A story in the news today underscores the following: If the sexual grievance industry is so terribly concerned that false rape claims garner too much publicity, they need to tell police to stop panicking communities every time a troubled young woman wanders in the police station looking for her 15 minutes of fame with a cockamamie rape tale.
Because every time police panic a community by telling newspapers that a rape occurred on the basis of nothing more than a girl's say so and it turns out that no rape occurred (and that is incredibly common), the community seethes, and citizens remember it the next time.
With the epidemic of false rape claims we're seeing, how long will it be before every community has been panicked by a sensational false rape claim?
And how easy is it to get a truly impartial jury for a rape claim in a community that's been burned by a rape lie? Seriously?
Today's news gives us yet another example (and it seems we have one of these stories every day): The Ottawa Citizen ran a headline on January 22: "Barrhaven schools on high alert after brazen sex attack on teen." The story said this: "Police are looking for a middle-aged man after the teenager, who was walking alone on Tartan Drive at about 9:45 a.m., was approached by an unknown man driving an older red four-door SUV with winter tires and no hub caps, similar to a Ford Escape or Explorer. It had two front bucket seats, but the rear seats had been removed. The vehicle had no front licence plate. Police said the SUV may have been registered in Quebec or the suspect could have removed the front plate to avoid being identified by the victim. The man asked for directions, then forced the young woman into the vehicle at gunpoint. He sexually assaulted her before dropping her off at the Fallowfield Park and Ride, police said. . . . ." The story proceeded to describe the man with great particularity.
The Ottawa Citizen's coverage of this particular rape claim was typical. An teenager's allegation was treated as 100% Gospel. It was a sensational rape claim that panicked an entire community.
Alas, as is so incredibly common in these cases, police now say it didn't happen. And the community isn't happy about it.
The Toronto Sun today reports: "Teen's false rape claim upsets neighbours." The locals are "seething," and some want the girl to apologize because there needs to be repercussions. Unfortunately, the young woman won't be charged, even though law enforcement admitted what she did was a crime. No explanation is provided, but isn't that a wonderful message to be sending to other would-be false rape accusers? Rape is treated as the second most serious of all criminal offenses, but abusing the power to cry "rape" is not punished. This is fair, how?
Here is the story in today's Toronto Sun:
Teen's false rape claim upsets neighbours
OTTAWA - Residents in a west-end neighbourhood are seething after learning a rape claim by a local teen turned out to be bogus.
Police announced Monday they have closed the books on the sexual assault investigation, saying rape claims made by the girl are "unsubstantiated" and "unfounded."
The 16-year-old won't face charges after she told police she was abducted at gunpoint and sexually assaulted in broad daylight on the morning of Jan. 18.
The two-week investigation had police canvassing the quiet neighbourhood and scouring footage from a Park and Ride lot where the teen claimed she was dumped after the assault.
"It's our belief the incident did not happen," said Sgt. Jeff Webster, who declined to comment on the investigation, saying it remains a "private" matter.
The girl provided police with a detailed description of her attacker and of the getaway vehicle in a case that sent shockwaves through a community still reeling from the 2005 murder of local teenager Jennifer Teague.
"That was the first thing I thought of when I first heard," said Tom Stone, 55, outside the Mac's convenience store on the corner where Teague was last seen alive.
"We believe we live in a quiet neighbourhood and all of a sudden, holy smokes, what's happening here? And in the middle of the day," said Stone, who has two young daughters and a teenaged son.
James Gilliland, president of the West Barrhaven Community Association, said residents are expressing both relief and frustration.
"On one hand, I'm relieved that it is a hoax and that means we don't have a predator trolling around our streets. On the other hand, it's frustrating that police resources were wasted on a hoax," said Gilliland, who said there was a heightened sense of concern in the community since the allegations first made headlines.
