sexual/physical assault charge against a Garda in Galway

inisboffin

thelongfellow wrote: »

Surely this cannot be true?

The Rape Crisis Centre commissioned a huge report in the last couple of years, can't link from phone, but google it an you'll find it. I believe the earlier figures quoted are vastly different. And that's not figuring in the huge amount of unreported rapes (unreported to authorities, obviously unreported to anyone is a whole other unknown)

Discodog

inisboffin wrote: »

The Rape Crisis Centre commissioned a huge report in the last couple of years, can't link from phone, but google it an you'll find it. I believe the earlier figures quoted are vastly different. And that's not figuring in the huge amount of unreported rapes (unreported to authorities, obviously unreported to anyone is a whole other unknown)

They would hardly be an independent, unbiased source.

Dr McManus

JustMary wrote: »

Source?

Google.

Mrs OBumble

bourgeois wrote: »

See Purdue Professor Kanin's nine-year study published in 1994 concluding that over 40 percent of rape allegations were demonstrably false.

I googled Prof Kanin, and got no sources that I'd regard as credible in the first three SERPs.

Wikipedia (sometimes good for facts, not credible for complex topics IMHO) is at the bottom of page 3, and even it suggests there has been serious rebuttal of his results. It also says his sample size was only 109, from a small US city (town? can't remember) between 1978 and 1987 - hardly large or widespread enough to be scientific.

I'm more inclined to go with N.S. Rumney's study in the Cambridge Law Journal that in this area ..."factual claims have been repeatedly made that have only limited empirical support."

There are some false claims. Possibly a higher proportion of false claims than in other areas (people have less incentive to falsely say that their house was burgled?).

But that does not mean that a large proportion of claims are false: the consequences for a person of reporting a sexual crime (even when it demonstrably DID happen) are significant, including robust questioning from police officers, invasive medical examinations, reactions from friends and neighbours, and even more robust questioning in court. Very little incentive there to make false claims.

Discodog

Did you look here :

http://falserapearchives.blogspot.com/2009/06/archives-of-sexual-behavior-feb-1994.html

It was top of the page when I entered Kanin 1994

I know of one horrific case where a father in foster family was accused by one of the foster daughters. The case was due for summing up & the defence were bracing the man to expect a very long sentence as the child was 12. A social worker was talking to the other daughter & she asked what would happen to the father. She then admitted that they had made the whole story up to try & get put back with their real mother. The case was dismissed but the guy had a nervous breakdown & has not worked or fostered since.

inisboffin

Discodog wrote: »

They would hardly be an independent, unbiased source.

Why? They have commissioned experts and had them analyse the numbers. They would be supplying the information, I assume numbers, and anonymously to look at the data. Are you inferring that the RCS are cooking the books or am I misunderstanding you?

bourgeois

JustMary wrote: »

I googled Prof Kanin, and got no sources that I'd regard as credible in the first three SERPs.

Wikipedia (sometimes good for facts, not credible for complex topics IMHO) is at the bottom of page 3, and even it suggests there has been serious rebuttal of his results. It also says his sample size was only 109, from a small US city (town? can't remember) between 1978 and 1987 - hardly large or widespread enough to be scientific.

I'm more inclined to go with N.S. Rumney's study in the Cambridge Law Journal that in this area ..."factual claims have been repeatedly made that have only limited empirical support."

There are some false claims. Possibly a higher proportion of false claims than in other areas (people have less incentive to falsely say that their house was burgled?).

But that does not mean that a large proportion of claims are false: the consequences for a person of reporting a sexual crime (even when it demonstrably DID happen) are significant, including robust questioning from police officers, invasive medical examinations, reactions from friends and neighbours, and even more robust questioning in court. Very little incentive there to make false claims.

I don't regard your 'opinions' posted above as credible either. Obviously if you've done a study like the Professor and have the statistics to back up your claims I'd be more inclined to entertain them.

Discodog

The RCS will of put forward a hypothesis that the majority of complaints are genuine & that false reporting is rare. They will of asked the researchers to back up this claim.

Most research can be biased depending on what you are setting up to prove. How do you prove a false claim unless it is a clear cut case like the example that I gave ?.

inisboffin

Discodog wrote: »

The RCS will of put forward a hypothesis that the majority of complaints are genuine & that false reporting is rare. They will of asked the researchers to back up this claim.

Most research can be biased depending on what you are setting up to prove. How do you prove a false claim unless it is a clear cut case like the example that I gave ?.

Really? You really think that they will put forward this hypothesis? Why? To what end? Can you back up this statement please? It is unfounded in my opinion. The reports they have commissioned was huge, it was all over the media. They was not just about the instances of reporting but about exactly how they were dealt with in the criminal justice system. How many reports were dismissed because people dropped the case, how many cases were dropped because legal errors, statute of limitations, physical evidence in relation to later reporting, burden of proof etc. The variables were many.

