In the course of the trial, Jessica Klork, 18, took the stand and admitted under oath to lying about being raped by Stephen Lyne. Klok admitted that she communicated the lie to the assailant. The assailant stabbed and killed Stephen in retaliation for the alleged rape of Klok.
"I lied that Stephen Lyne had raped me," the rape accuser told the court. "It was just a blatant, disgusting lie."
The young victim's sister, Sophia Lyne, testified that before her brother's death, the assailant repeated the rape allegation to her and was "really mad and angry" about it. Ms. Lyne said that the assailant had told her that he was "going to get Stephen himself for this" and that he was going to stab him.
Another witness verified that the rape lie was the assailant's motivation for the stabbing.
Stephen's mother broke down on the stand as she described the last time she saw her son alive.
Sources:
http://www.kerryman.ie/news/teen-girl-i-lied-that-stephen-lyne-raped-me-3034806.html
http://www.herald.ie/news/courts/mums-tears-for-dead-son-falsely-accused-of-rape-3035668.html
http://www.herald.ie/news/search-for-killer-of-schoolboy-as-town-left-numb-1780052.html
Posts
34 comments:
STOP THE INFANTILIZATION OF WESTERN FEMALES!
MAKE WOMEN AND GIRLS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS!
Start arresting false accusers!
No doubt the blood of Mr. Stephen Lyne is on the hands of Jessica Klok, NEVER to be washed away.
Like Lady Macbeth, she has blood on her hands and "all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten" her (not-so-tiny) hand. (Sorry I've been binge-ing on the Bard!)
I wonder what happened to "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"? It should certainly be applied to Jessica Klok.
Great comments from absolute ignorant people. Is this web site not about the truth and about not lying and about justice? The guy that held the knife is the only one with blood on his hands. He is the one that made the decision to end a life. The girl was 15 at the time. Cop on.
"He is the one that made the decision to end a life."
Correct, and no one disputes that the men who act as vigilantes when a woman cries "rape" should not be held responsible (although in Philadelphia, as our readers know, it's now de facto legal). See, that's the real "rape culture." The feminist narrative is that men don't take rape seriously. We've cited case after case after case here to show the opposite it true: men routinely have a visceral, knee jerk reaction to any rape cry, due process be damned, and too many tend to overreact to them, with often tragic results. And women who lie about rape generally know this.
Would you say the same about Darrell Roberson, who infamously shot Devin LaSalle? The woman who cried rape was convicted of manslaughter and Mr. Roberson was let off. I agreed with that decision.
Do you feel that the the college student (only the male, of course) who secretly watched the gay student in an intimate encounter for laughs should bear any legal responsibility for the gay student's suicide? Or should we just say the suicide was the sole responsibility of the student who committed suicide?
Look, I don't necessarily disagree with you. My problem is that the feminist narrative excuses women from ANY responsibility for rape lies. Example: Amanda Marcotte, for one, said that "hatred aimed [at] women who engage in sexual adventures is exactly why there are these kinds of incidents." She was referring to Hofstra. The rape liar, according to Marcotte, "probably got drunk, made the choice to have sex with multiple men, and then—because of misogynist attitudes towards sexual women perpetuated by the very people who claim to be so worried about false accusations—decided to call it a rape to clear her name."
In fact, in Hofstra, the liar's boyfriend was trying to call her at the very moment she was urging four young strangers to insert their penises into her. She was cheating on her boyfriend in a very nasty way, and she lied to cover it up. To attribute that to misogyny borders on pathology.
I would personally like to thank each and every MRA and everyone at The False Rape Society for opening my eyes to this kind of crap. As a young man I was caught up in this exact sort of thing. I was in the position of duped avenger. I could have been the man to kill another man, simply because I used to believe "women never lie about rape."
Thank you guys for exposing these lies. Always remember you are saving lives.
Anonymous - ” Great comments from absolute ignorant people. Is this web site not about the truth and about not lying and about justice? The guy that held the knife is the only one with blood on his hands.”
Speaking of “ignorant people”, I see you are IGNORANT of laws regarding the incitement of violence. I’m sure that similar laws exist in the UK, but just as a couple of quick examples (emphasis mine):
This is Ohio’s law regarding the incitement of violence:
2917.01 Inciting to violence.
(A) No person shall knowingly engage in conduct designed to urge or incite another to commit any offense of violence, when either of the following apply:
(1) The conduct takes place under circumstances that create a clear and present danger that any offense of violence will be committed;
(2) The conduct proximately results in the commission of any offense of violence.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of inciting to violence. If the offense of violence that the other person is being urged or incited to commit is a misdemeanor, inciting to violence is a misdemeanor of the first degree. If the offense of violence that the other person is being urged or incited to commit is a felony, inciting to violence is a felony of the third degree.
