.com. Mr. King has written several articles involving the struggles Terrence Kimble has faced at the hands of the Oregon criminal justice system. To me, the false rape conviction is used as part of King's overall thesis about the treatment of African-Americans by Oregon.
But relation to false rape allegations, Mr. King wrote an article in January of 2010 critical of law enforcement (Linn County) publicizing a false rape claim made by a then, 28-year-old woman. King was critical over the release of her identity (he refers to her as "the woman") and the punishment issued by the court.
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/january172010/heavy_metal_tk.php
I think the article speaks volumes about Mr. King's opinion regarding false rape claims. Note that he makes no mention of the enormous damage false rape allegations cause to the falsel accused and their families, the prevelance of false rape, the prevelance of male victims of rape, or how the criminal justice system and the media publicize the accused, often times, without a shred of evidence that a crime was actually committed.
How does a man get convicted when the girl says to her examiners that she wasn't raped, there is no physical evidence of rape, and the girl's family sides with the defendant? For that matter, what crazy DA brings charges with those facts?
I sure hope the judge didn't make that "I'd convict anyway" quip in front of the jury. Heck, even if he said it outside the hearing of the jury, it's strong evidence of bias on the part of the judge. That's surely grounds for appeal.
randian - ”How does a man get convicted when the girl says to her examiners that she wasn't raped, there is no physical evidence of rape, and the girl's family sides with the defendant? For that matter, what crazy DA brings charges with those facts?”
[1 of 2]
There are actually multiple questions to ask regarding how such a case could be moved along through the criminal justice system.
The first question would be why it would ever have made it past a police investigation to even be sent on to the DA for consideration. While it’s typical that unless they can disprove that a crime occurred, police are loath to be the ones to close a case, and will routinely hand DA’s “bad cases” – particularly if the alleged victim is a woman (consider it socio-political cowardice).
But, in this case, it was at the point of the SANE exam that the alleged victim confessed that she had lied, and no crime had occurred – a recantation backed up by the medical evidence (or lack thereof):
”Once in the care of doctors, the alleged victim said she had not been raped, in spite of her earlier allegation. A full examination revealed no signs of bruising, no signs of trauma, the girl joked with medical personnel, and the biggest evidence of all, was the doctor's revelation that the girl not only had not had sex, but that she had never engaged in a sexual act in her life.”<
That should have been more than enough for the police to find no crime had occurred and to close the case.
On the other-hand, according to the article linked above, the arresting officers put a beat-down on Kimble, so the PD may have had the own offenses of it’s officers that they wished to cover-up by forwarding the case on to the DA.
At that point, given the facts as we are told, a Deputy DA should have recognized it as not only a matter of an un-winnable case (recanting victim, no physical evidence), but also of no matter of crime having occurred (physical evidence against it having happened).
Thus, one must conclude that the Deputy DA was engaged in the sort of anti-male, rape-hysteric activism we’ve seen in others (like Mary Kellet) – with the backing of an elected DA – to go forward.
So, both the police and prosecutors can be seen as having nefarious reasons for pursuing the case.
[2 of 2]
But, that’s as far as it should have gotten. It should never have survived the Preliminary Hearing to be bound over for trial. With a recanting victim, and solid medical evidence that the crime had never occurred, any half-way competent defense attorney should have got it dismissed, and any half-way honorable judge should have realized that allowing such a non-case to go to trial was not only a travesty of justice, but a huge waste of the courts and a jury of citizens time and money.
That the case was allowed to proceed is then a huge FAIL on the judges part.
At trial, the facts as reported via the article, should have lead to any defense attorney (and, really, any person short of a brain-damaged drooling idiot) to have been able to raise “reasonable doubt” (or, in this case, clear and convincing doubt, of which there should have been no reasonable doubt). And, any jury of citizens, hearing the evidence relayed in the article, should have had no question in their minds about acquitting Kimble.
This case looks like a series of huge failures – on the part of the police for not closing it out early based on victim statements and physical evidence, on the part of the DA for taking the case to a preliminary hearing, on the part of the judge for allowing it to go to trial, on the part of the defense attorney for not being able to use the available facts to win an acquittal, on the part of the jury for finding a way to find him guilty, and on the part of the girl who accused him (first for making the claim, and lastly for not addressing the court at his sentencing to proclaim his innocence and appeal for true justice).
It took a number of people all failing in their responsibilities to get Terrence Kimble convicted. Unless, of course, there’s a whole lot more to this case than what the article is telling us.
I think there are 2 (not mutually exclusive) scenarios:
1) Something happened between prelims and the trial. The girl says nothing happened and the family sides with the defendant, but they do not object to a trial that, so far as they could know at the time, would have done nothing but prove the girl was lying. Personally, I'd want to avoid such a public outing. Then, at trial, neither the girl nor the family testifies for the defense. Were they threatened by the DA?
2) With his remark about wanting to convict despite the lack of evidence, that judge was biased from the getgo. Through their choice of what evidence the jury will hear, judges have enormous power to sway verdicts. Perhaps the judge didn't allow the jury to hear any of the exculpatory evidence, like the recantation and physical exam. After all, in today's rape jurisprudence corroboration isn't required. Thus the judge will instruct the jury that the fact that the DA didn't present a rape kit (he must not have, otherwise I don't see how the jury still says "guilty") isn't relevant to guilt, and the defense was barred from asking the complainant about what she said during the exam.
Post a Comment