Should False Rape Allegations Be Charged?

[Isle of Kesha]

You know how rare false rape accusations are, right?

[The Serbian Empire]

Bigfoot probably finds his way into few governmental reports.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 60/760.pdf

Here's the thing that I find disturbing about the narrative surrounding "no-crime" or "unfounded" rates. The evidence is generally interpreted to suit bias. So feminists, in general, have interpreted the data thus:

• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are higher for rape than for other criminal offenses, it is taken as evidence that police do not take accusations of rape seriously.
• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are the same for rape as for other criminal offenses, it is taken as evidence that false accusations of rape are not a particular problem.

Of course:

• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are higher for rape than for other criminal offenses, it can just as easily be taken as evidence that false accusations of rape are a particular problem.
• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are the same for rape as for other criminal offenses, it can just as easily be taken as evidence that the police are treating accusations of rape more seriously than the typical criminal offense.

I suspect it's the lack of conclusive evidence that makes the no-crime or unfounded rates so much higher.

[Calorax]

Bigfoot probably finds his way into few governmental reports.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 60/760.pdf

Here's the thing that I find disturbing about the narrative surrounding "no-crime" or "unfounded" rates. The evidence is generally interpreted to suit bias. So feminists, in general, have interpreted the data thus:

• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are higher for rape than for other criminal offenses, it is taken as evidence that police do not take accusations of rape seriously.
• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are the same for rape as for other criminal offenses, it is taken as evidence that false accusations of rape are not a particular problem.

Of course:

• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are higher for rape than for other criminal offenses, it can just as easily be taken as evidence that false accusations of rape are a particular problem.
• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are the same for rape as for other criminal offenses, it can just as easily be taken as evidence that the police are treating accusations of rape more seriously than the typical criminal offense.

I think everyone agrees false accusations of rape are bad but (according to CPS in the UK anyway) very few rape allegations brought forward are contested which, when you consider how little rape cases actually make their way through court, they easily could be. In addition, according to the IPCC, crime statistics often fail to record certain sexual assault allegations which, when you consider FURTHER that the sexual assault statistics (especially in the UK) are already high, rape accusations are not taken seriously enough.

Also, whilst i consider myself a feminist, why did you feel the need to bring that in the conversation?

[Tahar Joblis]

You know how rare false rape accusations are, right?

I'm pretty sure I know at least as much about the frequency of false rape accusations as anyone reading this thread. I've read dozens of academic papers on the subject. I've combed through lots of surveys.

And ultimately, what I know is that we don't have a very good idea what percentage of accusations of rape are, in fact, false. It's almost certainly more than 20%. The percentage of maliciously false accusations is likely to be >10%. Call the 90% confidence interval on the probability a given rape accusation filed with the police is false about [0.2,0.6]. It's likely, but not certain, that a majority of accusations of rape made to the police are true. For example:

• 8-15% of convictions of rape and/or murder made before the introduction of DNA evidence were false convictions.
• After the introduction of DNA evidence, roughly 25% of the time that DNA evidence was available and conclusive, it excludes the primary suspect.

The main issue is that on the whole, a small percentage of rape accusations (in most studies 2-10%) can be demonstrated false, and a similarly small percentage of rape accusations can be demonstrated true. (Significantly higher figures show up occasionally.) Most accusations of rape can be proven neither true nor false.

Some researchers and rhetoricians are dishonest, and use the figure for provably false as the actual rate at which rape accusations are false. A very few have done the opposite (I can dig that one study back up) claiming that almost all accusations of rape are false.

Most likely, a large minority of accusations of rape are materially false, some through malice, some through mistaken identity, some through the normal [if disturbing] construction of false memories, some through outright delusion. If I were to guess on what percentage of people who get accused of rape are in fact innocent of it, I'd guess about 40%.

[The Serbian Empire]

You know how rare false rape accusations are, right?

I'm pretty sure I know at least as much about the frequency of false rape accusations as anyone reading this thread. I've read dozens of academic papers on the subject. I've combed through lots of surveys.