"With what happened to Jennifer Teague, it certainly had everyone on edge. I had some people calling for self-defence seminars, and I know parents were making sure their teenagers were keeping their cellphones on them at all times. We were concerned even with (a teenaged family friend) taking the bus here ... It certainly serves as a reminder that bad things can happen in good communities."
Galliland is among the many residents calling on the girl to issue an apology for duping police and the community.
"There should be some repercussions," he said.
Police said they considered charging the girl with public mischief, but declined to pursue criminal charges after consulting with the Crown Attorney's office.
"It is a crime to make a false police report, and in this case we've looked at that and, given all the circumstances, we're not going to lay a charge," Webster said.
Link: http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/01/17121921.html
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Every Community Burned By a False Rape Scare Looks at Rape Claims With a Jaundiced Eye
A story in the news today underscores the following: If the sexual grievance industry is so terribly concerned that false rape claims garner too much publicity, they need to tell police to stop panicking communities every time a troubled young woman wanders in the police station looking for her 15 minutes of fame with a cockamamie rape tale.
Police: Woman made up sexual assault story
HENDERSONVILLE, Tenn. – Police in Hendersonville arrested a local woman after she admitted she filed a false police report claiming a man tried to sexually assault her.
Police told Nashville's News 2 that Michaelretshera Coe filed a report in December claiming that a male subject had attempted to sexually assault her in a parking lot on West Main Street.
Coe admitted to police on Thursday that she had made up the incident.
During the arrest, authorities found cocaine and drug paraphernalia and Coe will also face drug-related charges.
Police said she is scheduled to appear in court next month.
Link: http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=13841569
Police told Nashville's News 2 that Michaelretshera Coe filed a report in December claiming that a male subject had attempted to sexually assault her in a parking lot on West Main Street.
Coe admitted to police on Thursday that she had made up the incident.
During the arrest, authorities found cocaine and drug paraphernalia and Coe will also face drug-related charges.
Police said she is scheduled to appear in court next month.
Link: http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=13841569
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Redefining rape . . . much ado about probably nothing
(Thanks to our friend Jay for bringing this to our attention.)
Some House Republicans are seeking to enact the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act." One portion of the proposed act, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith, deals with the rape exception to Federal funding. It reads: "The [abortion funding] limitations . . . shall not apply to an abortion -- (1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest . . .." http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3/text
For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. The pro-abortion forces are having a conniption because the Smith bill would, supposedly, narrow existing law, which does not require a rape to be "forcible" in order for Federal funding to be allowed. They claim it is "redefining rape." The Smith bill "is scary," declares MoveOn.Org. "This bill takes us back to a time when just saying 'no' wasn't enough to qualify as rape," says Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior adviser to the National Women's Law Center. http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Sigh. Here we go. They act as if the GOP wants to roll back the clock to a time before the wave of feminist rape reforms that made it much easier to charge and convict men and boys of rape -- reforms enacted, in large part, because rape reformers fraudulently convinced everyone that only two percent of rape claims are false.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Smith bill would not alter the crime of rape. Nor would it impose the criminal "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard onto the requirement that a "forcible rape" be proven in order to obtain Federal abortion funding.
At issue here is this question: to what extent should Americans be forced to pay for a procedure that a sizable number of them find morally repugnant?
But perhaps we need not even grapple with that question -- as you'll see below, I predict that the vagueness of this proposed act will be clarified in a manner that appeases the pro-abortion forces as this bill works its way through the House and Senate. Let's briefly examine the issues.
FORCIBLE: This bill would prohibit the use of Federal dollars to fund abortions if the rape wasn't "forcible." What does "forcible" mean here? It's anybody's guess. In the "rape" milieu, "forcible" generally refers to rapes that aren't statutory rape or the product of incest.
My guess is that this term will be clearly defined as the bill moves through the House to placate the pro-abortion forces, most likely in the manner the Clery Act defines it. I will be shocked if the GOP defines "forcible" to require, for example, that the female must resist.