We are going WAY off topic with this subject given the thread title, it either needs a discussion in one of the other fora, or if you want, PM me and I can forward you links when I get home (am travelling). A good friend works often dealing with the legality of such cases, so I can get links to studies if you are interested.

Discodog

Only the RCS can answer that but you have to give researchers certain criteria. A counsellor at an RCS is never going to question or doubt the statement of an alleged victim neither are many Gardai. They are trained to take evidence & then let a Court decide. They are also rightly trained to be empathetic to the alleged victim. If you believed that a proportion of allegations might be false you probably wouldn't work for a RCS.
I might add that I think that they do a superb job.

Rape/sexual assault is a terrible crime & deserves the harshest sentence. But a false allegation is also a terrible crime & it does happen. One of the stated reasons for a false allegation is the compensation that can be claimed.

inisboffin

Discodog wrote: »

Only the RCS can answer that but you have to give researchers certain criteria. A counsellor at an RCS is never going to question or doubt the statement of an alleged victim neither are many Gardai. They are trained to take evidence & then let a Court decide. They are also rightly trained to be empathetic to the alleged victim. If you believed that a proportion of allegations might be false you probably wouldn't work for a RCS.
I might add that I think that they do a superb job.

Rape/sexual assault is a terrible crime & deserves the harshest sentence. But a false allegation is also a terrible crime & it does happen. One of the stated reasons for a false allegation is the compensation that can be claimed.

I just took issue with the way you came across about the motives behind this study. You say above that only the RCS would know the reasons, but I think the reasons behind and the finding of their studies are very transparent to the public. You should read it, there are many interesting findings connected to your comment regarding who questions victim credibility, they are quite shocking answers across the board, from family members to the police to the courts. I completely agree with you discodog, that false reporting is horrible, not only for the accused, but also for how it influences the perception of genuine cases. If you wish for more information. As someone else mentioned, it would be naieve at best to false report for financial gain, given the protocol that would ensue. I think I have said enough off topic now,please PM me if you need me to point you to more info, but the links to reports should pop up on google or the rcs site itself.

Martty81

snubbleste wrote: »

University College Galway ceased to exist in 1997

Sorry, can't let this pedantic pat moment pass but I attended UCG up to 2001 and it was still called that until at least 2002-2003.

Dr McManus

bourgeois wrote: »

I don't regard your 'opinions' posted above as credible either. Obviously if you've done a study like the Professor and have the statistics to back up your claims I'd be more inclined to entertain them.

I totally agree.
I am with Professor Kanin on this one.

Discodog

The Dublin RCS Press Release 2009 stated that 68 cases were dropped for various reasons & that 9 of these were because of false or malicious allegations. The RCS give the impression that false reporting is virtually non existent when these figures show it at 13%.

I reiterate that I totally support the work of the RCS - I have even fund raised for them !. But I will stick to my view that they may not be the best source of unbiased research.

inisboffin

Discodog wrote: »

The Dublin RCS Press Release 2009 stated that 68 cases were dropped for various reasons & that 9 of these were because of false or malicious allegations. The RCS give the impression that false reporting is virtually non existent when these figures show it at 13%.

I reiterate that I totally support the work of the RCS - I have even fund raised for them !. But I will stick to my view that they may not be the best source of unbiased research.

Grand, have to agree to differ then, and I think we can all see that 13% is quite different to 40%

Discodog

This is what I mean about unbiased reporting. The 13% does not include people that were acquitted or the cases that were unproven. Add those & the figure will be higher.

In law for someone to be acquitted of rape there has to of been a false allegation.

inisboffin

I recommend that people look at the reports themselves as I think this thread is quite misleading,

coffee_cake

Between the original article stating 'it wasn't in the context of a date' (would it have been ok then??) and this thread, some attitudes are very depressing. No wonder report rates are low
Maybe every time someone has something stolen we should post 'ah sure they're probably making it up for attention'

Discodog

inisboffin wrote: »

I recommend that people look at the reports themselves as I think this thread is quite misleading,

The report that I am referring to is here:

http://www.drcc.ie/about/press_archive/press_20090429.htm

I am not speaking for other posters but I would want any rape or assault victim to be given the utmost support & any rapist sent to prison for a very long time.

All I am pointing out is that false allegations do occur & that possibility must be part of dispensing justice. Rape is unusual in that in can result in very severe penalties but a conviction may rely on the testimony of only the two people involved.

coffee_cake

Discodog wrote: »

All I am pointing out is that false allegations do occur & that possibility must be part of dispensing justice. Rape is unusual in that in can result in very severe penalties but a conviction may rely on the testimony of only the two people involved.

Right, but it doesn't need to be brought up every time a rape is reported or discussed. Rape reports are already unbelievably low, and brought to court even lower.