And ultimately, what I know is that we don't have a very good idea what percentage of accusations of rape are, in fact, false. It's almost certainly more than 20%. The percentage of maliciously false accusations is likely to be >10%. Call the 90% confidence interval on the probability a given rape accusation filed with the police is false about [0.2,0.6]. It's likely, but not certain, that a majority of accusations of rape made to the police are true. For example:

• 8-15% of convictions of rape and/or murder made before the introduction of DNA evidence were false convictions.
• After the introduction of DNA evidence, roughly 25% of the time that DNA evidence was available and conclusive, it excludes the primary suspect.

The main issue is that on the whole, a small percentage of rape accusations (in most studies 2-10%) can be demonstrated false, and a similarly small percentage of rape accusations can be demonstrated true. (Significantly higher figures show up occasionally.) Most accusations of rape can be proven neither true nor false.

Some researchers and rhetoricians are dishonest, and use the figure for provably false as the actual rate at which rape accusations are false. A very few have done the opposite (I can dig that one study back up) claiming that almost all accusations of rape are false.

Most likely, a large minority of accusations of rape are materially false, some through malice, some through mistaken identity, some through the normal [if disturbing] construction of false memories, some through outright delusion. If I were to guess on what percentage of people who get accused of rape are in fact innocent of it, I'd guess about 40%.

Thank you, you've done a better job than I could have done.

[Tahar Joblis]

Here's the thing that I find disturbing about the narrative surrounding "no-crime" or "unfounded" rates. The evidence is generally interpreted to suit bias. So feminists, in general, have interpreted the data thus:

• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are higher for rape than for other criminal offenses, it is taken as evidence that police do not take accusations of rape seriously.
• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are the same for rape as for other criminal offenses, it is taken as evidence that false accusations of rape are not a particular problem.

Of course:

• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are higher for rape than for other criminal offenses, it can just as easily be taken as evidence that false accusations of rape are a particular problem.
• When the "no-crime" rates (UK) or "unfounded" rates (US) are the same for rape as for other criminal offenses, it can just as easily be taken as evidence that the police are treating accusations of rape more seriously than the typical criminal offense.

I think everyone agrees false accusations of rape are bad but (according to CPS in the UK anyway) very few rape allegations brought forward are contested which, when you consider how little rape cases actually make their way through court, they easily could be.

I've seen the study discussed in that article before. What it's saying is not that the veracity of accusations is rarely contested, but rather, that very few people in the UK make prosecutions for false accusations. Which in turn has as much to do with politics and policy of police departments as anything else. When the police "no-crime" a report of rape, they're saying they think it's false, but they aren't required to prosecute the person making the report, and aren't likely to do so unless the case is particularly egregious. So you get many more "no-crimes" than accusations that are prosecuted as false accusations.

I think the low number of prosecutions for false accusations says more about the politics that make it hard to prosecute false accusers than anything else.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Because there becomes the problem of when exactly we know something is "false". That's certainly the biggest issue.

Also, this can be used by rapists to "silence" the victim. Already true rape victims have an uphill battle socially and emotionally to bring charges against the people that raped them. Compound this with the possibility they might go to jail for speaking up, and you ensure the silence of victims.

Great environment for rapists. Horrible one for anyone they rape. And in this type of environment, the higher classes will invariably start to prey on the lower classes, as repercussions to raping them will be virtually nil. And the ripple effect will be that any charges not proven will open up the victim to possible jail time. Was attacked? Well, if you cannot prove it, you go to jail for "lying". Corporation you work for got you hurt on the job and now denies it? Complain and if it cannot be proven you go to jail.


The list is potentially endless. This type of law will start a domino effect that will put us squarely in a feudalistic society, and I for one am against it. My personal solution to people who have their lives ruined due to allegations is if it is not proven, have the records sealed, that only law enforcement have access to, not have it on their record they were accused of a crime. And make it illegal for a possible employer to ask if you have ever been accused of a crime.

This type of law already exists, and it's called perjury, and it doesn't apply just to rape.

And no, your solution is shit because there would be nothing to discourage any attention whore or bored person from accusing people of rape.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

So victims of false rape allegations shouldn't receive justice.

Got it.

