SANDPOINT — A Priest River woman has been sentenced for falsely claiming to police that she was raped by her former employer last year.
Jennifer Lee Robinson pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of making false statements to law enforcement during a pretrial hearing on Feb. 3, court records show.
Bonner County Magistrate Court Judge Debra Heise sentenced Robinson to 60 days in jail with 59 days suspended and credit for one day she served behind bars. A condition of her probation requires her to follow her doctor’s recommendations regarding counseling and medication, according to court records.
Robinson, 29, told Priest River Police she was raped at a home last August. She claimed that the 50-year-old alleged perpetrator struck her, choked her into unconsciousness and raped her.
She later recanted the allegations, the police report said.
In exchange for her guilty plea, prosecutors agreed to dismiss a misdemeanor domestic battery charge that was pending against her.
http://www.bonnercountydailybee.com/news/local/article_6dab42a8-547e-11e1-add8-001871e3ce6c.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
14 comments:
Bonner County Magistrate Court Judge Debra Heise sentenced Robinson to 60 days in jail with 59 days suspended and credit for one day she served behind bars.
Almost fell for it. An American judge actually jailing a woman for false accusation. That would be like a white Afrikaner judge jailing one of his own for killing a black.
Then I did the math.
60 days minus 59 days suspended, plus one day credit for time served. That would be exactly: "go home - you're free sister."
My first impressions were right. It's exactly the same as an Afrikaner judge convicting one of his own for killing a black.
What a joke! This piece of garbage should be facing decades in prison.
How can anyone take our legal system seriously when injustices like this are routine?
Guys,
Here's a reason why false accusations will NOT end. It's in women's and powerful men's (i.e. the harem masters) interests to keep the present, unjust laws in place...
MarkyMark
Jennifer Lee Robinson gets zero time in jail for this FRA and she gets the DV charge against her dropped. The only ood thing that I can see from this case is that her name (not face) is in the media (on one media site only). The FRA accused man of course has had his name tarnished, has lost business, made neighbors leery of him, and probably had to pay legal fees to an attorney for a FRA he is innocent of committing.
Aharon
Has Robinson's name been entered on Register-Her?
It should be
One of the oldest of legal principles is that the perjurer should have done to her what she thought to do to the person against whom she bore false witness. It's a principle so basic in its fairness that you can explain it to any normal eight-year-old in five minutes so they can understand.
Time served of a day in jail doesn't even come close to this basic, eight-year-old-kid level of justice.
Statistically, the more federal pork bloating an American organisation gets, the sicker it gets.
In the 50's and 60's American law enforcement was not so perverse, because there was just no pork bloat dollars there to fund the perversions.
Now, There are very few "responsible Male" politicians who would say to American Law Enforcement officials "Where IS The Pork", and where is it going???
More and more and more Federal "Bloat Pork" is not only perverting many American burocracies, but its gotten so sick and bloated that its NOW perverting our basic system of equal protection under the law.
More Pork = More Bloating = more manufactured statistics = More perversion of the course of justice.
S in Boston - ”Statistically, the more federal pork bloating an American organisation gets, the sicker it gets.”
So, I see you’re still on your one-man campaign to try to convince everyone that women are not the ones to blame for making FRA’s, but rather law enforcement (for some financial gain).
I’ve been over this with you dozens of times now, yet you cannot learn. Basically, the key point s are:
As the VAWA law is written, the total amount of federal money available to police agencies per annum is $67 million dollars (a small fraction of the total VAWA money machines wealth redistribution), with 1/57th of that total GURENTEED to each of seven territories and Native American Nations (Tribes). Once government over-head “skimming” (about 15%, typically) is factored in, that leaves about $1 million per state. Nothing to sneeze at, but hardly the “pork barreling” you’ve imagined.
And, on top of that, that money is not directly accessible – there is no way to bill VAWA, as you’ve dishonestly suggested – but must be applied for in the form of competitively awarded grants, which are intended to provide only partial funding for proposed of extant law enforcement efforts (supposedly) aimed at curbing the whole spectrum of “violence” (as it’s come to be expansively defined) against women.
Thus, the matter of trying to secure VAWA money relies NOT on the number of rape cases handled, but rather is little more than a “sales pitch” for more money [And, cynic that I am, I highly suspect that a good deal of political favoritism is also involved].
Being as it is that each and every case of a rape allegation will cost a given agency substantial amount of time and money to fully investigate (all of which will come out of their annual budget) there is a VERY STRONG DISINCENTIVE to have to handle any more cases than necessary, and thus the is ABSOLUTELY NO INCENTIVE to try to convince or coerce women into making false rape allegations.
If a given police agency really wanted to gain financial enrichment, it would be much more practical to simply set up speed traps, and collect fines. Beyond that, most police corruption tends to involve drugs, guns, prostitution, and “protection” racketeering. There is actually a lot of money to be had via those avenues, whereas there is only expenses to be realized if they could successfully get women to make FRA’s.
But, since you’re real goal is to be a good SoCon White-Knight, and ride to the protection of the women who make FRA’s, it’s only natural for you to try to find a way to blame the FRA crisis on men and patriarchal organizations (like law enforcement).
So, sure, keep claiming that the “real problem” is government pork – not thoughtless woman selfishly lying about a serious crime in order to benefit themselves. No, you wouldn’t want to draw and more attention to them and their shameful behaviors, now would you?
