False rape accusation...who would you believe?

ittakestwo

Deleted User wrote: »

The OP and other posts referred to women being the victims of attacks... hence the talk about false claims. I have no memory of anyone talking about male on male rape claims, except as a minor discussion a long time ago.



When? When did you propose it (unless you mean in the last few days?) The population of users who post to this thread has dropped considerably. I doubt there's more than a few posters who check or post to it anymore because the whole topic was well discussed previously. You're simply late to the party.

It's been ages since I've posted to the thread, and I just ghost it most of the time.



Nah. You're pushing the gender war line on the thread. Maybe you'd be happier on the controversy over feminism thread if you want to push that angle. (since you keep repeating gender war in your posts)



Social change. We've had 50 years of feminism rising within society, pushing certain claims, and this is one of those claims, irrespective of the lack of evidence to support it. People make assumptions. Just as there was the assumption in the US, that Black men were more likely to commit rapes than white men... people believed it to be true, even though they'd never seen any evidence to convince them of the fact. They simply assumed it was true. Just as you are doing. And I agree, that there are likely more claims that are not made (due to all manner of reasons), there's still little evidence to support the assumption.. just as there's little evidence to support your previous assumption.

And while I'm not a grammar nazi, could you recheck your posts (word choice) before posting, just to make them a little easier to read. Rather than me guessing your meaning.

The title of the thread is about a false allegation of rape. Anybody can be raped... anybody can make a false allegation of rape.

The title does not say anything about gender and just because OP gave an example of a made up scenario does not mean we have to refer to victims as she. People are using a victim as she not even in the context of the OP and you are pushing the gender war. Post #745 first paragraph a clear example of that fact.

Unless every single rape was reported then there would have to be more rapes than reported rapes and only a nutter would believe every single rape is reported.

ittakestwo

ittakestwo wrote: »

The title of the thread is about a false allegation of rape. Anybody can be raped... anybody can make a false allegation of rape.

Yup. That's obvious.

The title does not say anything about gender and just because OP gave an example of a made up scenario does not mean we have to refer to victims as she. People are using a victim as she not even in the context of the OP and you are pushing the gender war. Post #745 first paragraph a clear example of that fact.

I am not pushing a gender war... you introduced the term, and I haven't used or expanded on it... Referring to the effects of Feminism in society doesn't mean that I'm pushing any kind of gender war perspective... it's simply acknowledging forces in society.

Unless every single rape was reported then there would have to be more rapes than reported rapes and only a nutter would believe every single rape is reported.

Again, obviously.

Look. You haven't countered what I said, and are just dancing around trying to find an argument.

JimmyVik

I was asked to go into a Garda station once to make a statement.
I was with a friend the night before when he picked up a girl in a pub.
We all spent a few hours chatting and drinking and I went home.
The way i was interviewed felt like they were accusing me. The put me under serious pressure to say things and twisted my words to say something different to what I said.
By the time I had left I was in no doubt that my friend had raped the girl.
Hell I even thought I might have had a part in it.
A few weeks later, with me ****ting myself the whole time I decided to go in to the Garda station and ask to review my statement to correct the things they pressed me to say.
I was talking to a different garda and he said that there would be no need as the case was dropped.
I phoned my friend and he said he had only heard that morning that it had been dropped.
There was evidence to show that she had been framing him, and had done this to several other men in the past.
She had mental issues and was trying to get men back for abuse her father had committed.

Of course we still have acquaintances who think that he did rape her.

py2006

JimmyVik wrote: »

I was asked to go into a Garda station once to make a statement.
I was with a friend the night before when he picked up a girl in a pub.
We all spent a few hours chatting and drinking and I went home.
The way i was interviewed felt like they were accusing me. The put me under serious pressure to say things and twisted my words to say something different to what I said.
By the time I had left I was in no doubt that my friend had raped the girl.
Hell I even thought I might have had a part in it.
A few weeks later, with me ****ting myself the whole time I decided to go in to the Garda station and ask to review my statement to correct the things they pressed me to say.
I was talking to a different garda and he said that there would be no need as the case was dropped.
I phoned my friend and he said he had only heard that morning that it had been dropped.
There was evidence to show that she had been framing him, and had done this to several other men in the past.
She had mental issues and was trying to get men back for abuse her father had committed.

