posted
Another forum I lurk on is discussing recent developments in the Duke lacrosse team rape case which show Nifong actively worked to supress evidence. While most people agree that Nifong is in the wrong, to say the least, what do people on this forum think should happen to the men's accuser?
The Duke lacrosse team has had its defenders for some time. Others who have had false accusations made against them, though, not so much. On that same forum, one person related how a man he knew had had his life destroyed simply by an accusation of rape, with no actual physical evidence that the rape occured. As some of you know, my brother was falsely accused of looking at porn while teaching a class, but the accusers, girls, didn't have any consequences for lying but 'Don't do it again'. I anecdotally know several other examples, but I think the point is obvious. False accusations aren't that rare and are an issue that should be addressed.
This topic has come up, to some degree, on this forum. Dagonee has said that false accusations of rape can be countered with the accuser being charged with perjury. If this is so, how often is this charge carried out? What are the consequences of this charge? I've never heard of any women being charged with perjury for false accusations of rape, so I wonder how seriously the consequences of perjury work as a deterrent if they are either minimal or rarely enforced?
I understand that it's hard for people to come forward and report rape. If there is a threat of perjury hanging over their heads, it's going to make it that much harder to report it. I can see tougher enforcement of perjury being exploited by some to get away with rape. Yet, what other alternative is there than making the consequences for ruinging someone's life serious enough where people don't casually do it?
Rape is a serious issue not because of the physical damage it causes, but because of the damage it causes to the person's personality. I think that, in this sense, false accusations of rape or moral impropriety are every bit as bad and should be treated as seriously. An accusation of rape, even if shown to be false in the legal court, will never really be found false in the court of public opinion, and that person's character will never recover. As such, I think the accuser of the Duke lacrosse team should be facing some serious consequences. She should be made an example of.
posted
I think I agree with your conclusion Storm, and this issue has weighed heavily on my mind before. I need to collect my thoughts before posting anything of substance however.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But then, what's the standard for determining a false accusation? If the accused isn't convicted? Is never charged or arrested? How do you decide?
posted
If the consequence is being charged with perjury, than a prosecutor decides if there's enough evidence to make the charge and a jury decides if the accuser is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Same standard as for the people she accused.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it can be perjury, if it doesn't get as far as court and she therefore doesn't testify under oath in court. A false statement to police would be simply lying, and I understand that she's made several different statements to police already, no two of which could both be true. And then she's been flatly contradicted by the other dancer who was there.
Posts: 69 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Slander? Filing a false police report? obstruction of justice? Perjury if she lies on the stand?
The penalty for a malicious and false accusation should be severe if it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It deserves prison time.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perjury doesn't have to mean lying in open court, it can be lying in a sworn affadavit presented to the court (and I think maybe even a sworn affadavit given to the D.A., although I'm not sure.)
Filing a false report with the police is illegal, too, I know. I think libel and/or slander may apply in some cases.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Rape is a serious issue not because of the physical damage it causes, but because of the damage it causes to the person's personality.
Storm, rape is a serious issue BOTH because of the physical damage and the psychological damage. Many rapes are extremely violent. Just wanted to point that out.
Posts: 499 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd also agree with slander, and probably filing a false police report. Slander was the first thing that popped into my head.
I was JUST listening this morning to some radio hosts talk about the Duke issue. Their conversation centered around the idea that women shoudn't get anonymity protection in rape cases, because it protects them from any backlash that might come if they are making a false accusation, and ultimately men are just plain screwed and women are protected.
I don't know how I feel about that. Rape is a special case. If a woman really is raped, I'm all about giving her protections, she's already been traumatized enough (obviously she should still have to take the stand (barring some other damning evidence)), but there needs to be punishment for false accusations.
If a man has to go through a trial when he's been accused, and then acquitted, then I think the woman should have to go through the trial, if charges are brought against her, as well. It wouldn't be a slam dunk case on the woman though. If there's proof she was raped, but that she accused the wrong person, there might be either less punishment, or something. But it shouldn't be as simple as yelling "Witch! a witch! let's burn him!" in a village square, and then afterwards, whoops, I guess it wasn't a witch, well let's not do th at again. That's unacceptable.
I'm just wary of taking it too far back the other way. There's already too many rape victims who are afraid to come forward, it shouldn't be made any harder for them.
(This opens up thoughts of another men's vs women's rights issue I was going to start a thread on, that of paternity cases and who pays child support, but now I'll wait for this issue to end first)
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:If a man has to go through a trial when he's been accused, and then acquitted, then I think the woman should have to go through the trial, if charges are brought against her, as well.
I'd like to point out that not everyone who is acquitted is innocent, just like not everyone who is convicted is guilty.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, if this was decided upon, it could be very dangerous.
It might be a great disincentive for someone to call the police if they really were raped, because if they failed to prove it, they could instead go to prison. Double whammy.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If a man has to go through a trial when he's been accused, and then acquitted, then I think the woman should have to go through the trial, if charges are brought against her, as well.