Hmmm....you suffer from selective blindness. Got it.
I specifically said I think if a person is accused of rape or any crime and found not guilty, they should have the records of the allegation and ensuing court case sealed and it should be illegal for potential employers to ask if you have been accused of a crime. To me, that is a better solution than telling a victim..."You better be able to prove you were raped or your going to jail." The nature of the crime makes it hard to prove definitively, as sex can be consensual and later claimed to be rape. So since it is hard to prove, by putting the burden of proof on the victim and also punishing them if it is not proven, you ensure the victims stay silent. Much like how the mafia in the 1920's silenced anyone who spoke up, and so victims and eyewitnesses stayed silent.

So let me ask, if you witnessed what you thought was a rape in progress (the victim crying and screaming no) and you called the police to report a crime in progress, and the victim refuses to press charges due to fear or shame, should you go to jail for a false accusation? If a child claims a person molested them, and it cannot be proven without a shadow of a doubt, should that kid get jail time?

"Those damn peasants should learn to not complain! They should feel honored I blessed them with my seed!"

Come back when you can articulate an educated opinion.

"You better be able to prove you were raped or your going to jail."

Because that's totally how it works, really.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

You know how rare false rape accusations are, right?

Umm, no. This is bullshit.

The statistics on false accusations of rape vary widely, from 2% to Eugene Kanin's (1994) figure of 41%, which derived from a case study of a police agency in a metropolitan city in the Midwest. John Bancroft states that a search of the literature on false rape reports reveals that Kanin's figure of 41% false rape reports is regarded as unusually high. FBI statistics for the annual rate of false reporting of forcible assault across the country have been a consistent 8%.[5] A study from the UK found that of the approximately 14,500 cases of rape reported in 2005/2006 9% were classified as false allegations.[6]

Unless you're gonna make the argument that just under a tenth is "rare".

[Viritica]

Hmmm....you suffer from selective blindness. Got it.
I specifically said I think if a person is accused of rape or any crime and found not guilty, they should have the records of the allegation and ensuing court case sealed and it should be illegal for potential employers to ask if you have been accused of a crime. To me, that is a better solution than telling a victim..."You better be able to prove you were raped or your going to jail." The nature of the crime makes it hard to prove definitively, as sex can be consensual and later claimed to be rape. So since it is hard to prove, by putting the burden of proof on the victim and also punishing them if it is not proven, you ensure the victims stay silent. Much like how the mafia in the 1920's silenced anyone who spoke up, and so victims and eyewitnesses stayed silent.

So let me ask, if you witnessed what you thought was a rape in progress (the victim crying and screaming no) and you called the police to report a crime in progress, and the victim refuses to press charges due to fear or shame, should you go to jail for a false accusation? If a child claims a person molested them, and it cannot be proven without a shadow of a doubt, should that kid get jail time?

"Those damn peasants should learn to not complain! They should feel honored I blessed them with my seed!"

Come back when you can articulate an educated opinion.

"You better be able to prove you were raped or your going to jail."

Because that's totally how it works, really.

Thank you.

[Kvatchdom]

If someone breaks the law, they're charged. Simple.

[Tekania]

"You better be able to prove you were raped or your going to jail."

Because that's totally how it works, really.

NO, it isn't. Once again, there is a wide difference between an unsubstantiated allegation and an actual false statement. Simply because something is unsubstantiated does not mean it is false. Additionally when charging on a case like that, much like with a rape allegation it would be the burden of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was false.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Because that's totally how it works, really.

NO, it isn't. Once again, there is a wide difference between an unsubstantiated allegation and an actual false statement. Simply because something is unsubstantiated does not mean it is false. Additionally when charging on a case like that, much like with a rape allegation it would be the burden of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was false.

sarcasm, dude.

[Viritica]

Because that's totally how it works, really.

NO, it isn't. Once again, there is a wide difference between an unsubstantiated allegation and an actual false statement. Simply because something is unsubstantiated does not mean it is false. Additionally when charging on a case like that, much like with a rape allegation it would be the burden of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was false.

You do realize he was being sarcastic... Right?

[Keyboard Warriors]

Yes, anyone who falsely accuses somebody of rape should be arrested and charged. It really does concern me that a female can ruin a males life by simply saying a few words.