Of course we still have acquaintances who think that he did rape her.

Wow,that must have been tough going. I suspect nothing happened to her?

I wonder do they keep a file and hole on to your statement regardless? If so I would still be looking to review it at the time.

JimmyVik

py2006 wrote: »

Wow,that must have been tough going. I suspect nothing happened to her?

I wonder do they keep a file and hole on to your statement regardless? If so I would still be looking to review it at the time.

It was about 15 years ago.
I just want to forget the whole experience. And I wasnt even the one accused.
The worst part was that my friend has since got married and had to explain what happened to his now wife. She actually dumped him, but spoke to me afterwards and I told her what had actually happened.

Then years after her family found out, and some of them havent spoken to him since.

Caquas

Caquas wrote: »

I think you agree with me but have completely misunderstood my post.

It's obvious that consent is usually the issue, but google up some statistics if you want.

You made these assertion, you google the statistics

anewme

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

A woman who is raped faces psychological ruin.

A man is falsely accused faced psychological, societal and financial ruin.

I have the same sympathy (if not more) for men who are falsely accused.

This reads that you have more sympathy for men being falsely accused of rape than a woman actually being raped.

A woman who is raped faces the exact same issues that you have stated for the person falsely accused. Exact same.

py2006

JimmyVik wrote: »

The worst part was that my friend has since got married and had to explain what happened to his now wife. She actually dumped him, but spoke to me afterwards and I told her what had actually happened.

Wow, did she then believe him after speaking to you?

I hope your friend is doing ok now?

Society doesn't give a crap about men, and feminists want to encourage the believe ALL women social media movement. Utter disgrace.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

anewme wrote: »

This reads that you have more sympathy for men being falsely accused of rape than a woman actually being raped.

A woman who is raped faces the exact same issues that you have stated for the person falsely accused. Exact same.

How does a woman face financial ruination?
She doesn't have to spend thousands defending herself.

I await your response.

JimmyVik

py2006 wrote: »

Wow, did she then believe him after speaking to you?

I hope your friend is doing ok now?

Society doesn't give a crap about men, and feminists want to encourage the believe ALL women social media movement. Utter disgrace.

She didnt believe him when he told her first.
I mean, she couldnt believe he would do it, but she was thinking what if... theres no smoke without fire.
I knew her since we were kids and I told her what had happened.
It was outside the heat of the moment for her.

It calmed her down so that she could see clearly.
But even now as far as some of her family are concerned, their daughter married a rapist.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

That's what I thought.

ittakestwo

Deleted User wrote: »

Look. You haven't countered what I said, and are just dancing around trying to find an argument.

You first replied to my post at #745 with that odd first paragraph and I dont't know what I am suppose to be dancing around either.

anewme

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

How does a woman face financial ruination?
She doesn't have to spend thousands defending herself.

I await your response.

Really?

Are you missing that much of the bigger picture.

You don’t realise that medical bills and ongoing counselling costs money?

You don’t realise that a person without income if unable to work after an extended period faces financial ruin.

Your comment that you have more sympathy for a man If falsely accused than a woman raped is very telling.

anewme

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

That's what I thought.

What’s what you thought?

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

anewme wrote: »

Really?

Are you missing that much of the bigger picture.

You don’t realise that medical bills and ongoing counselling costs money?

You don’t realise that a person without income if unable to work after an extended period faces financial ruin.

Your comment that you have more sympathy for a man If falsely accused than a woman raped is very telling.

Those things are provided FOC.

A man falsely accused suffers more than a rape victim.

anewme

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

Those things are provided FOC.

A man falsely accused suffers more than a rape victim.

Now just stop.

That’s just not true.

A person unable to work long term due to trauma and ongoing medical issues does not get their ongoing mortgage, medical expenses and living expenses paid.

A person suffering the aftermath of a rape is very much financially impacted.

What you are saying is just not true.

