Should False Rape Allegations Be Charged?

[Caninope]

At what point does something go from an unproven allegation to a false allegation?

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

The problem being that it's substantially harder to disprove something happening than to prove it happening. It's also silly to include all false rape allegations as being lies (a false rape allegation could be due to confusion- if a victim was traumatized and was raped but the wrong fellow was convicted, that's hardly worthy of a crime).

[Caninope]

At what point does something go from an unproven allegation to a false allegation?

When it's disproven.

Yes, but it's substantially harder to disprove that something happened (especially in general) than to prove that it happened.

[Delmonte]

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

In a court of law, if an allegation is unproven, it is false.

You're wrong. I don't even know what else to say. That's actually just completely, ineffably wrong.

[The Serbian Empire]

At what point does something go from an unproven allegation to a false allegation?

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

Exactly, it's probably going to see a conviction rate on the false allegations at a similar rate to rape allegations as the evidence will probably not be strong enough to prove a crime has been committed.

[Caninope]

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

In a court of law, if an allegation is unproven, it is false.

In the United States, that's wrong. In a criminal case, no one is ever found innocent, they are found "not guilty"- it means the allegations against them were either unproven or false, but not necessarily the latter.

[The Serbian Empire]

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

The problem being that it's substantially harder to disprove something happening than to prove it happening. It's also silly to include all false rape allegations as being lies (a false rape allegation could be due to confusion- if a victim was traumatized and was raped but the wrong fellow was convicted, that's hardly worthy of a crime).

That is also true. That isn't worth of a crime in that case as the evidence would have been strong enough for a rape conviction in the first place. Maybe a settlement from the state for wrongful conviction, but no crime.

[Geilinor]

In a court of law, if an allegation is unproven, it is false.

You're wrong. I don't even know what else to say. That's actually just completely, ineffably wrong.

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

[Magna Libero]

Yes, it might be worth a consideration. However, how would this work? I guess it might be difficult to prove an allegation wrong -- atleast it's much easier to say that a person has been raped compared to the efforts of investigating if the allegation is true or false.

[Delmonte]

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

The problem being that it's substantially harder to disprove something happening than to prove it happening. It's also silly to include all false rape allegations as being lies (a false rape allegation could be due to confusion- if a victim was traumatized and was raped but the wrong fellow was convicted, that's hardly worthy of a crime).

We have judges to take those things into account. Deaths can be accidents but still be crimes. The sentence is merely reduced.

[Densaner]

Yes. That's why someone charged with Rape or similar sexual offences should be given anonymity until any prosecution is successful. Alleged victims are given that right. A charge of false Rape should prosecuted to fullest extent of the law. Whether that means wasting police time, wrongful prosecution and perjury if it makes it to court.

[Delmonte]

You're wrong. I don't even know what else to say. That's actually just completely, ineffably wrong.

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

Just like someone innocent could be found guilty for those reasons? It would just be another crime.

[The Serbian Empire]

You're wrong. I don't even know what else to say. That's actually just completely, ineffably wrong.

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

Lack of evidence tends to be the reason rape convictions are so low as to state only 10% of rape reports result in a felony conviction if 40 out of 100 are reported and 4 out of 100 result in a felony conviction. Does it mean those reports are false to the point of being a crime? No, just there wasn't enough evidence to result in a conviction.

[Chestaan]

Of course, as long as there is a way to determine which allegations are knowingly false and which are not.

[Geilinor]

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

Lack of evidence tends to be the reason rape convictions are so low as to state only 10% of rape reports result in a felony conviction if 40 out of 100 are reported and 4 out of 100 result in a felony conviction. Does it mean those reports are false to the point of being a crime? No, just there wasn't enough evidence to result in a conviction.

How would an allegation be proven false?

[Pandeeria]

Yes, of course.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It would be the same standard as proving it. Failure to prove isn't the same as proven false. And it wouldn't be for just rape. It would be for every crime.

In a court of law, if an allegation is unproven, it is false.

Formal Logic doesn't apply to a criminal court of law.

You're thinking of the Null Hypothesis in Formal Logic, but in a court of law you are trying to prove your case, if you cannot prove it you simply cannot prove there is enough evidence to support your allegations against the defendant, but it never is actually a false charge; it is just an unproven charge.

[Victorious Decepticons]

I think you're having a problem here. How can we prove something didn't happen?

A couple of ways would be to prove that the accused was nowhere near the accuser at the time of the supposed crime, or was only with the accuser while in a very public place, such as at a sports arena watching a game.

Or, to put it more academically, by proving that something else happened instead.

[The Serbian Empire]

Lack of evidence tends to be the reason rape convictions are so low as to state only 10% of rape reports result in a felony conviction if 40 out of 100 are reported and 4 out of 100 result in a felony conviction. Does it mean those reports are false to the point of being a crime? No, just there wasn't enough evidence to result in a conviction.

How would an allegation be proven false?

Sometimes, there's evidence proving consensual sex occurred and the victim regrets it to the point of claiming it was rape in hindsight. Others like said video in my OP have blatant crocodile tears and no evidence supporting it at all. It's probably as hard to prove it was intentionally false with malicious intent than to prove it was in fact rape.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You're wrong. I don't even know what else to say. That's actually just completely, ineffably wrong.

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

No, an allegation can only be found false if there is enough evidence in court to support the defendant's side that he/she/they never committed the crime in the first place.

Lack of evidence in a trial doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means you lack conclusive evidence.

[Shnercropolis]

When it's disproven.

Yes, but it's substantially harder to disprove that something happened (especially in general) than to prove that it happened.

That's not a problem.

[Geilinor]

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

No, an allegation can only be found false if there is enough evidence in court to support the defendant's side that he/she/they never committed the crime in the first place.

Lack of evidence in a trial doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means you lack conclusive evidence.

Courts only prove "not guilty", they don't prove that defendants have not committed a crime.

[Shnercropolis]

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

No, an allegation can only be found false if there is enough evidence in court to support the defendant's side that he/she/they never committed the crime in the first place.

It can be found false if there is insufficient evidence to prove it as true. Ever heard of "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

[The Serbian Empire]

An allegation could be found false due to confusion or lack of evidence.

No, an allegation can only be found false if there is enough evidence in court to support the defendant's side that he/she/they never committed the crime in the first place.

And not just inconclusive as to the outcome. It's more common to see inconclusive evidence leaving a seed of doubt allowing for the defendant to walk free than an outright situation of the defendant never committed the crime in the first place.

[Geilinor]

No, an allegation can only be found false if there is enough evidence in court to support the defendant's side that he/she/they never committed the crime in the first place.

It can be found false if there is insufficient evidence to prove it as true. Ever heard of "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

Yes, and my argument is that in such a case, no crime has necessarily been committed.

[Shnercropolis]

It can be found false if there is insufficient evidence to prove it as true. Ever heard of "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

Yes, and my argument is that in such a case, no crime has necessarily been committed.

Legally, yes.