Mr. Goodwillie was accused of rape early last year by a 24-year-old single mother who told cops that the Blackburn Rovers striker attacked her on a night out.
"I know what happened that night and I know that I did absolutely nothing wrong. I know all the evidence and it backs me up in everything."
Prosecutors dropped the charges last July, but Mr. Goodwillie is incensed that the woman was awarded 11,000 pounds in criminal compensation, and now he wants to take legal action against her.
If Mr. Goodwillie's allegations are correct, he should have the support of all persons of good will, including the feminist community.
In the UK, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) furnishes a monetary incentive to lie about rape. Under the Compensation Scheme, Britain pays crime victims, including women who claim they’ve been raped, substantial sums of money as “compensation.” The alleged rapes need not have involved violence to trigger the payments.
The compensation system has been subjected to rampant fraud, and women have falsely cried rape in order to collect. In one well-publicized case, a false accuser was compensated a substantial sum of money for her lie. In contrast, Britain does not compensate men for the harm they suffer after being falsely accused, no matter how egregious. The double-standard is stark, and morally grotesque. It tells us much about how our society regards the victims of false rape claims. See our report: Women Are Paid To Lie About Rape
In the Goodwillie case, the evidence includes witness statements and CCTV footage, which the 22-year-old claims shows the woman's story is a web of lies. The star athlete said he was on a night out with a pal when he met the woman on January 1. Goodwillie claims the pair knocked back booze before they headed to a house party. But the following day, the woman claimed to have possibly been drugged and attacked. Goodwillie and St Johnstone star pal David Robertson, 24, were both arrested.
No charges were ever brought against Robertson. The case against Goodwillie was based on the woman's claim that she had no memory and was not able to consent to sex.
But Mr. Goodwillie has alleged that fresh access to legal documents prove that the woman willingly went with him to the house bash. He said the evidence includes statements from the taxi driver who drove them there. And he also said the documents disprove her claims she'd no memory of sending a text message late at night, because CCTV cameras spotted her on the mobile.
Goodwillie explained: "The woman claims to have no recollection of events after 10pm on January 1, 2011. She denied sending a text message from her mobile phone to her mother around midnight, telling her not to have her brother come and collect her.
"She said the message must have been sent by me or a friend who was with me that night.
"But there is high-definition, time-coded CCTV footage which shows her sending a message from her phone outside the club where we were close to at midnight. Her phone records have been examined by the Crown Office and they show that message was sent to her mother's phone.
"The CCTV also shows her talking and walking normally and in control of her actions."
Mr. Goodwillie also said that a neighbour at the house where the alleged attack occurred claimed he heard the star and the girl joking about sex.
And he alleged official papers also show the woman lied about her whereabouts the morning after.
"In the morning, she took a mobile phone call from a member of her family who wanted to know where she was. Unknown to her at the time, her relatives were making the call from her house and she was not where she claimed to be. It was only at this time that she claimed to have suffered a memory lapse and the allegations were made. Then, on January 3, she tried to withdraw the allegations, I have been told."
Mr. Goodwillie said he had not "taken the decision to speak out lightly." He said: "I had to endure seven months of utter hell. The prosecutors studied CCTV images, examined phone records and text message traffic. These contradicted the woman's version of events. And everything I said was backed up."
Four of the most senior Crown Office staff — including the Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland and Derek Ogg QC, the head of the National Sex Crimes Unit — read all the case notes.
"I find that although the most senior prosecutors refused to take the case to court I am now being tried in the court of public opinion for something of which I am innocent.
"This woman and her lawyer seem determined to undermine me.
"My reputation has been tarnished by a catalogue of lies and untruths. Enough is enough. I have now instructed my legal team to take all the necessary steps to look after my interests, including a defamation action to protect my name," he said.
"I could have been in a jail cell for several years due to a false allegation. My life, my reputation, my career would all have been lost," he said. "I will do whatever is required to prevent my reputation being sullied any further."
For her part, the accuser is now upset because Mr. Goodwillie appeared to know details of a private meeting she had with prosecutors. She says she only denied sending a text message before the alleged attack in a private conversation at the Crown Office and it was not included in her police statements.