That statement you are making says a lot about yourself.

anewme

For god's sake, you're both going nutty.

The comparison is ridiculous. It's not a bloody competition to see who ends up worse. They're entirely different scenarios with different consequences.

anewme wrote:

That statement you are making says a lot about yourself.

Stop taking some illusory high moral ground here. You're both fighting in the mud.

py2006

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

A man falsely accused suffers more than a rape victim.

Not sure I agree with you here. Both will suffer horrendously.

The difference is, the effect on men is not often considered or even taken seriously.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

For god's sake, you're both going nutty.

The comparison is ridiculous. It's not a bloody competition to see who ends up worse. They're entirely different scenarios with different consequences.



Stop taking some illusory high moral ground here. You're both fighting in the mud.

Sorry, but not where you are going with this? There is mo mud.

The person made a statement that he had much more sympathy for a man who was falsely accused of rape, tham a woman who was raped.

In my response to the OP, I clearly went on to state that there are the exact same implications for both parties.

He then went on to say that a woman did not face financial ruin and further went on to say that a woman got everything FOC.

This is false and should be corrected.

I am challenging this is not taking the higher ground, what I am stating is what the OP is pedalling is categorically not true.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

I am challenging this is not taking the higher ground, what I am staring is what the OP is pedalling is categorically not true.

It's an opinion, just like yours is. And the manner of your response along with assuming a superior moral tone, is what's pushing you firmly into the mud, alongside him. The way in which the two of you are competing about which is worse, is a secondary reason why you're both fighting in the mud.

And Anewme, I've seen a lot of your posts over the years, and you're very pro-female in virtually every thread. It's not like you're standing free from bias here.

Now. I'm not getting involved in this discussion because I feel that both of you are being inappropriate considering the topic at hand.

But don't let me stop you. I'm out of this from here on.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

anewme wrote: »

Sorry, but not where you are going with this? There is mo mud.

The person made a statement that he had much more sympathy for a man who was falsely accused of rape, tham a woman who was raped.

In my response to the OP, I clearly went on to state that there are the exact same implications for both parties.

He then went on to say that a woman did not face financial ruin and further went on to say that a woman got everything FOC.

This is false and should be corrected.

I am challenging this is not taking the higher ground, what I am staring is what the OP is pedalling is categorically not true.

How do you know I'm a he or identify as such?

There's infinite more support for women who were raped than men who are falsely accused.

Look at poor Paddy Jackson, career ruined over lies.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's an opinion, just like yours is. And the manner of your response along with assuming a superior moral tone, is what's pushing you firmly into the mud, alongside him. The way in which the two of you are competing about which is worse, is a secondary reason why you're both fighting in the mud.

And Anewme, I've seen a lot of your posts over the years, and you're very pro-female in virtually every thread. It's not like you're standing free from bias here.

Now. I'm not getting involved in this discussion because I feel that both of you are being inappropriate considering the topic at hand.

But don't let me stop you. I'm out of this from here on.

Sorry, just for clarity, its not an opinion he is posting: he is stating a fact as being true, when its not.

What he actually said is that women are not financially impacted if they are raped as they get everything Free of Charge, he has said that twice.

Now, that is not an opinion, it is either true, or it is not.

This is nothing to do with being female (why call women females? )or pro-female or whatever you say it is. It is to do with people making false statements and pedalling them as the truth.

I've seen a lot of your posts over the years and I believe them to be anti woman, but that's beside the point and not relevant to the issue that someone has been making false statements and standing over them as truth.

anewme

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

How do you know I'm a he or identify as such?

There's infinite more support for women who were raped than men who are falsely accused.

Look at poor Paddy Jackson, career ruined over lies.

Did you not say in another thread that you had a row with someone on Facebook (not liking what she said about the strong performance of a Woman Prime Minister) and she accused you of mansplaining. And being a misogynist. I wonder what could possibly make her think that?