And, Colorado’s:
Any person who advocates for the unlawful destruction of private or public property by the use of physical force, or the unlawful injury of any person, or the unlawful taking of human life, as a policy or course of conduct, under circumstances constituting a clear and present danger that violent action will result therefrom, commits a class 6 felony. 18-11-202
And, here in Colorado, there exists specific law which denotes the context under which and individual IS responsible for the criminal behavior of another person, even including language that (in certain cases):
18-1-602. Behavior of another.
(1) A person is legally accountable for the behavior of another person if:
(a) He is made accountable for the conduct of that person by the statute defining the offense or by specific provision of this code; or
(b) He acts with the culpable mental state sufficient for the commission of the offense in question and he causes an innocent person to engage in such behavior.
(2) As used in subsection (1) of this section, "innocent person" includes any person who is not guilty of the offense in question, despite his behavior, because of duress, legal incapacity or exemption, or unawareness of the criminal nature of the conduct in question or of the defendant's criminal purpose, or any other factor precluding the mental state sufficient for the commission of the offense in question.”
Clearly, there is law on the books by which women who incite violence by proxy due to false allegations of rape can, and should be charged with felonies.
Did you have any other points of (your) ignorance which you’d care to raise?
That's as ignorant as saying a mother who encouragingly allows her children to be beaten to death or sexually abused by a parade of boyfriends is utterly blameless since she didn't get her own hands dirty.
Seek mental help immediately, please.
Excellent, slw.
"Klok was not charged for any criminality in connection with her lie".
Again and again and again, females are not held accountable for their actions while males are held 'accountable' for actions they did not take. Western society, government, and womyn are morally sick.
Men; go your own way to include avoiding womyn, ghost from supporting the real axis of evil (womyn, government, and modern society), boycott marriage and chivalry, and keep your back to the wall since in this age you are a target.
Aharon
Except this isn't about "men versus women." It's about injustice. Here two men conspired to do something terrible to another man because a girl lied. To excuse the men here is to do no better than what the feminists do: pretend that bad actors are not free moral agents.
I don't like it when we insult the many female readers and supporters we have here.
My son was accused of rape by two girls he'd dissed as a new freshman in high school. According to them, he sexually assaulted them by forcing his hands down their jeans on thirty different occasions, mostly in well-lit classrooms and hallways with other kids all around, yet no one saw anything. Although such accusations were ridiculous, no one would challenge these stories nor would the school allow a disciplinary hearing so that my son could face his accusers. He was simply suspended for seven months until the trial.
He was convicted on one count when one girl persuaded her best friend and another boy to say they saw some unwanted touching in their English class on one occasion. These statements were contrary to those recorded in the police statements and interviews by the dean of students, but the DA didn't inform the defense beforehand of the new witnesses and my son's attorney was so unprepared that he failed to even submit the boy's prior signed affidavit which countered his court testimony, or any of the other prior inconsistent statements made by the four conspirators.
My son wasn't allowed back in school and lost all contact with his community of friends as administratorsr feared that some idiot would retaliating against him. He was confined to home schooling in our basement for two years. We finally found a private school that would admit him for his jr. and sr. years, but at a tremendous cost. So far we have spent over $300,000 on his schooling and attorneys and we are still fighting his school district to help out and are appealing his conviction to the state. We've gone through three years of Hell.
So, someone doesn't think that those who make false accusations to others should be held accountable? The logic would follow that instead it's the High School's fault for not allowing a hearing so that my son could face his accusers, or the police department's fault for failing to investigate thoroughly, or the DA's fault for withholding critical evidence from the defense, or even the judges fault for failing to see the impossibility of almost all statements and recognizing the lies and conspiracy of four 14 year olds for what it was. Finally, according to this logic, it was my son's fault for having parents that chose an attorney who thought the accusations to be so ridiculous that he didn't need to prepare in order to win the case.
It must have been everyone's fault but the two girls who got together to do this. Right? Not!
The fault is certainly with all of the above, but even more so with those who in the name of reducing violence perpetrated on women, have so prejudiced the legislators, judicial systems, police departments, and school systems. They have empowered unscrupulous girls and women though their own false facts and intimidation which prevents even the most canny administrator, cop, or judge from stating the obvious for fear of attack from feminists.