SOURCES:
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4123455/David-Goodwillie-Ill-sue-over-rape-lies.html
http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/2012/02/12/267546-David-Goodwillie-plans-to-sue-woman-for-accusing-him-of-rape.html
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/editors-choice/2012/02/12/scotland-star-david-goodwillie-s-interview-on-rape-claim-set-to-be-probed-86908-23745936/
Posts
16 comments:
Trouble is, there are no persons of good will in the feminist community. They are nothing but a gang of liars and haters.
'Paid by the government to lie about rape'. When have women in the West ever been so treated by men and some patriarchal culture of the past? This is the feminist egalitarianism? My best to David Goodwillie. I hope he kicks the lying bitch and her team into the goal post.
Are most men simply naive and ignorant of the extent of the dangers they face socializing with women? It must be so.
Aharon
This is not very simple. Politicians are stupid and so corrupted in anywhere. They are doing any harmful thing to the society for upgrading their private life.
My false rape accuser also got a substantial amount of "Victims funds" that she never had to pay back, because law enforceemnt used perversions and semantics games to label her false rape accusation as "Un-founded" instead of false.
Any simpleton can put together these quack and perverted ??victim funds?? are coming from the federal government, and some girls are cashing in.
I was the second guy my false rape accuser, accused of raping her in that same year, and the perverse law enforcement officers still refused to charge her with even a misdermeanor.
I feel sorry for the next guy she falselly accuses of raping her, as Im sure with all state and federal pork bloated rape councilors she's talking to, shes getting better at her lies.
I tried to make law emforcement charge her, but the perverted perverts who now run American law enforcement refused, and even threatened to charge me if i didn't drop it.
So i feel sorry for the next guy she falselly accuses, but im doing all i can to "Break the perverse system" that is raking in federal pork bloating dollars to persecute innocent guys, and also pays false rape accusers for their accusations.
David Goodwillie, thank you for staying to fight this perverse system instead of running and hiding from it the rest of youre life like most guys.
Guys have a constitutinal right to not be persecuted by false witness.
David, its interesting, the only reason im not in jail from my false rape accusers lies is because my false rape accuser said i raped her and she took a cab home after.
I said to the police, i didn't rape her, and gave her a ride home that night, so lets find these cab reports to show she didn't take a cab home that night.
law enforcement didn't want to hear that there might be proof that she is lying, so they started to get hostile to me, And Im not joking. They threatened me that if i didn't drop my insistance that she be charged, they were going to arrest me, and fallow through with a rape charge. Basically they scared and threatened me to death until i dropped it.
But folks, i haven't dropped it. I at least want the victim dollars she got for her false rape accusation against me, I want the perverse officers that handled my case fired for threatening me, and i want the pig that falselly accused me of rape to be charged and taken off the street so she does't do it to anyone else.
S in Boston - "and i want the pig that falselly accused me of rape to be charged and taken off the street so she does't do it to anyone else."
What's this? After so many times declaring that you didn't even blame her, finally, some harsh words for her (and her behavior)!
Well, I'm glad to see that you have finally reached the point where you can now see your way clear to putting at least some of the blame on her.
I have to say, it was really weird, and not a little bit disturbing, when you used to declare that you didn't blame her - just the police.
Congratulations on throwing off the mantle of White-Knight delusions by which you saw her as but a victim herself, having been pressured by the patriarchal systems (law enforcement, in particular) into making a falser rape allegation.
Can it be that you now finally understand that women are capable of making the choice to make an FRA all on their own, and for no other reason than their own self-interest. If you have, all I can say is congratulations on finally swallowing that Red Pill.
Being falsely accused is a very shocking, mind-numbing experience. Sometimes you simply can't immediately grasp that you have been railroaded by a monster. It takes time to adjust to your new reality.
Mr. Werner, not so fast sir, as you can see in my "hold accounteable list" above, she is last.
She is last because the folks that should have held her accounteable ( the mechanism that holds people accounteable for their actions) is broken, and needs to be fixed first.
After the broken machinery that did not hold her accounteable is fixed, then we can fix the bad products of the broken machinery.
To go around just fixing the broken products is kinda silly and futile, if the machinery is still producing bad apples.
[1 of 2]
S in Boston - "After the broken machinery that did not hold her accounteable is fixed, then we can fix the bad products of the broken machinery."
If you had actually bothered to read the news items that Pierce and Steven have been posting, what you would have noticed is that more and more, woman are being charged.
Now, it far from perfect, but it is happening on an increasing basis.