She is hardly going to do that if you were a woman now, is she? The hint is in the name.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

I've seen a lot of your posts over the years and I believe them to be anti woman, but that's beside the point and not relevant to the issue that someone has been making false statements and standing over them as truth.

haha.. I could easily have laid the claim that you are anti-male based on your past contributions, but I didn't. Notice the difference in how I wrote what I did? Calling you very pro-female left out any of the negative connotations. So.. yeah.. you've just reinforced my earlier point.

I'm an egalitarian. I'm pro-first/second wave feminism, and i'm very anti-third/fourth wave feminism, because I don't believe that modern feminism wants equality for the genders. I'm not anti-woman... not even slightly. But then, i know you don't make any distinction between feminism and women. In spite of the low numbers of women who identify themselves as feminists compared to the whole.

This is nothing to do with being female (why call women females? )or pro-female or whatever you say it is. It is to do with people making false statements and pedalling them as the truth.

Because a girl isn't a woman, but remains female. Female covers all age groups. Just my preference, since I tend to live in China where most women want to be called girls. Simple conditioning in my speech.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

anewme wrote: »

Did you not say in another thread that you had a row with someone on Facebook (not liking what she said about the strong performance of a Woman Prime Minister) and she accused you of mansplaining. And being a misogynist. I winder what could possibly make her think that?

She is hardly going to do that if you were a woman now, is she? The hint is in the name.

I did..I also said in that thread that she assumed my gender.

So I'll ask again.. how do you know I'm a man? Or how do you know I identify as such?

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

haha.. I could easily have laid the claim that you are anti-male based on your past contributions, but I didn't. Notice the difference in how I wrote what I did? Calling you very pro-female left out any of the negative connotations. So.. yeah.. you've just reinforced my earlier point.

I'm an egalitarian. I'm pro-first/second wave feminism, and i'm very anti-third/fourth wave feminism, because I don't believe that modern feminism wants equality for the genders. I'm not anti-woman... not even slightly. But then, i know you don't make any distinction between feminism and women. In spite of the low numbers of women who identify themselves as feminists compared to the whole.

Because a girl isn't a woman, but remains female. Female covers all age groups. Just my preference, since I tend to live in China where most women want to be called girls. Simple conditioning in my speech.

I'm going to be completely honest here, I dont know what any of this below means ...not one bit of it.

............I'm an egalitarian. I'm pro-first/second wave feminism, and i'm very anti-third/fourth wave feminism, because I don't believe that modern feminism wants equality for the genders..........

Maybe I just live more simply, (call men men and women women) but that does not mean I can't or wont comment when I see people telling untruths, or obvious anti women Agendas.

To me, labelling someone pro female has negative connotations, maybe you are more read up than me.

What I have observed on this thread, is that anyone who challenges the status quo has been rounded on- The post about women who are raped get everything for free peed me off, and also the fact that others would let this pass without calling out the spoofer made me comment.

the_pen_turner

Gareth_Bale wrote: »

I find that most females have no interest in modern feminism, thankfully they have too much sense to be taken in by its propoganda.

i wish that was true . look at all the times you hear about the pay gap , for example. sadly a lot of women are brainwashed into beleiving this crap

anewme

anewme wrote: »

I'm going to be completely honest here, I dont know what any of this below means ...not one bit of it.

............I'm an egalitarian. I'm pro-first/second wave feminism, and i'm very anti-third/fourth wave feminism, because I don't believe that modern feminism wants equality for the genders..........

Nah. I don't buy it, and I doubt many other do either. They can crawl through your post history, but I'm sure most of them have seen you post in other threads related to gender issues.

I do know that you're aware of the differences between the feminism waves.. cause we've had the discussion before about feminism. And while I could take this moment to throw in some digs, I'm not going to. All I'll say is that this is a rather dishonest tack to take.

To me, labelling someone pro female has negative connotations, maybe you are more read up than me.

Again, I doubt that. Pro generally means a positive, while anti-suggests a negative.

What I have observed on this thread, is that anyone who challenges the status quo has been rounded on- The post about women who are raped get everything for free peed me off, and also the fact that others would let this pass without calling out the spoofer made me comment.

That's not the status quo. It's one posters remark. Fact is, I don't know if females who have claimed rape get free legal costs... if i knew, that they didn't, I would have said as much.