COERCION: Likewise, I expect the word "coercion" to be defined as the bill moves through the House. Perhaps the GOP will allow funding for abortions where the pregnancy was the result of "physical coercion" (e.g., a rapist has a knife to a woman's throat), but not psychological coercion.
STATUTORY RAPE: The pro-abortion forces are having a conniption because, they claim, the bill "would rule out federal assistance for abortions sought following statutory rape. For example: if a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion." http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Well, here's where it gets interesting. There is a tradition in this country for insisting that statutory rape isn't "rape-rape" -- that it's not the moral equivalent of common law or forcible rape, isn't there?
Let me put it this way: if the pro-abortion forces are so incensed about this aspect of the proposed bill, why aren't they also incensed about the following?
If your son is statutorily raped by a woman, he will be liable for child support if the statutory rapist decides to have the baby (which means, you will have to pay for your son's child). In the case of County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843 (Ct. App. 1996), a thirty-four-year-old woman had sex with a fifteen-year-old boy and became pregnant. The woman was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor -- commonly called statutory rape. She decided to have the child, and after she gave birth to her daughter, she received Aid for Families with Dependent Children, and the county sought reimbursement for the AFDC payments from the father, the 15-year-old boy. The court held that the boy, a statutory rape victim, was financially liable for the child that resulted from his victimization.
This case is not alone: "Two state supreme courts and several state appellate courts have ruled that male statutory rape victims can be financially liable for supporting a child resulting from their criminal victimization." R. Jones, ARTICLE: INEQUALITY FROM GENDER-NEUTRAL LAWS: WHY MUST MALE VICTIMS OF STATUTORY RAPE PAY CHILD SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN RESULTING FROM THEIR VICTIMIZATION? 36 Ga. L. Rev. 411 (2002). There are no reported cases where female victims of statutory rape have been held to a similar support obligation.
I've never heard a feminist complain about that one, have you?
INCEST: The pro-abortion forces are also screaming because the incest exception would only allow federally funded abortions if the woman is under 18. http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion. Hmm. This means that if the incest victim is over 18, and presumably a participant to consensual sex, funding is not available to her. I don't see this one changing, at least in the House's version of the bill.
BOTTOM LINE: The GOP representatives are making a very mild statement on behalf of their constituents: they don't want to pay for elective abortions. Undefined terms will be defined, I predict, and the usual compromises with the Devil will be made. In the end, things will be pretty much the way they are now.
Some House Republicans are seeking to enact the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act." One portion of the proposed act, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith, deals with the rape exception to Federal funding. It reads: "The [abortion funding] limitations . . . shall not apply to an abortion -- (1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest . . .." http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3/text
For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. The pro-abortion forces are having a conniption because the Smith bill would, supposedly, narrow existing law, which does not require a rape to be "forcible" in order for Federal funding to be allowed. They claim it is "redefining rape." The Smith bill "is scary," declares MoveOn.Org. "This bill takes us back to a time when just saying 'no' wasn't enough to qualify as rape," says Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior adviser to the National Women's Law Center. http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Sigh. Here we go. They act as if the GOP wants to roll back the clock to a time before the wave of feminist rape reforms that made it much easier to charge and convict men and boys of rape -- reforms enacted, in large part, because rape reformers fraudulently convinced everyone that only two percent of rape claims are false.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Smith bill would not alter the crime of rape. Nor would it impose the criminal "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard onto the requirement that a "forcible rape" be proven in order to obtain Federal abortion funding.
At issue here is this question: to what extent should Americans be forced to pay for a procedure that a sizable number of them find morally repugnant?
But perhaps we need not even grapple with that question -- as you'll see below, I predict that the vagueness of this proposed act will be clarified in a manner that appeases the pro-abortion forces as this bill works its way through the House and Senate. Let's briefly examine the issues.
FORCIBLE: This bill would prohibit the use of Federal dollars to fund abortions if the rape wasn't "forcible." What does "forcible" mean here? It's anybody's guess. In the "rape" milieu, "forcible" generally refers to rapes that aren't statutory rape or the product of incest.
