British teachers union aggressively protects the wrongly accused

The British teachers union, NASUWT, said schoolchildren who falsely accuse teachers of crimes “must understand there is a consequence” to making allegations that are “unjust and malicious."

The vast majority of claims made against teachers are unsubstantiated. NASUWT data shows that fewer than one-in-20 allegations of claims against teachers last year – including assault, sexual abuse and serious threats – resulted in court action.

A new law gives teachers the legal right to anonymity until they are charged with a criminal offense. But even that's not enough for the union. The union passed a motion claiming that “the most effective way to protect teachers from malicious allegations is to make such an allegation a criminal offence.”

Chris Keates, NASUWT general secretary, said: “The issue of false, malicious and unsubstantiated allegations against teachers continues to be an enduring problem. Teachers’ fear of having allegations made against them is very real, yet four out of five did not feel that current protections for teachers are adequate. The fear of having an allegation made against them is compounded by the fact that even if they are exonerated, their career will be permanently blighted by the fact that the allegation will remain on record.”

http://www.businessinsider.com/british-teachers-want-to-punish-kids-who-make-false-abuse-claims-2012-4

COTWA reprints letter from Daily Tar Heel (UNC student newspaper)

UNC sexual assault policy threatens falsely accused

By Letter to the Editor | Letters

Updated: 04/04/12 11:50pm

 

TO THE EDITOR:
I was glad to see, in Tuesday’s article “Sexual assault rules in limbo,” that the remarkable overhaul of the justice process for sexual assaults is not going unnoticed.

However, the new standard of evidence to be used in sexual assault cases is disturbing. For criminal trials serious and trivial, we are afforded a hearing “beyond a reasonable doubt”.

Yet on this campus, any person suspected of committing sexual assault is stripped of his or her rights and brought before a panel which will consider “a preponderance of evidence”.

This, as Dean Sauls said, is “more than just writing a policy,” and it certainly ought not to be passed off as “aspirational,” for there are real, potentially disastrous consequences to be considered.

We must look no further than the case of Caleb Warner at the University of North Dakota to see the problems associated with this policy.

According to reports, Warner was accused of sexual assault, but his accuser was later suspected of lying by the police. However, despite the questions surrounding the claims, Warner was found guilty under this “preponderance of evidence” standard. After more than a year, UND finally admitted its mistake and reversed the ruling.

The “Dear Colleague” letter is not binding policy. Let UNC be progressive in upholding the rights of all students, not just victims of sexual assault.

We should never have to see a case like Caleb Warner’s here in North Carolina: the rights of sexual assault survivors can be protected without risking the same mistakes that ruin the lives of the falsely accused.

David Adler ’15
Computer science

Two men in clear after false Christchurch Park rape claim

Two men, aged 18 and 21, were arrested as part of an inquiry in an alleged rape in the Christchurch Park arboretum. At this point, no further action will be taken, as is has been determined that the allegation was false.

The alleged incident supposedly happened sometime between 2:30 and 5 a.m. on February 18th. Police got the report at 6:45 of two men attacking a female. Police cordoned off a portion of the park while crime staff started the investigation.

The woman, believed to be 18, was taken to a sexual assault center in Ipswich. Further inquiries by detectives showed no evidence of rape.

No action will be taken against the women, and officers have stressed that anyone who reports being raped will be taken seriously, and supported in whatever way possible.

Detective Sergeant Andrew Smethurst said:

This report concerned a lot of people in the local community and as such it was thoroughly investigated. Following the investigation it was established that the incident was not as originally reported and having spoken again to the complainant we are satisfied that no such crime has been committed. While this particular incident has turned out to be a false claim we want to reassure members of the public that anyone reporting a rape or sexual assault in Suffolk will receive a full level of support from specially trained officers.

It would be a wonderful thing if the "full level of support" were offered to the wrongly accused.

Link: http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/ipswich_two_men_in_clear_after_false_christchurch_park_rape_claim_1_1341017

COTWA got it wrong: prosecutor Sue Baur was right not to prosecute rape accuser who recanted

COTWA has obtained information from Cowlitz County, Washington prosecutor Sue Baur regarding this post, where we stated that Ms. Baur had decided not to prosecute a woman who admitted that she lied about her father raping her when she was 11-years-old. The woman's accusation put her father behind bars for nine years.

The news reports distorted what happened, and COTWA repeated the distortion. Ms. Baur not only acted properly, her conduct was exemplary. 

The reporting of this case purposefully gave the impression that there had been a determination that the 2001 allegations were false.  In fact, there has been no adjudication that the girl lied at the original trial, or that her recantation was more reliable than her original testimony.  A judge simply ordered that, in light of the recantation, the father was deserving of a new trial.  