As for not calling others out... yeah.. no... you see many of the posters who previously contributed to the thread, are simply observing now, having lost the interest to partake, because... most angles were covered before. It's an old thread. It's generally new people to the thread who contribute now, and the remainder just watch to see what happens. It's not approval. That's what the "thanks" at the bottom of posts does... and I didn't see many "thanks" in relation to his post about legal fees.

the_pen_turner

the_pen_turner wrote: »

i wish that was true . look at all the times you hear about the pay gap , for example. sadly a lot of women are brainwashed into beleiving this crap

You can be taken in by all the propaganda and not be a feminist. A lot of feminist ideology/claims has spread beyond feminism into other areas of society, so people get to hear it from many angles. When people take their opinions from others, without doing their own research, you get this kind of thing.. merely parroting what others have said, because they assume it must be true.

It's just that there is an overabundance of voices speaking this stuff in the media (and in the social sciences).. It's slowly, very slowly, being whittled away by common sense, and more accurate appraisals of the statistics on hand.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Nah. I don't buy it, and I doubt many other do either. They can crawl through your post history, but I'm sure most of them have seen you post in other threads related to gender issues.

I do know that you're aware of the differences between the feminism waves.. cause we've had the discussion before about feminism. And while I could take this moment to throw in some digs, I'm not going to. All I'll say is that this is a rather dishonest tack to take.



Again, I doubt that. Pro generally means a positive, while anti-suggests a negative.



That's not the status quo. It's one posters remark. Fact is, I don't know if females who have claimed rape get free legal costs... if i knew, that they didn't, I would have said as much.

As for not calling others out... yeah.. no... you see many of the posters who previously contributed to the thread, are simply observing now, having lost the interest to partake, because... most angles were covered before. It's an old thread. It's generally new people to the thread who contribute now, and the remainder just watch to see what happens. It's not approval. That's what the "thanks" at the bottom of posts does... and I didn't see many "thanks" in relation to his post about legal fees.

You dont need to buy it? When I last looked I didnt need your approval for to vouch for my character. It is as I said. I find your paragraph verbage and I've no idea what any of that that stuff is.

Show me any of my posts EVER where I've gone into any topics to do with anything like you've referred to ....feminist waves, first waves, second waves, modern feminism, any of that or the difference between them. There are none - ZERO. I dont know what they are. I've never claimed to know anything about it. I dont know what eglitsrism is ( no interest in knowing either) and 200 percent can say I've never mentioned it ever. You are being totally dishonest deliberately here, or you are mixing me up. I have had no debates with you on feminist waves.

The poster was not just referencing legal costs, as well you know.Again, you are not being honest in your response. The post was that men are financially ruined by being accused of rape where a woman could not face financial ruin through rape.

A person could face financial ruin by being unable to work and pay their mortgage, snd fall into debt his response was that women get EVERYTHING free of charge.

They do not. And well you know it. Dishonest.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

They do not. And well you know it. Dishonest.

Enough. Not going to chase down this rabbit hole with you.

Caquas

bubblypop wrote: »

You made these assertion, you google the statistics

No, you’re the only one doubting me.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Enough. Not going to chase down this rabbit hole with you.

You accused me of having debates with you about feminism and feminist waves when I clearly said I had not.

I had NO DEBATES with you about those topics. I repeat, I dont know anything about feminism or feminist waves or egliterism.

When challenged on your scurrilous allegations, you try to fob them off as a rabbit hole to get out of it.

It's ok for you to make these allegations that I am lying, but not ok when I ask you to stand over it. Poor, poor form.

anewme

Caquas wrote: »

No, you’re the only one doubting me.

No, she's not.

Quote: Eleven Benevolent Elephants

A man falsely accused suffers more than a rape victim.

Seriously? That's the hill you want to die on?

There's taking the piss but spouting hateful ****e like this...hopefully a MOD will pick up on it.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Quote: Eleven Benevolent Elephants

A man falsely accused suffers more than a rape victim.

Seriously? That's thze hill you want to die on?

