to think 2 years isnt long enough?(35 Posts)
I was reading about a woman who cried rape about an innocent man she had consensual sex with and she was sentenced to 2 ywars in prison.
aibu to say this wasnt long enough. She could of potentially ruined an innocent persons life and cases like this make it harder to prove real incidents of rape.
This isnt the person you know though. She admitted to lying when the police went back to see her 10 years later after the original report
The person I was at court with would have admitted to being pope john paul the 2nd if it would have made it all go away.
It wouldn't be the first time in history that a woman "admitted" something didn't happen thinking that would stop the hurt and trauma only to find themselves in a worse situation.
Mosman she admmitted she lie. She wasnt cross examined or forced into anything. She tried to destroy a mans life because she cheated on her husband
I know of a sexual abuse victim who was told at court it wasn't too late for her to drop all this nonsense. You have to wonder if justice has been done at all here or if this woman has had insult added to injury.
I know a guy who was accused of a sexual assault. Was later proved beyond any doubt to have been totally innocent. Unfortunately it was too late. His name had been dragged through the mud in the papers, he'd lost his job, half his family turned on him, he wasn't allowed to see his two youngish kids (divorced). He lost a huge amount of weight and really quickly. He became very seriously depressed and committed suicide.
The woman who falsely accused him got six months.
No sympathy or respect for any woman that cries rape. It's vile.
She's only giving women a bad name to those looking for a bad name to give to women.
If that makes sense?
There are some interesting stats in here but the point still remains that what she did was a horrible crime and she deserved longer. She will probably only serve half that sentence. She is giving women a bad name.
I think it's always dangerous to try to form an opinion about the appropriateness or otherwise of a sentence on the basis of a newspaper report, particularly a Daily Mail report. The judge has had the benefit of seeing all the paperwork, hearing the witnesses, and listening to detailed submissions on both sides, plus sentencing guidelines arrived at over years of experience. What you get from a newspaper report is a tiny fraction of the facts, usually carefully selected to get the reaction that the paper wants. And yes, in the case of the Mail, what it wants is a misogynist reaction.
The 'attrition' rate for rape in the UK is 12%. This means only 12% of the reported cases result in conviction. About 25% get to court. The other 75% don't, because the CPS decides there's not enough evidence, or the woman decides she's too scared to testify...
Against that, 1 or 2 two women out of 80,000 reporting rape seem to lie about it...
So, if every rape was reported, there would be 200+ stories in every newspaper, every day about them. Well done the Daily Mail for finding space for this story between the horrifying stories of real rapes.
I would also love to know how many of the 'false accusations' are actually real rapes where the woman recants because of all of the pressures on her. In my experience, I know several rape and child abuse victims, I have been sexually assaulted myself and know of no one who has been accused of rape or accused someone falsely. In the case of the child abuse and rape victims I know... no convictions. One was investigated but the
child rapist accused died.
Around 400,000 women are sexually assaulted and 80,000 women are raped each year (British Crime Survey). The majority of rapes are never reported.
From a Guardian article a year ago:
London's top prosecutor, Alison Saunders, gave a chilling warning that the 'almost demonisation' of women by the media was having a negative impact on the British justice system and leading to acquittals in rape cases. This echoed evidence given by End Violence Against Women to the Leveson inquiry that prejudicial and inaccurate media reporting of rape sends a strong and consistent message to the justice system and the public more broadly that women routinely "cry rape"; to rape survivors that they will not be believed; and to potential perpetrators that they will get away with it.
This is the evidence they submitted.
Yes, let's have one story in the papers every time there is a false accusation and one every time there is a rape. The papers would be like books there would be so many rape stories pages and there would be nothing else in them.
I do hate people who accuse men of rape falsely. It does make it harder for real victims. What makes it much harder for real victims though are; victim blaming; Police indifference; public misunderstanding; misogyny; fear; mob mentality; celebrity meaning you can do what you like; lack of funding; lack of services; single parent blaming (so people raped by their husband can't leave); misunderstanding of 'violence' and how that includes silent rape; everything else...
'So 4 pages against 38 pages would suggest to me that rape convictions get 10 times more coverage than false accusation.'
To most people it might suggest that there are far fewer false accusations than there are rapes ...
Do you know how many women are raped every year in the UK? How few of those rapes are reported? How many of those reports lead to the CPS taking the decision to prosecute - not due to any doubts over the veracity of the complaint but due to whether there's a reasonable chance of getting a conviction? And many are dropped down to lesser charges, again based on the chances of conviction.
The rape convictions the media chooses to report on are a tiny fraction. But papers like the Mail always put false accusation cases front and centre.
O/T - just as well we arent in the USA - this man got 18.5 million compo after being locked up for 20 years on a false rape accusation
Sadly no mention of action taken against his accuser.
And there only appear to be 4 pages under swearch with the terms 'false rape accusation'
So 4 pages against 38 pages would suggest to me that rape convictions get 10 times more coverage than false accusation.
Search within the DM own site and I found hundreds of stories with the search terms 'rape conviction' - 38 pages of them - all of which have been published at any given time.
'irrelevent regarding the injust regarding that man and that womans lies.'
Very relevant when a newspaper chooses to publicise this case and ignore thousands of others. Very relevant because it leads to threads like this where people talk about women 'crying rape' and 'mens ... lives ruined.'
She did a terrible thing. She was convicted. She was given 2 years.
Where are the reports of all the rape convictions? Where is the context that shows that this, whilst terrible, is a crime that is exceptionally rare and has been punished?
Rape is basically legal in this country. I think it would be better to just make it literally legal. That way I'd never have to read another bullshit thread about women "crying rape" and how atrocious it is and how unfair on all the pool ole men and how awful and how they should be locked up for 50 years etc etc ad motherfucking NAUSEUM.
narked irrelevent regarding the injust regarding that man and that womans lies.
But it does again bring to light the whole debate surrounding the victim having her name kept private and the accused having his published. Many mens lives have been ruined - mud sticks - by spurious allegations.
Disgraceful doesn't even begin to cover it.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.