My guess is that this term will be clearly defined as the bill moves through the House to placate the pro-abortion forces, most likely in the manner the Clery Act defines it. I will be shocked if the GOP defines "forcible" to require, for example, that the female must resist.
COERCION: Likewise, I expect the word "coercion" to be defined as the bill moves through the House. Perhaps the GOP will allow funding for abortions where the pregnancy was the result of "physical coercion" (e.g., a rapist has a knife to a woman's throat), but not psychological coercion.
STATUTORY RAPE: The pro-abortion forces are having a conniption because, they claim, the bill "would rule out federal assistance for abortions sought following statutory rape. For example: if a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion." http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Well, here's where it gets interesting. There is a tradition in this country for insisting that statutory rape isn't "rape-rape" -- that it's not the moral equivalent of common law or forcible rape, isn't there?
Let me put it this way: if the pro-abortion forces are so incensed about this aspect of the proposed bill, why aren't they also incensed about the following?
If your son is statutorily raped by a woman, he will be liable for child support if the statutory rapist decides to have the baby (which means, you will have to pay for your son's child). In the case of County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843 (Ct. App. 1996), a thirty-four-year-old woman had sex with a fifteen-year-old boy and became pregnant. The woman was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor -- commonly called statutory rape. She decided to have the child, and after she gave birth to her daughter, she received Aid for Families with Dependent Children, and the county sought reimbursement for the AFDC payments from the father, the 15-year-old boy. The court held that the boy, a statutory rape victim, was financially liable for the child that resulted from his victimization.
This case is not alone: "Two state supreme courts and several state appellate courts have ruled that male statutory rape victims can be financially liable for supporting a child resulting from their criminal victimization." R. Jones, ARTICLE: INEQUALITY FROM GENDER-NEUTRAL LAWS: WHY MUST MALE VICTIMS OF STATUTORY RAPE PAY CHILD SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN RESULTING FROM THEIR VICTIMIZATION? 36 Ga. L. Rev. 411 (2002). There are no reported cases where female victims of statutory rape have been held to a similar support obligation.
I've never heard a feminist complain about that one, have you?
INCEST: The pro-abortion forces are also screaming because the incest exception would only allow federally funded abortions if the woman is under 18. http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion. Hmm. This means that if the incest victim is over 18, and presumably a participant to consensual sex, funding is not available to her. I don't see this one changing, at least in the House's version of the bill.
BOTTOM LINE: The GOP representatives are making a very mild statement on behalf of their constituents: they don't want to pay for elective abortions. Undefined terms will be defined, I predict, and the usual compromises with the Devil will be made. In the end, things will be pretty much the way they are now.
Nun From Fringe Christian Sect Lies About Rape
It turns out that police were skeptical of the accuser's story even when that story ran. That didn't stop police from using the news media to help them crack the case by acting as though a rape had occurred. (The public generally doesn't realize that when a news report tells about a scary rape that "police say" occurred, police do not share with the news media the holes in the accuser's story. And the news media doesn't bother doing its own investigation -- because, after all, why would "journalists" do their own investigation? -- they merely parrot what a police representative tells them. If you want to see this phenomenon play out in dreadful, dramatic fashion, study the Hofstra false rape case.)
In fact, the "sexual assault" was all made up. A New York Daily News headline says this: "Nun Mary Turcotte recants accusation of rape after police release sketch of made-up suspect." The Daily News story begins as follows: "A Brooklyn nun from a fringe Christian sect has confessed to an unholy lie: telling cops she was sexually attacked and left unconscious in a snowbank, sources said Monday." (The church at issue is apparently a split-off from the Catholic Church, founded by a defrocked priest who ordained himself Pope.)