Your case is what, 6 or 7 years old now (judging by the time you related it back on Glenn Sacks old blog)? You have been stubbornly avoiding acknowledging it, but quite a bit has changed since then.
Back in 2008, in the yearly days of this site, the typical news story about an FRA included an account of the falsely accused innocent man having been arrested (often with a "perp walk" involved), named in the press, held for hours, interrogated and berated, intimate exams being conducted upon him; and then, police would finally get around to looking into the woman's story and trying to gather physical evidence – at which point they would be able to break-down and expose the FRA. Of course, this was AFTER they had managed to humiliate and ruin the innocent man.
Now, we see more stories in which the FRA is quickly deduced, the innocent man is NOT named, and she is the one who is arrested. Anymore, these woman are sometimes being charged and prosecuted – especially in the UK where they have the ability to charge them with a felony count (which makes the cost and effort of a prosecution more worthwhile to pursue).
There is, of course, still much room for improvement. But things are improving. Yet you can only see things from the perspective of your old case.
And, while I agree that it is important to charge woman and to prosecute them when there is evidence to make they case against them (what you fail to understand is that in your own case, the evidence that called the rape allegation into doubt never-the-less was not a compelling case that she was lying beyond all reasonable doubt. Had they tried to take her to trial on the misdemeanor charge, it would have been unlikely that a jury would have convicted her anyway. It wasn’t semantic games, but rather lack of clear and convincing evidence which prevented a complete exoneration for you. You could make the case that they could and should have put more effort into finding evidence that she was definitely lying, but the Boston PD has plenty of cases that need attention. It’s understandable why they might decline to put a lot of man-hours into investigating a misdemeanor case of false reporting. I’m not arguing that it is in anyway “fair” or just, simply understandable in light of multiple higher priorities.).
And, while I do agree that she should have been charged (if only with the misdemeanor false reporting that MA law provides for), I fundamentally disagree that merely charging women will somehow, magically, put an end to a practice that women have been engaged in since the dawn of human existence. Even in the UK, where woman are being sentenced to prison for FRA’s, it hasn’t stopped woman from continuing to make FRA’s as they believe that doing so will suit their aims. The reality that you fail to recognize is that woman, when judging whether or not to make an FRA, don’t usually consider the possible punishments they might face. Most probably never have the first thought about it. They ONLY consider what short-term benefit they might receive. And, it is such considerations of how individual woman believe they will benefit that is the sole driver fro the FRA crisis. It is not, as you (ALWAYS) suggest, a top-down driven conspiracy to provide external motivations to pressure women to make FRA’s but rather a bottom-up internal motivation basis on the part of individual women (multiplied by thousands of them).
[2 of 2]
All of you easily disproved nonsense about [going back over the multiple theories you’ve proffered] homosexual overlords dictating that the SGI (or, as you prefer, “Gender-Raunch”) control law enforcement via secret alliances to force them to promote women into making FRA’s and not charging them so that they can manufacture statistics which supposedly, somehow “empower” these homosexual overloards and their gender-raunch minions, is ultimately for naught. Your one-man (under a dozen aliases) campaign to convince people that women who make FRA’s are not to be held as culpable, but rather that there are man who can be alternately held responsible for the actions of these women doesn’t hold water with most rational thinkers.
Most people can easily deduce that the woman ARE to blame. The criminal justice system may be badly broken in terms of it’s response, but it has NEVER, EVER been inclined to disbelieve women, nor to hold them personally responsible. There is no new “perversion”, just the same old way it’s been done for a hundred years and more. VAWA didn’t cause it. The SGI didn’t cause it. Homosexuals didn’t cause it. The police didn’t cause it. No, the FRA problem has been caused by woman who now increasingly find themselves in situations wherein they believe an FRA will benefit them personally. The “broken system” sikmply fails to properly address their misdeeds and properly protect men from the attendant harms being done. But, it is not the genesis for the FRA problem we face. Women – selfish, thoughtless, uncaring women – are the real culprits.
Misguided efforts to blame and reform every other player (police, prosecutors, the press, and event he public-at-large) are ultimately not going to solve the problem. We need first-and-foremost, to create public knowledge that women do (and quite often) chose to make FRA’s, then we need to ensure that they are named, shamed, and finally prosecuted and properly punished for doing so. Deterrent should be out primary goal, as that is what will keep more innocent men out of harms way. The police, the press, and the public never get a chance to f*** it up if the FRA is never made in the first place.