However, our justice system will never hold these four kids accountable for the suffering caused my son, my wife or me. We rarely prosecute perjury in this country nor will any agency investigate this matter further since no prosecution can result. My son will always be know as a convicted rapist in this community regardless of his being a straight A student who was previously known as a kind and thoughtful kid. For him, there will be no justice regardless of whether he wins his appeal. No rape victim or her family could suffer any more than we have. For us, this will never heal.
Roger - ”…but the DA didn't inform the defense beforehand of the new witnesses and my son's attorney was so unprepared…”
Which, first, the court (the judge) should not have allowed (in Colorado, 30 day’s prior notice is required), constitutes what is known as a discovery violation (the sort of thing which tends to get criminal cases throw out, and prosecutors in trouble with the Bar Association), and is solid grounds to ask that the conviction be over-turned and a new trial ordered by the Appellate Court.
If you attorney hasn’t informed you of these simple and obvious facts, not only was he/she unprepared, they are also UNQUILIFIED. Report them to your state Bar Association, and file an appeal citing Ineffectiveness Of Counsel and Improper Admission of Evidence (testimony of individuals not presented to defense on the prosecutions witness list).
This is so simple that you can probably get an eager law student (under the Student Practice Act in your state) to do this work Pro Bono for both the experience and the name recognition that will come from both over-turning a conviction and taking down a slacker attorney (and possibly the DA as well). Look up Legal Aid at a Law School in your state.
You can fight back if the trial was conducted improperly as you’ve indicated.
Sure, it's "real simple" to fight false charges.
Two sets of books!
Policies and procedures outweigh actual law every day of the week.
The judges are smart enough to know they are subverting the intent of the law,but do it anyway.
Real good advice to the folks that spent a quarter mil seeking "justice."
Better to advocate for prosecution for false accusers,and repeal of the misandrist VAWA lawz that pay States matching funds.
It's all about the money and power over the populace,that's why we are never going to see any changes,not from above nor below.
Like everyone else said, she incited the violence by falsely crying rape, So she has blood on her hands. No one's excusing the actions of the man, just saying that the girl does share responsibility for the incident.
Yeah because she was supposed to know that when she told Mr. Shane Regan that Mr. Stephen Lyne had raped her she knew the outcome?
It's like yelling FIRE in a crowded theatre, isn't it?
How wuz I supposed to know people would get hurt?
I just told a harmless little lie, naming a specific person wo is now dead.
Not my fault.
Anonymous - ”Yeah because she was supposed to know that when she told Mr. Shane Regan that Mr. Stephen Lyne had raped her she knew the outcome?”
Trying to read through your poorly composed post, it seems that you are meaning to (at least attempting to) assert that the young women did not and could not know that her boyfriend would attack and kill the young man who she was falsely accusing of having raped her?
If so, while she might not have been able to foresee just how far her boyfriend would go in seeking to avenge what she lead him to believe had happened to her, she would have at least known that he would have been likely to respond in some violent manner. She unleashed the lie, and it was therefore her responsibility to reign it back in at the first hint that her boyfriend was going to take any action based on that lie. Her failure to recant to him (likely because she had cheated on him, and valued her own “reputation” above even the life of the young man she fraudulently accused), and confess that Stephen Lyne had not raped her left her boyfriend focused on seeking revenge.
Yes, she is certainly at fault.
If one points a gun into the air, and fires a shot aimed at nothing but the sky, should that bullet’s trajectory cause it to strike and kill someone, the person who fired the shot is not free of culpability simply because they did not know where the bullet would go (hopefully that is simple enough for you to understand).
She knew full well that was a possibility, And she did it anyway. She created a clear & present danger by doing it & she is therefore responsible.
slwerner you just said it perfectly.-You always do!
"Yeah because she was supposed to know that when she told Mr. Shane Regan that Mr. Stephen Lyne had raped her she knew the outcome?"
That something is reasonably foreseeable does not mean that it is certain to follow.
Thanks for trolling here. Stay classy!
She was in a psychiatric unit, being treated for the wrong diagnosis
Anonymous - "She was in a psychiatric unit being treated for the wrong diagnosis"
???
Are you talking about Jessica Klok, or the troll posting here?
Anonymous - "The Irish police had a task force set up on Shane Regan 3 years before he killed Stephan Lyne..."
Right. Because police have that kind of time and money to establish task forces for every guy who seems likely to commit violence at some future date.
