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

[traceyracer]

nypost.com/2018/06/05/former-college-student-who-claimed-rape-admits-it-was-all-lies/

Won't sending her to prison make it harder for the real victims to come forward?

And what if she's mentally ill and needs help rather than criminal-minded?

"I never claimed this. I stated that the rate of false or malicious reporting of crimes will be related to the number of motives there may be to make a false or malicious report, along with other factors. "

And then you listed a great list for reasons women and girls lie starting with "They're mad!!! They're unstable!!!"
And 1 for burglary

Ergo

There are multiples more false rape claims than false burlary claims.

Logical objective man has spoken.

In a world where men's "reasonable and honest belief" in consent encompasses successful defences like "I fell penis first into her vagina as she lay drunk and borderline unconscious on my floor", "I hadn't actually talked to her, let myself into the hotel room with a pass-key obtained by deception, asked my mate if I could 'have a go', and had sex with her from behind even though there were no indications that she even knew it was a different person having sex with her", "I only met her this evening, but I'm telling you that she said was into rough sex and I accidentally strangled her (and conveniently, since she is dead, she can't contest my version of events)" and "she was into rough sex so I used the knife under my pillow to accidentally sever both her jugular and carotid artery", you will have to excuse me if I think that actual, properly understood "reasonable and honest belief" is a million miles from the complete bullshit our legal system seems to accept as "reasonable and honest belief".

Men accused of rape seem to construct "reasonable and honest belief" out of the flimsiest of materials. And juries seem to buy it.

There is a fascinating chapter in Deborah Cameron's book "The Myth of Mars and Venus" where she carefully analyses and does a lit review of findings on the way men and women use language. It turns out that in all other walks of life (politely declining invitations to the pub, telling people they haven't been successful in a job application, critiquing work, writing reviews of things) men and women use language and non-verbal cues in exactly the same - with circumlocution, padding, caveats, all those things that make normal social interaction comfortable rather than too blunt for comfort. It is only in the sexual realm where suddenly popular culture and the law assume that men revert to some sort of animalistic set of tendencies where nothing short of screaming NO while punching them in the nose will enable them to understand that their advances are unwanted.

I wonder what your female acquaintance's experience actually felt like from her perspective. Or what her reasons for re-conceptualising her experience as rape were. It is, after all, not uncommon for women to repeatedly say no, then eventually (when it becomes apparent to them that there is no way of escaping the situation) lie there inert while the man "gets on with it", and initially tell themselves, as a psychological defence mechanism "oh, it was just bad sex, we all have bad sex sometimes". Only to realise months or even years later (perhaps when listening to a friend describe a similar experience, and realising that their outrage at her experience actually carries over into their own experience) that what they were subjected to was rape.

Can I see the stats you used and the source for the "secondly" point please.

You referenced the 3% figure which is (on everything I've seen) aa figure that is % false reports of reports. And you said it was a figure from % false reports of all rapes whether reported or not.

Omg I can’t quite digest the level of excuse making on this thread. “They could have mental illness, they could withdraw due to being scared”...how about they could just be a lying bitch who single handedly ruined an innocent guys entire life?!

Stop choosing to explore the 100 little side avenues of this post and focus on what it actually says, if a girl ‘lies’ about being assaulted ‘not withdraws her complaint or suffers mental illness’ if a girl 100% knowingly lies about being assaulted and later admits that/ is found out beyond doubt (it happens way more than you want to acknowledge) then I 100% support that she should take the exact same punishment the guy would have suffered. Same jail time ...etc.

Anyone who disagrees that women should be just as responsible before the law as men are is not a feminist (they’re the worst kind of ‘want to be better than men’ attention seekers)

In a world where men's "reasonable and honest belief" in consent encompasses successful defences like "I fell penis first into her vagina as she lay drunk and borderline unconscious on my floor", "I hadn't actually talked to her, let myself into the hotel room with a pass-key obtained by deception, asked my mate if I could 'have a go', and had sex with her from behind even though there were no indications that she even knew it was a different person having sex with her", "I only met her this evening, but I'm telling you that she said was into rough sex and I accidentally strangled her (and conveniently, since she is dead, she can't contest my version of events)" and "she was into rough sex so I used the knife under my pillow to accidentally sever both her jugular and carotid artery", you will have to excuse me if I think that actual, properly understood "reasonable and honest belief" is a million miles from the complete bullshit our legal system seems to accept as "reasonable and honest belief".

None of those constitutes a successful defence. I recognise some of them as distortions of the actual defence advanced in cases that have been covered in the press, in particular the second one which appears to be based on the Ched Evans case but is a country mile from the actual defence. And, at the end of the day, it isn't about what the "legal system" accepts as a reasonable and honest belief. It is about what a jury accepts.

Iamall I don't think anyone on this thread has said there is no such thing as a woman lying about rape. And we have laws against perjury which provide redress in these (rare) cases - the same laws that deal with people lying over insurance claims, driving offences, etc.

So - do you think women lie more often about rape claims than people in general do about other, non-sexual crimes?

Do you think women who lie about rape should face tougher penalties than, say, a person who lies about burglary?

Do you think all "not guilty" verdicts mean the alleged victim lied, or do you accept that because "not guilty" involves the jury believing "beyond reasonable doubt" that both the man did it, and that he did not have "reasonable belief" in the woman's consent, it is possible for a woman to have been raped, and yet for a man to get a not-guilty verdict?