There's taking the piss but spouting hateful ****e like this...hopefully a MOD will pick up on it.

Some posters seem more concerned in attacking people challenging the poisonous attitude rather than challenging the poisonous attitude themselves.

The best bit is that rape victims don't suffer financial implications- because they get everything free of charge.

Caquas

Caquas wrote: »

No, you’re the only one doubting me.

Don't be ridiculous.
Probably no-one else cares what you said, probably shouldn't myself.
But just, as a point, the person making the point has to back it up, with proof. Otherwise it's just BS

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fact is, I don't know if females who have claimed rape get free legal costs...

Injured parties do not have legal representation.
There is a suggestion that they should, particularly in the case of rape, as the injured party can themselves be cross examined in the witness box.

One eyed Jack

Caquas wrote: »

No, you’re the only one doubting me.

I doubt you too because it was explained to you already that it’s the State is pursuing a case against the accused, not the victim. I don’t need to google statistics to know that’s true in 100% of criminal cases.

iptba

She Accused Him Of Sexual Assault. He Sued, And His Years-Long Court Battle Just Ended With A Settlement.
By Ashe Schow
Dec 28, 2020 DailyWire.com

https://www.dailywire.com/news/she-accused-him-of-sexual-assault-he-sued-and-his-years-long-court-battle-just-ended-with-a-settlement

Another case which involved the kangaroo courts in US colleges where male defendants may not be able to avail of due process.

Seems better to generally leave such cases to the criminal system.

Given the move to consent classes and similar in Irish colleges, it doesn't seem impossible that we may arrive with similar scenarios here at some stage in the future.

...Ghost...

bubblypop wrote: »

Injured parties do not have legal representation.
There is a suggestion that they should, particularly in the case of rape, as the injured party can themselves be cross examined in the witness box.

This might be true (legally speaking) in criminal cases, but not in civil cases, where "victims" get a second roll of the dice, whether or not a criminal case proceeds and regardless of the outcome of the cases heard by the criminal courts.

What we need is for false accusers (where proven) to be given the same sentence the accused would have got had there been a conviction. It's been pointed out here by a poster and has been thanked by some when it was said that the repercussions are "exactly the same". I agree, the damage can be very similar, but it should be noted that men will find getting information and support to be much harder and legally very expensive.

Where I see a difference is that when a conviction is given, the woman must take it upon herself to get back on track after suffering a horrific ordeal. She will find that support is very much available in abundance to help her achieve this. This is only right.

However, when a man clears his name and the evidence shows the "victim" was lying and had made a false allegation, the man still has to pay the legal bills. Free counselling pamphlets will not be bulging from his coat pocket. His job is long gone. His house is probably gone and under the stress of everything, his relationship, his family may well be broken. Many of his friends will have disappeared and this assumes he hasn't put a knot around his neck. Meanwhile, the "victim" who made the allegation walks away un-named, unscathed, and benefits from extra sympathy from those close to her who believe her story despite the evidence to the contrary.

This is the society we live in. Justice may be blind, but we should at least sharpen the other side of the blade, or it will never cut both ways.

One eyed Jack

...Ghost... wrote: »

What we need is for false accusers (where proven) to be given the same sentence the accused would have got had there been a conviction.

...

This is the society we live in. Justice may be blind, but we should at least sharpen the other side of the blade, or it will never cut both ways.

They’re two completely different offences, it’s not going to happen that sentencing for rape is equated with perverting the course of justice. There’s no “blade” involved that needs to cut both ways between a victim and an offender, or someone who is found not guilty, because in a criminal case, it’s the State is pursuing a prosecution against the defendant, and the victim appears as a witness for the State.

99nsr125

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They’re two completely different offences, it’s not going to happen that sentencing for rape is equated with perverting the course of justice. There’s no “blade” involved that needs to cut both ways between a victim and an offender, or someone who is found not guilty, because in a criminal case, it’s the State is pursuing a prosecution against the defendant, and the victim appears as a witness for the State.

There is no case without a statement from the false accuser.

It is a **personal** accusation from one person against another, that's why the repercussions for a false accusation should be equivalent.