If all this additional information you claim to have was never relayed to police, prosecutors, nor press..then exactly how do you know it? And why didn't you come forward with it?
For your information, I have a life - a rather good one at that - and tend to rely on facts that are established by normal conventions rather than those proffered by some drunken idiot who cannot compose half-way intelligible sentences on the Internet.
Sources like you and yours are what we more commonly refer to as bullsh*t.
Drunken Anonymous Irish feminist troll - "...and how many girls minors have done the same and no one was killed..."
What's this/ A nugget of the Leprechaun's gold buried in the pile o' Blarney?
Yes, many girls/minors have lied about being raped, and most often no one gets killed. Yet, men and boys do suffer immense harms due to those lies as well. And, just like Jessica Klok, they are also responsible for the harms born of their selfish and evil lies.
That Jessica Klok might suffer daily from the knowledge that she is guilty of inciting a murder is simply fitting. No need for pity for the likes of her. Her (self-)torment is well deserved!
The troll just keeps giving the gift of stupidity - ”… the police knew was going to happen anyway they said it was just a matter of time…”
Okay, in stark contradiction to your previous assertions that Jessica Klok would have no idea what her boyfriend would do in response to the inflammatory lie she told him, you now suggest that Shane Regan was well known as a violent hot-head.
Seems that his girlfriend would easily recognize such a character trait, and would just as easily understand that a lie such as hers would absolutely result in a violent reaction on his part.
Damn! She’s even guiltier that what she first appeared to be.
Not to dumb-assed trolls. When you find that you’ve dug yourself in a logical pit, stop digging.
Oh, wait! That would be common sense wasted on idiots.
I have deleted two anonymous comments that purport to furnish personal information about the rape accuser. We rely on information published in mainstream news sources. An anonymous comment to this blog is not vetted by editorial standards. Show me a respected news source where this information appeared and we'll post it. Thanks.
Once you lie about such a grave issue as rape, there always are consequences. They might be "only" a wrecked reputation for the slandered. Loss of friends, arguments, beatings, fights, or, rarely murder.
Once you commit a serious wrong you are responsible for the consequences.
So if you drive drunk, you did not know you would run over 3 people.
And when you cut the brake cable of a car, just to scare the owner, you did not know that the accident would kill 8 people. So what?
But anyway, it is shocking that the woman was not charged with anything.
Absolutely shocking.
If she knew the boyfriend was going to seriously talk to the accused, she already should be charged as an accessory.
A good DA could get her on something, could he not? if he wanted!?
Human-Stupidity.com - ”A good DA could get her on something, could he not?”
HS,
The following is Part 2 of the UK’s 2007 Serious Crime Act, which parallels laws covering the “Incitement of Violence” in the U.S.
It would allow for charging her, knowing that her boyfriend was violence-prone hot-head – although, as she was only 15 at the time, she would likely have been charged as a minor:
Encouraging or assisting crime
Part 2 of the Act came into force on 1 October 2008.[5]
Section 59 abolishes the common law offence of incitement in England and Wales, and Northern Ireland, and replaces it with three new offences:
Intentionally encouraging or assisting an offence
Section 44 creates the crime of:
• Doing an act capable of encouraging or assisting the commission of an offence; and
• Intending to encourage or assist its commission.
A person is not taken to have intended to encourage or assist an offence merely because such encouragement or assistance was a foreseeable consequence of his act.
The offence is triable in the same manner, summarily or on indictment, as the anticipated offence (s.55(1)) and, on conviction, a person can be sentenced to the same penalty as applies to the anticipated offence (s.58).
Encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed
Section 45 creates the crime of:
• Doing an act capable of encouraging or assisting the commission of an offence; and
• Believing that:
o The offence will be committed; and
o His act will encourage or assist its commission.
The offence is triable in the same manner, summarily or on indictment, as the anticipated offence (s.55(1)) and, on conviction, a person can be sentenced to the same penalty as applies to the anticipated offence (s.58).
Encouraging or assisting offences believing one or more will be committed
Section 46 creates the crime of:
• Doing an act capable of encouraging or assisting the commission of one or more of a number of offences; and
• Believing that:
o One or more of those offences will be committed, but having no belief as to which; and
o His act will encourage or assist the commission of one or more of them.
The offence is triable on indictment (s.55(2)) and, on conviction, a person can be sentenced to the maximum penalty of those applying to the anticipated offences (s.58).
Post a Comment