SugarHigh

bluewolf wrote: »

Between the original article stating 'it wasn't in the context of a date' (would it have been ok then??) and this thread, some attitudes are very depressing. No wonder report rates are low
Maybe every time someone has something stolen we should post 'ah sure they're probably making it up for attention'

Where is that even suggested?

You must spend most of your time looking for things to be offended about.

Discodog

bluewolf wrote: »

Right, but it doesn't need to be brought up every time a rape is reported or discussed. Rape reports are already unbelievably low, and brought to court even lower.

I agree & this is the first time that I have ever discussed it here. Previous posters referred to reports & statistics & I decided to take a look, for my own education.

The RCNI state that:

"This makes it unlikely that a woman would make and stick with a false accusation of rape."

http://www.rcni.ie/myths-facts.aspx#false

Whereas this report from the Dublin RCC say that false allegations made up 13% of cases & if you add in the acquittals the percentage gets higher

http://www.drcc.ie/about/press_archive/press_20090429.htm

Law has to be balanced. If the RCC's virtually deny the possibility of false allegation then they are biased. Of course you want to encourage reporting & ensure that the genuine cases get to Court. An alleged victim needs to know that she will be believed but you can't be blind to the possibility of a false allegation as they clearly happen.

The Dublin report also states that Alcohol was a factor with 88% of accused & 84% of victims having taken drink.

inisboffin

I've held back on fully discussing this as I feel the topic will be moved, but Discodog, not sure what the connection is here with your alcohol related comment? I will still have to disagree with you on the way you interpret these statistics. If we take the estimated cases that were unreported or unfiled to an official source we get a huge shift in figures. There is even a difference between 'told' and 'reported' in some areas. We also seem to be comparing statements and findings from multiple dates and reigions here too, I would expect differences. We all know statistics from anyone need to be seen in the context of a
bigger picture.

Also I find it odd that on one hand you 'support and fundraise' for an organisation that you also seem to think is full of bias and imbalance?

I don't know, but if it were me I would rather not support an organisation that I found this way. It would go against my ethos.

The recent report to which I was referring is called Rape And The Criminal Justice System I believe.

talla10

Head The Wall wrote: »

Not really, there's plenty of scumbag guards out there

Garda assault case dismissed

Ya cant really make the point of scumbag gardai while quoting a case in which the charges against gardai were dropped.

And IMO nobody really knows what other people do behing closed doors or know what goes on in a persons head. I wouldn't dismiss this story straightaway but at the moment only an allegation has been made and the suspended guard is innocent until proven guilty and all allegations must be taken seriously until they are proved or disproved

Discodog

inisboffin wrote: »

I'
Also I find it odd that on one hand you 'support and fundraise' for an organisation that you also seem to think is full of bias and imbalance?

I have not said that they are full of bias & imbalance. I simple pointed out that when you read reports you have to bear in the mind the viewpoint of the organisation that produces them.

If there was evidence of false reporting you would not expect the RCNI to actively publicise it as it could put people off reporting & affect fundraising.

We know what happens when the church report on the church or the banks report on banks.

The two reports that I have quoted were both written for public & not expert viewing by essentially the same organisation & yet their message is inconsistent.

inisboffin

Discodog wrote: »

I have not said that they are full of bias & imbalance. I simple pointed out that when you read reports you have to bear in the mind the viewpoint of the organisation that produces them.

If there was evidence of false reporting you would not expect the RCNI to actively publicise it as it could put people off reporting.

We know what happens when the church report on the church or the banks report on banks.

Wow, RCNI are now in the same category as the church and banks?- ouch!
We are going round in circles discussing RCNI, again, happy to take it to PM

Discodog

inisboffin wrote: »

Wow, RCNI are now in the same category as the church and banks?- ouch!
We are going round in circles discussing RCNI, again, happy to take it to PM

Don't be so touchy - it's not like you. No matter how many times I state how much I support the RCNI you fail to see the importance of accurate, unbiased & totally independent information. The RCNI can only help victims if it states the truth.

What do you think would happen if they commissioned a study who's verdict was that 30% of allegations were false ?. They couldn't publish it. Maybe they should not be directly involved in studies ?. Perhaps we need a totally independent organisation to publish them.

inisboffin

Aaah, no YOU hang up!

ILA

This Garda was a probationer, which means he's not a fully trained and hasn't quite finished his two years in Templemore.

Are the Gardai capable of committing wrongs, hell yes. We've all saw Training Day!

Head The Wall

talla10 wrote: »

Ya cant really make the point of scumbag gardai while quoting a case in which the charges against gardai were dropped.

it was dropped on a legal technicality, eyewitnesses testified in court that he assaulted her. One of the witnesses was his own girlfriend so he did assault her but got lucky on a procedural error as this was the first case taken by the Garda Ombudsman.

Would you trust this guard seeing as he wasn't convicted?