Do you never read reports of rape cases where the man has come up with a "dog-ate-my-homework" level of excuse as to why he thought he had reasonable belief, which the jury then accepted, and think "hang on a minute - do we need to think a bit harder about what constitutes grounds for 'reasonable belief'?"

Which bits are "distortions", prh ?

Because as a woman, reading rape cases covered in the press, week in, week out, I come away with the strong impression that "belief in consent" appears to equate to "I once saw a violent porn film with this practice in it, so women, including this one, must all like this sort of practice."

Astonishment -

Excuses

If a woman makes a malicious allegation for rape then she should face prosecution same as anyone else who makes a malicious allegation.

For children (the OP talks about "young girls") I am not sure. Ahe of criminal responsibility is 10 I think? If a 10yo made a malicious allegation of rape I'd think that social services should be involved as there would be ??? around whether she was put up to it by an adult, or had been abused by someone else etc

What is your view? Thread title is "should young girls go prison for false rape claims". My answer is NO if they are under the age of criminal responsibility, and caution for under 16s (under 18s?).

I don't mean caution as in "they should get a caution" but caution as in "has she done this entirely independently and there is nothing else going on with her".

Karya

I commend you on your google research over lunch but you could have saved yourself a lot of effort if you had read my original points.

I have never said that revenge/finance etc cannot be motives for other crimes. (that's just silly)

I have stated repeatedly that when you compare false, malicious reports of rape against false, malicious reports of other types of crime, then the motives i have listed are far more applicable, if not solely applicable to rape.

I mean, its possible to make a long, convoluted argument that someone may be motivated to make a false, malicious report of burglary against another person on the grounds of reputational protection, but its not very likely is it?

However its very easy to make a strong argument for the false, malicious reporting of rape against another person on the grounds of reputational protection.

You see what I mean?

Fermat

You are projecting and speculating.

You are arguing against men who dishonestly claim they had an honest belief. I join you in condemning them.

As I said, the key words are reasonable and honest

You need to watch what you're saying here patriarchy. The suggestion that women who have been raped may be "defiining it" in ways other than it's meant ie non consensual penetration is a totally shitty one.

But the problem sometimes lies around the definition of 'consensual' IMO. What if a couple of drunken students have sex and then the girl can't remember anything the next morning. This seems to be a common university situation where the guy is seen not to have obtained consent although he was equally drunk (and may not have consented when sober).

I come away with the strong impression that "belief in consent" appears to equate to "I once saw a violent porn film with this practice in it, so women, including this one, must all like this sort of practice."

No, it doesn't mean that or anywhere near. Remember that coverage in the press is often highly inaccurate and sensationalised.

I fell penis first into her vagina as she lay drunk and borderline unconscious on my floor

That doesn't sound like any case I know of. However, if the victim is unconscious the law dictates a presumption that there was no consent and that the defendant knew there was no consent. If he wanted to argue otherwise the burden of proof that there was consent or that he reasonably believed there was consent would fall on the defendant. If you can point me towards the case to which this refers I will see if I can find out more.

I hadn't actually talked to her, let myself into the hotel room with a pass-key obtained by deception, asked my mate if I could 'have a go', and had sex with her from behind even though there were no indications that she even knew it was a different person having sex with her

As I say, this bears little relationship to the actual defence. The evidence of Ched Evans and his friend was that the victim was specifically asked if Evans could have sex with her and she looked at Evans and agreed. They said that she actively encouraged Evans and that, at her request, he gave her oral sex (his friend having declined to do so) prior to full sex. This was an unusual case in that the victim at no point alleged that she was raped. The case was based entirely on her inability to recall events despite, according to expert evidence, not consuming anywhere near enough alcohol to cause memory loss. Indeed, the only evidence that Evans and his friend actually had sex with her came from Evans and his friend.

I am not familiar with the other two cases referred to. I would expect a defence in the terms described to fail. As with the first case, if you would like to point me at the cases concerned I will see if I can find out more.

Previous posters claimed that approx 3% of all crimes are deliberately falsr reports therefore the rate of deliberately false rapes as a percentage of all rapes will be similar

You (or they) have misunderstood

False rape reports stand at approximately 3% which is ariund about the same as ither crimes

They haven't said all crime false reports are 3% so rape must be as well

That is absolutely arse about face

Fucking hell would'ja look at my typing

On second thoughts DONT

You are arguing against men who dishonestly claim they had an honest belief. I join you in condemning them.

So do I.

By way of full disclosure, having posted more on this thread than I intended, I am a man. I was a victim of sexual assault and attempted rape when I was in my early teens (a long time ago!). I did not report the incident to the authorities.

I would love to see a perfect system where all rapists were convicted and anyone falsely accused was acquitted. Achieving that would mean that defendants would only be able to get away with claiming an honest belief when they did indeed honestly and reasonably believe that the victim consented. Unfortunately, such a system is not possible in the real world.

As with the first case, if you would like to point me at the cases concerned I will see if I can find out more.

There was such a case, see the indy link below - and as absurd as it sounds, that was the defense and he was acquitted by the jury.

The defendant was a very wealthy individual and I would not be surprised if that was a factor in his acquittal.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/i-fell-and-penetrated-her-by-accident-millionaire-rape-suspect-claims-a6767486.html