...Ghost...

...Ghost... wrote: »

However, when a man clears his name and the evidence shows the "victim" was lying and had made a false allegation, the man still has to pay the legal bills. Free counselling pamphlets will not be bulging from his coat pocket. His job is long gone. His house is probably gone and under the stress of everything, his relationship, his family may well be broken. Many of his friends will have disappeared and this assumes he hasn't put a knot around his neck. Meanwhile, the "victim" who made the allegation walks away un-named, unscathed, and benefits from extra sympathy from those close to her who believe her story despite the evidence to the contrary.

You seem to be mixed up here, I'm pretty sure that if evidence shows the 'victim' was lying, then she is in fact the offender in a false allegation case. So, no I don't believe that if someone makes a false allegation, that they walk away unscathed.
That doesn't make sense.

One eyed Jack

99nsr125 wrote: »

There is no case without a statement from the false accuser.

It is a **personal** accusation from one person against another, that's why the repercussions for a false accusation should be equivalent.

It’s not though? It’s the State is making the case that the defendant is guilty. If during the investigation a person is found to be lying, they can be prosecuted. If they’re found to have perverted the course of justice during a trial, they can be prosecuted.

It’s never just one person’s word against another, and the repercussions are not the same, nowhere even near the same, and the offences are nowhere near the same, so the punishment for perverting the course of justice in any case, won’t be the same as the punishment for a completely different offence.

...Ghost...

bubblypop wrote: »

You seem to be mixed up here, I'm pretty sure that if evidence shows the 'victim' was lying, then she is in fact the offender in a false allegation case. So, no I don't believe that if someone makes a false allegation, that they walk away unscathed.
That doesn't make sense.

There is no shortage of examples where false allegations were shown to be malicious and nothing happened to the person making it. Sure, there are some cases where the false accuser was prosecuted, though I am not aware of any in Ireland.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s not though? It’s the State is making the case that the defendant is guilty. If during the investigation a person is found to be lying, they can be prosecuted. If they’re found to have perverted the course of justice during a trial, they can be prosecuted.

It’s never just one person’s word against another, and the repercussions are not the same, nowhere even near the same, and the offences are nowhere near the same, so the punishment for perverting the course of justice in any case, won’t be the same as the punishment for a completely different offence.

The state brings the case, but there is no case without an allegation, right? If the accuser is found to be lying, they can prosecuted, but there is no appetite for that in Ireland to the best of my knowledge.

There are many ways of perverting the course of justice and although legally speaking, it's the same offense whether the perjury be in relation to a burglary, or a sexual assault, the impact on the victims life is different depending largely on the type of accusation being made. Surely it is only right that the damage done by the perjurer be the leading factor rather than the legal heading of the offense.

Were you to be falsely accused and the punishment was the same for either offense, would you rather the accusation be that you beat up a 12 year old girl, or that you sexually assaulted her? I'm confident you would do neither, but one of these offenses will cause permanent reputational and other far reaching consequences even when proven to be false.

I would argue that being accused of sexual assault is just as bad as being the victim of sexual assault. Everyone will have a different experience if they have suffered either either event, but largely shared victim traits will be trauma, relationship difficulties, depression, suicidal ideation for the person sexually assaulted. For the person falsely accused, these same traits are likely, some to a lesser degree, but there will also be the added complication of reputation damage resulting in unemployment, massive legal bills, death threats and so on. So I really don't think anyone is served justice if perjury is treated the same regardless of the type of allegation/lie.

I have personally seen the damage a false accusation of sexual assault can do. I know someone close to me who lost their livelihood and was smeared by a false allegation. Despite being cleared by evidence presented to prove the accuser was lying, the authorities took no interest in prosecuting the woman who made the allegation.

One eyed Jack

...Ghost... wrote: »

The state brings the case, but there is no case without an allegation, right? If the accuser is found to be lying, they can prosecuted, but there is no appetite for that in Ireland to the best of my knowledge.