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

I suppose when you can prove that it's false, likely through a different investigation and certainly through a different trial.

[The Serbian Empire]

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

I suppose when you can prove that it's false, likely through a different investigation and certainly through a different trial.

Indeed, that would be the case.

[Imperializt Russia]

You know how rare false rape accusations are, right?

Umm, no. This is bullshit.

Unless you're gonna make the argument that just under a tenth is "rare".

In fairness, only one in six rapes are even reported.
If we figure that one in ten of those are false, then it's even less.

[New Edom]

I've heard the argument that the alleged rarity of false rape accusations means it doesn't bear much consideration. I've also heard it said that it could diminish already existing reluctance to report the crime.

These two arguments pose problems. For the first, it presents the notion that if something is rare we shouldn't worry about it. By that logic, if rape were as rare as false rape accusations are said to be, we shouldn't be concerned about it. I disagree. Rarity doesn't mean something is not a concern. People are far less likely, for example, to be attacked by a bear than they are to get into a car accident, but we still take precautions when camping or hiking.

As for it diminishing the likelihood of people reporting rapes, I disagree with this as well. I think that strong emphasis on there being a lack of shame that society should put on someone reporting that someone raped them can and should be done and maintained, and safety of the reporting, emphasis on fair procedures of investigation and making sure counseling and general social support are offered can be done alongside making it clear that false accusations are unacceptable.

The unfortunate thing is that people do lie. They lie about things for many reasons--to avoid shame, for money, for revenge, out of a moment of anger.

[Nickel Empire]

You are stupid if you think no.

[Vassenor]

How do you differentiate "false accusation" from "accusation where the trial collapsed"?

People are hesitant enough about reporting rape just out of fear of being branded a false accuser. What would the threat of actual punishment accomplish?

[New Edom]

How do you differentiate "false accusation" from "accusation where the trial collapsed"?

People are hesitant enough about reporting rape just out of fear of being branded a false accuser. What would the threat of actual punishment accomplish?

A couple of examples come to mind.

In one case, a taxi driver was accused of rape by two young women who didn't want to pay for their cab ride. Fortunately for him, the cab had a camera in it that captured the whole thing from the time of their arrival to their accusation.

In another case, two high school girls accused a teacher of attempted rape and sexual harassment because he refused to change their grades. Eventually they confessed to this. By that time his reputation had been ruined and he changed cities and careers.

[Benuty]

I've heard the argument that the alleged rarity of false rape accusations means it doesn't bear much consideration. I've also heard it said that it could diminish already existing reluctance to report the crime.

These two arguments pose problems. For the first, it presents the notion that if something is rare we shouldn't worry about it. By that logic, if rape were as rare as false rape accusations are said to be, we shouldn't be concerned about it. I disagree. Rarity doesn't mean something is not a concern. People are far less likely, for example, to be attacked by a bear than they are to get into a car accident, but we still take precautions when camping or hiking.

As for it diminishing the likelihood of people reporting rapes, I disagree with this as well. I think that strong emphasis on there being a lack of shame that society should put on someone reporting that someone raped them can and should be done and maintained, and safety of the reporting, emphasis on fair procedures of investigation and making sure counseling and general social support are offered can be done alongside making it clear that false accusations are unacceptable.

The unfortunate thing is that people do lie. They lie about things for many reasons--to avoid shame, for money, for revenge, out of a moment of anger.

Gravedig much?

[Novorobo]

To add, I think the practice of not allowing the media to publish the names of the victims should be a policy that applies to the accused as well, I think the name of the accused should not be published unless they are convicted.

The majority of rape accusations don't lead to convictions, so I somehow doubt it's the false ones that are exceptionally likely to get that far. The real concern isn't the false rape allegations that actually lead to a conviction, the real concern is that they don't need to lead to a conviction to ruin someone's life.

[Hetmarch]

We should praise this womyn for being so strong and independent! If you think otherwise you are a misogynist.

[Anglo-California]

We should praise this womyn for being so strong and independent! If you think otherwise you are a misogynist.

muh soggy knee