Ms. Baur, to her credit, decided that she would not retry the father because she felt that a jury would not be able to figure out what happened, much less find him guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. She properly dismissed the case and released the father.  The father has not been found "innocent" by a court, and we may never know the truth about what happened.

Ms. Baur believes that no one should ever, ever go to prison for something he or she did not do, and that "we should always err, if at all on the side of the defendant’s freedom." 

COTWA relies on mainstream news media reports, and in this instance -- as happens all too often -- the reporting left much to be desired. Susan Baur has been unfairly maligned; in fact, she deserves to be applauded.  For what? For doing what too many prosecutors don't do -- her job, fairly, and with justice.

COTWA believes it is important to prosecute persons who make false claims, but no such prosecution should be brought unless the prosecutor is confident, to a moral certainty, of the false accuser's guilt.  Where it is clear that someone lies about rape, to refuse to prosecute undermines public confidence about the way rape claims are handled.  Juries want to punish rapists but are loathe to risk punishing the innocent. Juries will be all the more wary of convicting men of rape, even those who deserve to be convicted, if they believe that prosecutors cavalierly allow accusers to tell rape lies with impunity.

In this instance, Ms. Baur did not undermine public confidence about the way rape claims, or false rape claims, are handled. The news media did.  We were unwitting accomplices in that undermining, and for that we apologize to Ms. Baur.

Good Friday, 2012-style

This piece is well timed to coincide with Archivist's earlier piece. It appears that Ireland's national broadcaster, RTÉ, likely will face charges of bias after a soon to be published report as to why it falsely accused Father Kevin Reynolds of raping a minor and fathering a child when he was doing missionary work in Kenya 30 years ago.

After RTÉ’s program "Prime Time" ran the piece "Mission to Prey" ran in May of 2011, an independent investigation was launched as to why the Father was so badly libeled and who made the decision.

It is alleged that the program falsely accused the priest of the rape and impregnation, and of providing financial support for the child over many years as well.

Before the show was broadcast, Father Reynolds volunteered to take a DNA test to prove he wasn't the father of the child, but RTÉ declined. Unfortunately, he was removed from his home and his parish ministry. He was later proven innocent after two independent DNA tests.

Ireland's broadcasting watchdog, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, submitted a copy of their investigation to the RTÉ with notification of the sanctions it intends to impose (up to 250,000 euros, or $320,000). RTÉ will have 2 weeks (14 days) to respond. At that time, the authority will publish the report with any penalties that will be imposed.

Link: http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=30843

When God allowed his son to experience the greatest injustice possible: a wrongful conviction

Today is Good Friday, the day Christians around the world celebrate what they believe to be the central fact of history: that God sent his only son to live as a human in order that he might willingly offer himself as a sacrifice for the transgressions of all of mankind.

In order to vicariously atone for mankind's sins, Christ was subjected to trumped-up charges by the leadership of his faith and brought before the Roman Prefect, Pontius Pilate, who promptly declared him innocent.  Nevertheless, to appease the angry mob that didn't think enough was being done to punish a perceived wrongdoer, Pilate ordered Christ to be flogged.  When that wasn't enough for the crowd, Pilate ordered Christ to be subjected to the death penalty.

Jesus is the most famous wrongly convicted person of all time. The state bowed to the pressure of a committed interest group by sacrificing a wrongly accused man. Jesus was unfortunate, but necessary, collateral damage in the state's more important, politicized interest of appeasing an angry group of activists.

It is well to remember that God allowed his son to be executed by the state, not by a criminal acting on his own, in order to make a crucial point. Being killed by a criminal would not have manifested the community's rejection of the Messiah. The Divine Plan implicitly recognized that, all other things being equal, misconduct by the state in punishing an innocent person is qualitatively different and more significant than misconduct by a criminal acting on his own.

Just as Christians believe that all of us are ultimately responsible for Christ's death, so, too, all of us have blood on our hands for the treatment of the modern day wrongly accused.

Investigation shows woman falsely accuses two police officers of sexual assault

Carolyn Jensen was arrested for drunken and disorderly behavior and was taken to police headquarters for processing. She called her boyfriend to come get her, and claimed that the two transporting officers had sexually assaulted her. A lengthy investigation found no evidence to support the allegation.

Jensen has been admitted to a so-called "Pre-Trial Intervention" program, and if she successfully completes it, she'll be free, with no criminal charges on her record. She was accepted to this program by Superior Court Judge Thomas Manahan, with no admission of wrongdoing. The program calls for supervised probation and 50 hours of community service.  Robert Weber, Morris County Assistant Prosecutor, that that PTI was appropriate, after a psychological report noted that Jensen has a history of alcohol abuse.