There are many ways of perverting the course of justice and although legally speaking, it's the same offense whether the perjury be in relation to a burglary, or a sexual assault, the impact on the victims life is different depending largely on the type of accusation being made. Surely it is only right that the damage done by the perjurer be the leading factor rather than the legal heading of the offense.

Were you to be falsely accused and the punishment was the same for either offense, would you rather the accusation be that you beat up a 12 year old girl, or that you sexually assaulted her? I'm confident you would do neither, but one of these offenses will cause permanent reputational and other far reaching consequences even when proven to be false.

I would argue that being accused of sexual assault is just as bad as being the victim of sexual assault. Everyone will have a different experience if they have suffered either either event, but largely shared victim traits will be trauma, relationship difficulties, depression, suicidal ideation for the person sexually assaulted. For the person falsely accused, these same traits are likely, some to a lesser degree, but there will also be the added complication of reputation damage resulting in unemployment, massive legal bills, death threats and so on. So I really don't think anyone is served justice if perjury is treated the same regardless of the type of allegation/lie.

I have personally seen the damage a false accusation of sexual assault can do. I know someone close to me who lost their livelihood and was smeared by a false allegation. Despite being cleared by evidence presented to prove the accuser was lying, the authorities took no interest in prosecuting the woman who made the allegation.

I get where you’re coming from, I really do, but I can’t agree with you that a false accusation of rape should be regarded in the same light as rape. They really can’t be compared, not their impact on the victims, nor their impact on society, which is the thing I think you’re missing, is that in criminal cases, defendants are on trial for committing a crime against society. Often in cases where someone has lied about being raped, or has made a false allegation of being raped by a named individual or individuals, the impact on society just isn’t comparable, and often it’s just not in the public interest to pursue a case. This happens in cases where people have been raped too.

I also don’t agree with your perception of largely shared victim traits between two very different circumstances, because as you rightly pointed out beforehand - each person’s experiences will be different and they will perceive their experiences very differently from one person to the next. It’s not just because I’ve been in both positions that I can say what you’re suggesting happens in but a very small minority of circumstances, but it would be disproportionate IMO to impose a sentence of 7 years for example (the average sentence for rape in Ireland) on a person who is convicted of making a false allegation. The consequences really aren’t the same.

Rape is a far more heinous violation of a person’s dignity than the idea of any damage to a person’s reputation as a result of a false allegation, and in terms of seeing justice done, it’s far easier for a person to seek their reputation be restored in their community than it is for the victims of rape to ever see justice done.

You don’t appear to be at all conscious of the difficulty of what is involved for a victim of rape to even come forward when everything in them is telling them that they’re starting from the default position that people will not believe them, because of this idea that immediately they are viewed with suspicion when they make an allegation against someone who people would never imagine would be capable of committing rape.

For the person who is falsely accused, the consequences aren’t even remotely comparable on any level, and the idea of trying to equate the two ideas of rape and false accusations of rape as though the consequences are similar is just misguided at best, misleading at worst. I’m not suggesting you’re doing so out of any malice or anything, but there are people who do, and I wouldn’t even entertain that kind of idiot, frankly. Like suggesting that people who make false accusations of rape should be prosecuted and if found guilty should be sentenced to an average of seven years, it just isn’t worth it in many cases to pursue a case in order to secure a conviction, it’s also not worth it in most cases to engage with a person is already fully convinced in their beliefs about false allegations.

Dunfyy

Only about

10% rape cases are prosicuted

...Ghost...

...Ghost... wrote: »

There is no shortage of examples where false allegations were shown to be malicious and nothing happened to the person making it. Sure, there are some cases where the false accuser was prosecuted, though I am not aware of any in Ireland.

Then you won't mind linking to these cases then?
And we are talking about Ireland, as this is Ireland and our laws are what we are talking about here.
There have been cases where women have been prosecuted for making false claims, I'm not sure where you came up with the idea that there is 'no appetite ' for that?

AndrewJRenko

iptba wrote: »

Given the move to consent classes and similar in Irish colleges, it doesn't seem impossible that we may arrive with similar scenarios here at some stage in the future.

What is the connection between consent classes in colleges and false allegations?