Turcotte is a 26-year-old white woman. She claimed a hulking black man was the culprit of her imaginary rape. That's common in stories of this nature -- young white women often claim that a minority man, typically black or Hispanic, raped them. Such a lie is generally intended to jack up the scariness and plausibility factors. Racially motivated rape lies have been going on in this country since long before the Civil War.
Turcotte claimed that sometime during the night of January 22, according to the Daily News, "a thug ambushed her, choked her until she passed out and dragged her - in her habit - eight blocks. She said she awoke in the snow with her underwear down and her breasts exposed."
Even when police put out the alert, according to the Daily News, they were "skeptical someone could have dragged or carried a woman in nun's gear through the streets without drawing notice."
So let's rewrite the news story reported above to make it accurate: "Police are asking for the public's help in finding a man they say a woman claims sexually assaulted her in Brooklyn. Police don't buy her story so this might all be made up."
Would a self-respecting news outlet have reported that story? If the police had admitted its skepticism, this story might not have been reported -- and that would have been for the best. It would have spared every black male who fit that description from being viewed with suspicion.
It was all a lie. According to the Daily News: "She told cops she made up the story in an attempt to cover up a consensual sex romp with a bodega worker inside the Glenwood Ave. residence."
But here's the amazing part of the story: according to an unnamed "woman in religious garb" at the convent, not only did Turcotte make up the rape lie, she made up the excuse for it. Thus, this does not appear to be a rape lie motivated to cover up an illicit sexual encounter, as is very common, but a rape lie motivated by a cry for attention, which is also very common.
The unnamed source said Turcotte had an "emotional break" and "it wasn't her fault."
Stop there. Have you ever read those words in a story about a rapist? "He had an emotional break and it wasn't his fault." Even if the rapist did have an emotional break, no one would bother writing it.
Link: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/02/01/2011-02-01_nun_rape_tale_was_bed_of_lies.html
Family to get $1.8 million in dad's jailing, teen's false sex-assault interrogation
A West Bloomfield Township family will get $1.8 million to settle a lawsuit against the police department, after the father was prosecuted and jailed after being accused of sexually assaulting his severely autistic daughter — a prosecution that eventually imploded.
The charges against Julian Wendrow were dropped for lack of evidence in March 2008, after he had spent 80 days in the Oakland County jail. His wife, Thal Wendrow, was also jailed, and the girl, 14, and her brother, 13, were placed in foster care for months.
The settlement was made public in district court filings today.
The Oakland County prosecutor’s case was based almost solely on statements the daughter reportedly made using facilitated communication, a widely discredited method in which the child typed on a keyboard with the assistance of a school aid. The girl, who does not speak and functions on the level of a two-year-old, reportedly typed that her father had been raping her since age seven. Prosecutors pursued the case, even though a physical exam showed no sign of assault.
The family sued in federal court in 2008, alleging 38 counts of false imprisonment, wrongful prosecution and other misdeeds.
The Wendrows named the police department as a defendant in part because of a two-hour interrogation a detective conducted with the 13-year-old boy, shortly after his parents arrests, wrongly telling him they had videotapes of both the boy and his father sexually assaulting the girl. The boy had no adult representative present for the interview.
Joseph Brusseau, the detective who remains on the police force, later admitted in depositions that was untrue. The boy, who suffers from Asperger's, a milder form of autism, can be seen in a video rocking and crying during the interview and insisting that neither he or his father had assaulted anyone.
The Free Press obtained a copy of the video of the interview and the parents said they had no objections to putting it on Freep.com.
“They pushed this thing in spite of literally having no evidence of any kind of abuse, other than this Faciliated Communication nonsense, which is in effect a Ouija board,” said Bloomfield Hills attorney Deborah Gordon, who represents the Wendrows. “What the police department did was unbelievably horrific.”
William Hampton, the attorney representing the police department, said the settlement was “nothing more than a business decision by the insurance company, with no admission of wrongdoing or of any liability.”
And he said the department would investigate the case the same way again, including the interrogation of the boy and the jailing of the father.
