should young girls go to prison for "false rape claims"

Yes of course they should, and named and shamed.
There has been far to many of these false claims lately and it is ruining lives.

When it comes to prosecutions though, we only prosecute the most serious malicious false accusations.

It is wrong to tell lies.

Relevant research paper: repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol23/iss1/1/

Oooh lots of absolutely there!!

Absolutely kids

As i said earlier an absolutely without doubt false accusation should be prosecuted where appropriate...which would probably be most of the cases

Rufustheyawningreindeer perhase we should agree to disagree on that lol... When it comes to prosecutions though, we only prosecute the most serious malicious false accusations. So the most serious of that 3%... they can't prosecute the other false accusations within the 12% because there was no criminal Intent (called "mens rea") in those accusations.

You're right we can't and should not prosecute a women you retracts her accusation unless it can be proved she had criminal intent when she made it therefore putting her in the 3% bracket.

Please don't call young women "girls": until I read the article, I thought you were talking about children.

Sorry, my error. I've just done the arithmetic and she was 17 at the time. I saw her current age of 19 and didn't join the dots to the offence being two years old. That makes me all the more concerned that she have retracted under police pressure and then, when charged with lying, pled guilty as the path of least stress. Remember that the stress of a similar trial drove Eleanor de Freitas to suicide.

How is it "madness" (nice use of ableist language) to suggest that some allegedly false claims might actually not be false? There was a case where a multiple rapist was caught and there was forensic evidence proving he had raped a woman in another US state from the one in which he committed most of his crimes. And that woman had been convicted of wasting police time.

We have to be very very careful when prosecuting false rape accusation cases, because the alleged false accuser might be lying when they retract. The police are rather prone to pressuring rape victims, particularly young ones, into retracting allegations. These coerced retractions have sometimes then been used as "evidence" that the victim lied. It's wrong to expect anyone to flawlessly navigate such abuse of police power, and cases like this should only go to court if the prosecution service have made sure that the police didn't coerce the retraction.

There has also been at least one case where a school-aged girl falsely accused a teacher because she was being sexually-abused outside school and knew no other way to get help. Jon Brown of the NSPCC said "where a false accusation is made, it can often be a cry for help from a troubled young person who is in need of help but can't bring themselves to say what has actually happened or is still going on", indicating that cases like the one above, where the victim is truthful about being abused but has misidentified her attacker, are commonplace. Sexual abuse is a situation that no human should ever have to face and it is ridiculously unjust to expect a child or young person to flawlessly navigate sexual abuse and its consequences, including reporting.

I concur with a PP that we shouldn't jail people for non-violent crimes, unless they are repeat offenders or have committed a crime over a long period undetected (e.g. skimming a pension fund for years). Appropriate alternatives to a custodial sentence for a false accuser could include a written published retraction and apology, and monetary compensation to the victim. Garnish her wages if she can't pay the compensation upfront.

Please don't call young women "girls": until I read the article, I thought you were talking about children.

*meant

@Flyingpompom I many I was disgusted at the false accuser, apologies if it came across differently

Oh my god

Im reading a book, watching telly and attempting to mumsnet

And just look at the effect that has on my typing

Wouldnt disagree with that one either slarti

Prosecutors are not quite so eager to charge victims with false reports on the word of police officers who badger them into recanting the rape accusation. Too many were later found to be telling the truth.
Bad for the prosecutors career.
A lot of crimes could be solved if they processed the rape kits. But they don't.

Because a traumatised women delayed reporting or isnt injured

Or because all parties were ratarsed and it was not provable that the accuser didn't consent.

And its not all accusations which arent true

Its accusations which the police believe might not be true

Because a traumatised women delayed reporting or isnt injured

And they certainly are note provably untrue

kids

But the whole thread is about putting women in prison who make a false accusation of rape

If making a false accusation covers jailing a woman who retracts her accusation...well thats dreadful!

kids

I honestly think its saying the same thing

Section 4:11 just mentions a few cases

Some of which may be false so would fall under the 3%. There doesnt appear to be any further reference to 12% being false (malicious)

Just that the definition of 'false' used hy the police and CPS covers

Cases were there is no injury....doesnt mean the 'victim' is lying

Cases were the 'victim' so pissed she doesn't remember anything....doesnt mean the 'victim' is lying

Cases were The reporting was delayed....doesnt mean the 'victim' is lying

Cases were the 'victim' retracted her accusation...doesnt mean the 'victim' is lying

We are both posting in good faith ...but we disagree completely on the meaning of the 12%

So i think we will just have to agree to disagree

Im certainly not reading anymore of that sodding government paper

Ill have another look kids

A false accusation of rape is not just those which are provable to be malicious... it's all accusations which are not true. The total provable to be not true is the 12% figure.

Rufustheyawningreindeer thats the summary but there is a lot more later on in the body, section 4.11 in particular. It going into what type of cases add up the figures... Prawnofthepatriarchy I never said 3-12% was malicious, I said 12% is provable to be false and 3-5% is malicious... (3-5% depending on study) the one I found quickly for this chat says 3%.

Glad it was only on page 11

Would have been a right pain reading the whole thing!

Yes, in cases where the allegation is clearly malicious and false, of course they should be jailed.
Rape, quite rightly, carries enormous consequences. A false accusation can ruin a life. If an innocent person's name can be dragged through the mud in the press before a conviction, then we must be also willing to jail malicious accusers trying to exploit this.

Thats what i thought prawn

Dreadful really that it says that

Your Ministry of Justice link doesn't say what you say it does, KidsDriver. It gives a figure of 3% for malicious reports, not 3-12%. It's easy to misread it, though, because they do say that 12% of reports are false but then define "false" in a very unhelpful way as basically meaning any allegation of rape not provable in court, which is not how most people would see it. When I hear that 12% of rape claims are false I understand that as that saying women are making false reports, not that 12% of reported rapes can't be proved in court.