Prosecutions for rape accusations

[Offred]

Was reading this just now;

www.theguardian.com/law/2014/dec/01/109-women-prosecuted-false-rape-allegations

Two things jump out. One that there is no rule restricting the police from treating someone making an accusation as a suspect in a different crime, relating to the same circumstances, of perverting the course of justice, which obviously has the implication referred to in the article, that the rape claim will not be properly investigated as it is already being treated as the basis for a different investigation.

The second that how in the hell are police so frequently 'proving' that the woman has made a false accusation? I mean we are always being told that rape prosecutions fail because of a lack of evidence sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a rape took place, how are police finding sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone has not raped someone AND that they went to a police station and deliberately made an unambiguously false complaint knowing and understanding what they were doing?!

No, that's not the case at all. He might genuinely have not committed the offence but lied because he was drunk and couldn't remember or some such.

What I'm wondering is, why are women who lie about rape pursued so aggressively when, as you say dancing, people bullshit the police all the time?

Also, if a man denies raping a woman and is then convicted, is he further prosecuted for perverting the course of justice? If not, why not?

No they don't, the same that they don't for any type of crime, however they do lose the credit that they would otherwise have received for pleading guilty at the first available opportunity. Pleading guilty at the first available opportunity usually leads to a reduction in sentence of around a third (but this varies). So in some sense you could say that they receive a heftier sentence for their lying, putting victims through the trauma of a trial and also for wasting court time and costing the tax payer additional funds by having a trial. So they don't get off scot free for the lying part.

There is a difference between lying under oath and making a false accusation because one is an attempt to avoid being convicted and the other is an attempt to convict someone of a crime you know they didn't commit. It isn't just accusers that can be charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice, those providing false witness statements or deliberately concealing evidence can also be prosecuted for attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Let's make it not about rape then woman accuses man of stealing her purse, man says in his defence "I was in Birmingham" at the time, woman charged with perverting course of justice.

If man later proved not to be in Birmingham ie he lied to police but still no proof he did the robbing, would he be charged with anything? Or does it not apply to lies made in your own defence?

why are women who lie about rape pursued so aggressively

But they're not. with a few disgusting exceptions They are not. The stats demonstrate this. And perpetuating the myth that women are so pursued is damaging because it discourages women from reporting rape.

109 women in 5 years seems a lot to me dancing, unless there are equivalent numbers for other crimes?

I think it's interesting that the article considers other jurisdictions use an offence closer to "wasting police time"

The numbers do not seem very high to me but I don't know the context.

On the assumption that around 1% of rape allegations are falsely made, it is proportionate to the number of rape convictions, which I believe is somewhere around 10000-15000 for the same period.

Surely you would argue (as I would) that rape is grossly under-prosecuted and notoriously hard to secure convictions for. So how against that background can you suggest that 109 people in 5 years (most though not all women) is represents an aggressive approach to false rape claims?

I think if there's a general tendency to prosecute all sorts of people for perverting the course of justice - people who accuse others of fraud, theft, arson etc - and it's all a bit harsh well ok then maybe we need to rethink how we deal with such a crime. But I doubt somehow that that's the case. I doubt that there are 109 convictions combined for false accusations of other crimes.

Cailin, see p10 if this report -

www.cps.gov.uk/publications/research/perverting_course_of_justice_march_2013.pdf

I doubt that there are 109 convictions combined for false accusations of other crimes.

Why?

IMO there doesn't need to be a change to perverting the course of justice. That's not the problem really and false accusations can ruin lives.

It's the way rape is investigated that's the problem. If the police didn't automatically assume the victim was lying people would feel better about reporting IMO. Also the way it's reported, I was under the impression that false accusations were a much bigger deal than the stats seem to suggest and that's from crap media outlets.

If you doubt that suspected false allegations of rape are unnecessarily aggressively pursued read the report Yonic linked dancing.

the CPS themselves say: "the report shows that a significant number of these cases involved young, often vulnerable people. About half of the cases involved people aged 21 years old and under, and some involved people with mental health difficulties. In some cases, the person alleged to have made the false report had undoubtedly been the victim of some kind of offence, even if not the one which he or she had reported.
This review has highlighted the complex nature of these cases. Prosecutors
need to look critically at the behaviour and credibility of all those involved, not just the person making the complaint."

I agree the media overemphasise cases of false allegations.

That report is very helpful about what constitutes perverting the course of justice and it's a lower test than I had thought.

Cailin, TBF not all of those cases that were sent for review resulted in a charge (I think it was about a third of the rape cases).

The purpose of the report was to allow the DPP to review all decisions in depth for a year and certainly some of the case studies show times when the charge wasn't pursued (eg between a 15 and 18 year old) as although there was no rape there was unlawful intercourse.

Christ, cailindana, if we are suggesting that people are going to be let off serious crimes because they are young, or because they have mental health difficulties, then the courts and our prisons will be almost empty.

Also, you're talking here about a cases a year where a balanced decision could have been taken the other way.

Of course, the police and CPS will sometimes make wrong judgement calls. and I'm acknowledged upthread that there are cases where they have behaved disgustingly. But these cases are not representative of the broader picture.

Also, note that the report seeks to set out guidance to ensure that more vulnerable people are not prosecuted for this kind of crime. I am sure that no such approach is taken with burglary, gbh etc etc.

I've said already. It's not just about the numbers of convictions though I don't think comparing them to the numbers of rape convictions is the right comparison either as Caitlin says.

If you read the article it explains that an American researcher who has been researching this topic is saying she has found the UK is unusually aggressive in both pursuing charges and choosing a higher charge.

But the words of an American researcher when the American justice system take a very different approach to false accusations of rape isn't entirely helpful.

In fact the whole of the American justice system is very different to our own - death sentences, 60 years in prison for joint enterprise offences.....

And I've also said before that the number of convictions is not the broader picture I am looking at and criticising in the main. It is the fact that there is nothing to stop police dropping their investigation into a rape accusation after mere days and choosing instead to investigate the complainant. You might want to ask yourself how it is even possible to investigate a crime based on making a false accusation if you have not investigated the accusation.

The fact that there is nothing to prevent this happening means that it could happen to anyone who reports a rape. If it is not hugely common/standard practice that is simply because of police officer's discretion/beliefs and I don't think that's an adequate or safe system.

Would be interested to know what sentences the cases got. In the study in the paper, one woman got a suspended sentence for pleading guilty - although the max penalty might be the same as rape I imagine it's very much case by case (eg if a specific accusation was false but the accused had previously been violent to the accuser, the sentence would be less)

A woman I know slept with 3 men, accused them of rape, and was later found to be lying. She was prosecuted.

She was caught because of texts messages found on her phone to her friend.

I find it astonishing that people think people doing this shouldn't be prosecuted for lying and potentially leading to someones incarceration.

Offred, judging by the study linked, not being able to demonstrate that the rape claim was false to the standard of criminal proof would mean perverting the course if justice was dropped.

Sorry that should have said 2 men

I'm not versed in the law but aren't there other crimes that could be pursued if they not sure about the rape charge before trying to flip the case to a lying one?

You might want to ask yourself how it is even possible to investigate a crime based on making a false accusation if you have not investigated the accusation.

But we don't have enough information about specific cases to know why the investigation might turn into a false accusation investigation within a few days. If there is very clear evidence to suggest the complainant has totally fabricated the accusation then it might only need a few days for the investigation to take a different course.