Link:  http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20120403/NJNEWS/304030012/Woman-who-made-false-claims-of-sexual-assault-admitted-to-PTI

Warrant issued for woman accused of falsifying rape report

Katheryn Marie Louise Clark now has a warrant out for her arrest because she failed to appear in court for falsifying a rape report in December.

Clark missed her Tuesday appearance in Pittsburg County District Court, where she was charged with false reporting of a crime after she allegedly told authorities that she had been raped.

Deputy Jack Suter was sent to Longtown on December 16th and took Clark's report that she had been raped, according to the police affidavit. She stated that she had been dragged by the hair and forced to have sex, while she was biting him and screaming.

A rape kit was performed, and the nurse that performed the kit told authorities that "there was not any evidence of sexual assault," according to the affidavit.

A possible witness, and the person Clark identified in her statement to police, weres interviewed. It was determined that there was no evidence to support the rape claim, and that she had lied about the rape.

Link: http://mcalesternews.com/policecourts/x1560871440/Warrant-issued-for-woman-accused-of-falsifying-rape-report

Does refusing to charge for rape lie that put innocent man away for nine years undermine public confidence in the way rape claims are handled?

Cassandra Kennedy, 23, admitted that she lied about her father raping her when she was 11. Her accusation put her father behind bars for nine years.

Ms. Kennedy will not be charged with a crime because prosecutors fear it could stop others from reporting sexual assaults.  Prosecutor Sue Baur said: "This is the kind of thing that shouldn't happen."  But she said that charging Kennedy might discourage victims from coming forward.

Kennedy admitted her lie because of a guilty conscience. "I did a horrible thing," she told detectives last January.  She was allegedly bitter following her parents' divorce ten years earlier. "I wanted him to love me," Kennedy said, "and I didn't think he did at that time.  I took my own vengeance."

Kennedy told police she got the idea of setting up her father from a friend whose stepfather had been sent to prison for a child sex crime.  "I thought that is what I would do to make my dad go away." She told a teacher about the alleged abuse, and repeated the stories with consistency. The details seemed beyond the sexual knowledge of an 11-year-old.

Her father denied the allegation but a jury convicted him of three counts of rape of a child and he was sentenced to more than 15 years in jail.

The father was released last week and the charges against him were dismissed. He told a reporter that he did not want to comment but is simply trying to get on with his life.

The decision not to prosecute this apparent crime is troubling.

First, the prosecutor's concern that charging Ms. Kennedy might deter others from reporting their sexual assaults is speculative and unsupported by any evidence of which we are aware.  Charging Ms. Kennedy would not send a signal that the prosecutor intends to charge any woman who makes a disputed rape claim that the police don't believe. The instant case caused grievous harm and is extreme. It involves an admitted rape lie that had a catastrophic effect on another person's life. Charging the author of such a lie would not likely deter anyone from reporting her own sexual assault.

Second, Ms. Baur's rationale for not prosecuting Ms. Kennedy sends a message that can only hurt the wrongly accused. The absence of any punishment for an apparent crime that caused a man to forfeit his liberty for almost a decade can only encourage similarly motivated persons to make false accusations.  According to Dr. Valerie Wright, research analyst at The Sentencing Project: "People who perceive that sanctions are more certain tend to be less likely to engage in criminal activity."And: "Research to date generally indicates that increases in the certainty of punishment, as opposed to the severity of punishment, are more likely to produce deterrent benefits."  If crimes such as this one are not deterred, society invites more abuse of the criminal justice system at the expense of the innocent.

Third, Ms. Bauer's rationale for not prosecuting Ms. Kennedy undermines public confidence in the way rape claims are handled. The prosecutor should want the public to regard rape as a serious crime deserving of serious penalties. Indeed, juries want to punish rapists but are loathe to risk punishing the innocent. Juries will be all the more wary of convicting men of rape, even those who deserve to be convicted, if they believe that prosecutors cavalierly allow accusers to tell rape lies with impunity. 

Fourth, the victim should have a say in whether the false accuser is prosecuted. The victim in this case did not publicly express an opinion on the subject, and we are wondering if anyone bothered to ask him.

Sources:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2124170/Cassandra-Kennedy-Father-freed-decade-jail-daughter-admits-lied-raping-11.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

http://www.tbd.com/blogs/amanda-hess/2010/09/uninvestigated-rapes-live-blogging-senate-hearing-on-rape-in-the-u-s--1734.html

Does refusing to charge for rape lie that put innocent man away for nine years undermine public confidence in the way rape claims are handled?

http://www.cotwa.info/2012/04/girls-rape-lie-that-put-father-away-for.html