When reading about false rape accusations one can't help but wonder if the accuser, even in the knowledge that she will not succeed in bringing a conviction, is motivated by knowing a trial will make the accused's life miserable. His name will be dragged through the mud whereas she will remain unknown to the larger public.
It really is time that false accusations were punished. If not at least by removing name supression.
Two cases appear in headlines this morning. One in NZ:
In summing up the case yesterday, Murrell's defence lawyer, Fergus Steedman, said his client and the complainant had been friends. Murrell's testimony showed he cared about the complainant and knew her well.
Mr Steedman said the woman was yet to become an adult who took responsibility for her own mistakes. The false accusation had been made to prevent her from having to face her mistakes, Mr Steedman said.
The complainant was a compulsive liar, he said, and throughout the trial her testimony had been contradicted by other witnesses and evidence.
"She lies as a matter of routine. She lies when she doesn't need to. She is a liar, full stop," he said.
And the other in Australia:
A MOTHER has described as a ''gross injustice'' a legal process which she says led her son's life to the edge of destruction over a rape charge found to be baseless.
It was of small comfort to her that a judge has now ordered the Director of Public Prosecutions to pay defence costs of almost $20,000 after the case collapsed.
''We have been traumatised beyond belief by the system,'' she told The Age. ''We've been watching our son's life potentially get destroyed in front of our eyes.'' She had ''lived in abject fear of an injustice'' while her son, now 20, a third-year university student, had had his reputation ruined.
8 comments:
You overlooked Strauss-Khan perhaps?
Cadwallader
Invariably these cases result in a slap on the wrist to the false accuser, if they are caught at all. Such crimes should be punished by at least the same sentence that the alleged rapist would have got if conviction.
You overlooked Strauss-Khan perhaps?
Hardly "overlooked," given there's nothing to suggest a false complaint was made in his case.
Milt: Read the New York Times...
A financial transaction gone awry, but no apparent rape.
Cadwallader
There's a term..."a rape of convenience"... that apply's so well to cases like this and the lefty feminist "rape culture" wallowing of the "HandMirror" type bloggers in particular.
Vindictive and nasty.
You seem to be accepting the Defence Counsel's rather than the prosecutors sumnation yet false denigration of a victim's character has been a prime tactic of Defence Counselin recent times.
You have assumed (incorrectly) that in order to get a trial anyone can simply make an allegation to police and the perpetrator be charged.
This is simply not the case. Most reports to police (around 90% in fact) do not proceed to trial.
Your suggestion of removing the name suppression of victims would endanger their saftey and that of the wider public in the long run. Good thing you just write a blog huh?
"You have assumed (incorrectly) that in order to get a trial anyone can simply make an allegation to police and the perpetrator be charged."
I didn't.
"Most reports to police (around 90% in fact) do not proceed to trial."
Can you provide the source for that statistic and/or indicate whether it relates to rape complaints only?
"Your suggestion of removing the name suppression of victims would endanger their saftey and that of the wider public in the long run."
I suggested removing name supression for a accusers who are found to be false complainants - not victims.
Post a Comment