So, rather than do what you invariably do, and try to discredit law enforcement as the real culprit (despite the completely obvious fact that they often get it right and expose FRA’s), especially via such obvious and easily disproved lies about direct profiteering via FRA’s, how about first addressing the reality that individual woman are behind each and every FRA – even those that are never made to the police and end up in misguided vigilante justice.
Arguing that we need to first “fix” law enforcement is every bit as ridiculous as those who used to argue here that we need to stop all rape first, before addressing FRA’s.
”In contrast, Britain does not compensate men for the harm they suffer after being falsely accused, no matter how egregious. The double-standard is stark, and morally grotesque. It tells us much about how our society regards the victims of false rape claims.”
Much of this, of course, comes about due to the fact that the innocent men who are harmed, and even killed due to false allegations against them (by name) are not officially recognized as the victims of a chargeable crime. Even in the UK, where Perverting the Course of Justice is a felony offense, it is considered to be a crime committed against the state (via it’s law enforcement agents).
Her in the states, every single state has passed a Victims Rights Act which confers certain rights upon those who are considered to have been the victims of a criminal offense. Yet, when the only chargeable criminal offenses against those who make false allegations is either false reporting to police, or possibly perjury (lying to either a Grand Jury or to the Court at trial), the innocent men falsely accused are left off the list of victims of the crime. They are considered only to be “victims” in that a liable has been committed upon them. But, that makes them the victim of a tort, not a criminal offense, in the eyes of the court system, meaning that, under the current status quo their legal remedy will have to come via a civil court action, brought privately on their behalf at their own expense.
What is desperately needed are new laws which not only make the false reporting of a felony crime to be also a felony offense, but which will formally recognize that those who are false accused (either directly named or as result of simply matching a description) as the primary victims of that false reporting crime. Then, they will be subject to the provisions of Victims Rights Acts, and will be eligible for victims compensation money, and can have a say in the prosecution of the case against their accusers).
We can grouse on and on about how woman are not charged, are not prosecuted and punished, and about how men are not compensated. But, until we present the idea that new laws are needed into the public discourse, those injustices will continue unabated, and with no hope for legal reforms.
Please, please, please, when ever this subject comes up, remember to mention the lack of meaningful laws to properly address the matter. Don’t leave it up to the continued misrepresentation that it is some perversion of law enforcement that can be otherwise remedied, rather than a structural matter of the laws on the books that it truly is.
[/soapbox rant]
SLW, I understand that victims rights acts do provide sometimes important aids to the victims of crime, and that leaving victims of FRAs off the list is not just. But we also need to acknowledge FRAs are not like other crimes. The harm of a rape occurs without any state help. The harm of an FRA, in contrast, occurs because the state processed a wrongful claim, didn't filter it out.
In days long gone, the state weeded out rape lies better than it does today (and fewer were made) because we had laws requiring corroboration and force. Those days are gone. While law enforcement overall does a fantastic job filtering out false claims, Scott's frequent bellyaching here is appropriate for some locales -- they act not as filters but more as funnels.
If we want to stanch FRAs, we should not be looking at laws that protect men after the harm is done (that's akin to David Futrelle saying that FRAs are ashame, but that the Innocence Project protects falsely accused men -- great, except that the Innocence Project isn't concerned about deterrence, and it only directly helps men after the damage has been done to them (when they're in prison), and then, only if the lie can be exposed by DNA evidence, which excludes acquaintance "he said/she said" claims).
What we need most of all are laws to deter FRAs -- more severe minimum sentences for lying to police about rape -- and then we need to insist that lies be prosecuted. The principal laws that need to be changed are the false reporting sentencing statutes. Those might have been adequate in the day when corroboration and force were required to commit sexual crimes, but not today. Today, it is much, much easier to tell an effective rape lie.
What we need most of all are laws to deter FRAs -- more severe minimum sentences for lying to police about rape -- and then we need to insist that lies be prosecuted.
******
Amen to that. And they need to be prosecuted by someone other than the duffus who just charged an innocent man with rape.
Good! I really hope he wins. It's criminal what they do in these cases.
False allegations of rape do not exist, or get no mention at all, in the curriculum of Europe's largest gender studies department I am suing, at LSE.
The court hearing date is on March 13th. Please go to the sexismbusters site for all the press and media, and to donate towards the fighting fund.
Post a Comment