“We’ll assess everything, but really, right off hand, I can’t think of anything they would do differently because we really don’t think they did anything wrong.”
Facilitated communication has been widely dismissed by experts worldwide because studies show it is the aide who is actually doing the typing. Nevertheless, the Wendrows had pushed the school district to use it, hoping their daughter might be able to succeed in school work.
Oakland County prosecutors, who are also named in the suit, admit in depositions that they did not investigate the method prior to charging the Wendrows, and could not find anyone to support the method as reliable, despite calls nationwide after their arrests. They pursued the prosecution nevertheless. The charges were dropped in March when the girl was unable to type a single answer to questions posed to her in district court.
The Wendrows will be in federal court Thursday, where the prosecutors, and two other defendants, Walled Lake Consolidated School District and the Michigan Department of Human Services will argue to have the case dismissed because of governmental immunity.
Link: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110111/NEWS03/110111069/1005/Family-to-get-1.8-million-in-dads-jailing-teens-false-sex-assault-interrogation&template=fullarticle
The charges against Julian Wendrow were dropped for lack of evidence in March 2008, after he had spent 80 days in the Oakland County jail. His wife, Thal Wendrow, was also jailed, and the girl, 14, and her brother, 13, were placed in foster care for months.
The settlement was made public in district court filings today.
The Oakland County prosecutor’s case was based almost solely on statements the daughter reportedly made using facilitated communication, a widely discredited method in which the child typed on a keyboard with the assistance of a school aid. The girl, who does not speak and functions on the level of a two-year-old, reportedly typed that her father had been raping her since age seven. Prosecutors pursued the case, even though a physical exam showed no sign of assault.
The family sued in federal court in 2008, alleging 38 counts of false imprisonment, wrongful prosecution and other misdeeds.
The Wendrows named the police department as a defendant in part because of a two-hour interrogation a detective conducted with the 13-year-old boy, shortly after his parents arrests, wrongly telling him they had videotapes of both the boy and his father sexually assaulting the girl. The boy had no adult representative present for the interview.
Joseph Brusseau, the detective who remains on the police force, later admitted in depositions that was untrue. The boy, who suffers from Asperger's, a milder form of autism, can be seen in a video rocking and crying during the interview and insisting that neither he or his father had assaulted anyone.
The Free Press obtained a copy of the video of the interview and the parents said they had no objections to putting it on Freep.com.
“They pushed this thing in spite of literally having no evidence of any kind of abuse, other than this Faciliated Communication nonsense, which is in effect a Ouija board,” said Bloomfield Hills attorney Deborah Gordon, who represents the Wendrows. “What the police department did was unbelievably horrific.”
William Hampton, the attorney representing the police department, said the settlement was “nothing more than a business decision by the insurance company, with no admission of wrongdoing or of any liability.”
And he said the department would investigate the case the same way again, including the interrogation of the boy and the jailing of the father.
“We’ll assess everything, but really, right off hand, I can’t think of anything they would do differently because we really don’t think they did anything wrong.”
Facilitated communication has been widely dismissed by experts worldwide because studies show it is the aide who is actually doing the typing. Nevertheless, the Wendrows had pushed the school district to use it, hoping their daughter might be able to succeed in school work.
Oakland County prosecutors, who are also named in the suit, admit in depositions that they did not investigate the method prior to charging the Wendrows, and could not find anyone to support the method as reliable, despite calls nationwide after their arrests. They pursued the prosecution nevertheless. The charges were dropped in March when the girl was unable to type a single answer to questions posed to her in district court.
The Wendrows will be in federal court Thursday, where the prosecutors, and two other defendants, Walled Lake Consolidated School District and the Michigan Department of Human Services will argue to have the case dismissed because of governmental immunity.
Link: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110111/NEWS03/110111069/1005/Family-to-get-1.8-million-in-dads-jailing-teens-false-sex-assault-interrogation&template=fullarticle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