I'd like to point out that not everyone who is acquitted is innocent, just like not everyone who is convicted is guilty.
Certainly. But then that's also why I said "if charges are brought against her." In other words, if there's enough evidence to prove that she falsely accused someone (not yet sure what role her knowing or not knowing that she did so falsely should play), then she wouldn't be charged. It wouldn't be as automatic as "well he's innocent, let's get her!" or "he's guilty, I guess she was right."
Perhaps some of this could be more fairly settled if men had some of the privacy protections that are afforded to women. For example the Duke lacrosse players that were accused. Perhaps instead of parading them around on CNN for weeks, their names could be kept secret until the trial.
If anyone has a solution that is fair to all parties, then by all means put it forth, but right now I tend to view the situation as wholly skewed towards women with few protections for men. I'm totally in favor of it being skewed towards women, I think they SHOULD have an advantage in this instance. But there should be protections for men as well. They shouldn't have their lives ruined by fingerpointing. Even a further step than not all guilty people are convicted and not all innocent are acquitted, men never even get that chance. As soon as the world "rape" is attached to their name, they're already convicted in the court of public opinion, which bears it's own punishments and consequences.
So long as rape victims are protected from being prosecuted, I agree with a measure of punishments for false accusations. No idea how it'll look in practice, but it's a fine idea. And I strongly favor giving men who've been accused of rape some privacy protections.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Two issues which will make this very hard to put into practice:
1) The gap between "reasonable doubt that X raped Y" and "reasonable doubt that X did not rape Y" is huge.
2) Beyond having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the rape took place, the prosecutor would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged victim knew no rape occurred and that the alleged victim intended to make a false statement.
3) Inconsistent statements alone are not enough to qualify for filing false police reports/making false statements. There's plenty of evidence that eyewitness memories change without intent.
Absent evidence of a frame up - acquiring semen from a used condom or a video of seduction - I don't see how most false accusations can be tried. Even the Duke one.
Now, the prosecutor ought to face sanctions (and possibly will). That's a different ball game.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for your honest assessment of the situation, Dagonee. I would add to your points my belief that women are still not really looked on as fully responsible for their actions by many people and, thus, it's more o.k. for them to have 'moods' or to be hysterical.
One of the consequences of being accused that I believe can be ameliorated is the financial burden of defending yourself in court. I think a case can be made that just as it's in the state's interest to prosecute cases, it's in the state's interest to defend cases, and people shouldn't have to pay for their defense against criminal charges.
I realize this raises other issues, but it's something that I think is an issue and some merit.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I would add to your points my belief that women are still not really looked on as fully responsible for their actions by many people and, thus, it's more o.k. for them to have 'moods' or to be hysterical.
Yes, a terribly insulting presumption, but one that nonetheless clouds this issue.
Posts: 5663 | Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
On the other hand... If a false acuser knows that she can be prosecuted, it will make it far less likely that she will recant and set the innocent man free.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
While a false accusation of rape is a horrible thing, I'm not sure I feel great about anything that might make actual rapes go unreported in greater proportion than they do now.
Are there any statistics on how often false allegations of rape are made? Is it really so common that we need to be concerned about harsher penalties for it? High profile cases aside, I really don't know (and I don't put a lot of stock in high profile cases, since I think a lot of the response to arises from the celebrity in question rather than the case itself).
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would think the statistics on unreported rapes are probably about as reliable as the statistics for false accusations, if not more so....
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Possibly. I honestly don't know. I'm still wondering if either statistic as it currently stands would serve as a good enough justification to create harsher penalties for the latter, though. I'll try to do some googling, maybe.
Edit: Hmm, not able to find anything terribly reliable at this point, and I have to go get ready for class. I'll look later, or perhaps someone with stronger google-fu than me will turn up something before I get back.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm still wondering if either statistic as it currently stands would serve as a good enough justification to create harsher penalties for the latter, though. I'll try to do some googling, maybe.
You're going to find a lot of stats on unreported rapes and probably few on false accusations.
I do not understand your third sentence. "I'm still wondering...." Are you arguing that false accusations shouldn't be an issue because, no matter what proportion they are to 'real' accusations, they would keep women from reporting rape?
If so, this seems to me to speak not to the problem of false accusations but to the problem of not being ashamed to report rapes. Perhaps rather than just ignoring the problem of false accusations, the problem of being ashamed to report rapes should be addressed.
My personal opinion is that no matter what the stats that both issues are a problem and that their resolution isn't mutually exclusive.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I was in college here in SC, a girl at my school filed a police report saying that she had been raped because she thought she was pregnant and didn't want her parents to know she was sexually active. When the police determined that there had been no rape, the young woman involved was charged with filing a false police report (which I believe is a misdemenor(sp?)). I don't know what the outcome was, aside from the fact that she was kicked out of my school (she violated our honor code), but I suspect she was pled out.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