It must be the police taking orders to generate statistics and get money! It must be the press fanning the flames of “rape culture”! It must be “gender-raunch” (whoever the F&*% they are) “empowering” (what ever the F*@% that’s supposed to mean) themselves!
It just couldn’t be the fault of individual woman making choices to benefit themselves at the expense of others!
Mr Werner, You seem to have a disconect in yer linear thinking cacpcity. I want to hold women acounteable, but the law enforcement machanisms to do this are "Broken" or "Perverted" if you will.
How do you propose we hold women accounteable, if its not the realm of law enforcement to do it???
Instead of law enforcement to hold women accounteable, should we use mobs??? or stoning???
S in Boston - ”I want to hold women acounteable, but the law enforcement machanisms to do this are "Broken" or "Perverted" if you will.”
[1 of 2]
Umm? This from the guy who still refuses to even see his own accuser as the one primarily responsible for her own choice to do so?
It seems to me that the only reason you even bring up the matter of punishing women is to serve as a vehicle for your anti-LE machinations. Seems to me that your issue is with LE’s failure to act far more so than with what those actions might actually be (i.e. wrist-slaps for misdemeanor charges). Yes, women should ALWAYS be at least charged, so that there will be a permanent record of their (“alleged”, technically speaking) crime. But, in the nearly complete absence of actual meaningful charges and possible punishments, it’s all; too sadly understandable. [Now, as you fancy yourself a “linear thinker”, you should be able to follow the logic that, although women should be charged, there are also some very practical reasons why they might not be – as “A” follows “B”, the high probability of cases being dismissed as excessive prosecution – judges do actually do this very thing – coupled with the costs in both time and money [bald-faced lies about billing VAWA aside], plus the likelihood of minimal penalties – court costs and community service for most first time offenders – the logic would be to “not bother” with many of these cases].
But, that isn’t really my main issue with you anyway. My issue is with the way you taken to outright lying about things such as billing VAWA for rape cases in your on-going effort to deflect the primary blame for FRA’s away from the women who make them, and onto patriarchal organizations (just like the gender-feminists, you SoCons always seem to find a way by which to blame men for women’s bad behaviors).
[2 of 2]
There are some simple realities that remain that fly in the face of your various “theories” as to how men/the patriarchy should be seen as the truly culpable agents in the FRA crisis:
1)VAWA money is not provided for this “pork bloating” of LE that you imagine.
2)The 2% canard was never based on statistics (any statistics, from LE or otherwise) – it was a complete fabrication, born in the convenience of NOT having any LE stats to refute it at the time it was made. Actual LE stats, via the UCR are not being used to support that canard (as you’ve more recently taken to lying about), but rather serve to refute it and the entire rape-epidemic myth. The SGI (gender-raunch) doesn’t like these actual stats because they do not fit the narrative they wish to tell. They would be happy to go back to the days of no LE-produced stats so that they could simply make up what ever numbers they choose without anyone having the data to refute them. The whole “manufactured stats” nonsense on your part is a complete FAIL!
3)Telling lies indicating that LE stats are being used to reinforce the 2% canard actually end up giving it undo credibility by suggesting that it was ever linked to any actual numbers derived from LE. Not everyone who reads the FRS shares your reflexive hatred for and mistrust of LE. Many still respect LE, and if they are lead to believe that the 2% canard is a LE-based stat, they might be inclined to believe that canard.
4) The bottom line is, as it has always been, that women are the ones who freely chose to make FRA’s as they feel it will suit them. This is not a recent development, and predates even the existence of LE and News Papers, so neither can be accurately blamed for creating the problem (they can either function to make the consequence arising from FRA’s better or worse, but only AFTER a woman makes one).
4)FRA’s have happened not only throughout history, but also around the world as well (even though you might have not have understood that, for instance, neither the UK nor Australia, is a part of the US, and therefore not connected to either American Law Enforcement nor VAWA). The existence of FRA’s outside of the US easily demonstrates that neither VAWA money nor American Law could possibly be responsible for the FRA issue.
5)The only “perversion” which could actually explain the apparent rise in the number and frequency of FRA’s is sexual revolution which has had the effect of having more women end up in situations wherein they believe that an FRA will benefit them (caught in their infidelities, for example). LE has always tended to believe women who claimed rape (date-rape being an exception), and to over-react in going after the men accused. This is simply human nature – men hard-wired to protect women – coupled to the fact that LE tends to attract the those most likely to behave in-kind. LE didn’t need to have any of it’s protocols perverted in order to allow woman to chose to make FRA’s (as they have readily been able to do since before recorded history). Woman only need to perceive that they, individually, and without consideration of any negative outcome for themselves, have some reason to make an FRA.
6)FRA’s made to others outside of LE tend to have even worse consequences for the falsely accused than those made to LE (vigilante jusctice).
7)The inescapable conclusion is that woman who make FRA’s are the only ones who can rightly be seen as the ones primarily responsible for the crisis at hand. If no woman ever made an FRA, then none of the other missteps that police, prosecutors, press, or public tend to make would ever occur. Your idea of blaming the women “last” has zero merit. No “if’s”, “and’s” or “butts”.
so let me get this right, she gets zero time for false accusation but had the person accused been convicted he would be facing probably between 5 - 15 year in prison, convicted felon for life and anywhere between 10 years to life of sex offender registration... yeah that seems fair WTF
Attention Moderators:
Please stop letting posts through from that gender-raunch guy.
He makes this site look completely senseless to casual onlookers that might otherwise learn something here.
Stop it!
Post a Comment