Re: Bad idea: Punishing false rape accusers

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:38:39 -0800, "Sir Jessy of Anti"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
>"MMET572" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "Sir Jessy of Anti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > "Rauni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:16:39 GMT, "MMET572" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >"Magic Nose Goblin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dee Fish out of Korea) wrote in message
>> > > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Magic Nose Goblin) wrote in message
>> > > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > > >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kate Orman) wrote in message
>> > > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > > >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rich) wrote in message
>> > > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > > >> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kate Orman) wrote in message
>> > > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > If it's not against the law to make a false report to the
>> > > >police, then
>> > > >> > > > > > how are these charges being laid?
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > When such charges are laid, they are for crimes against the
>> > state
>> > > >> > > > > (just ask Laurie). Specifically things like perjury, or in
>> the
>> > > >> > > > > UK either 'wasting police time' or 'perverting the course
>of
>> > > >justice'.
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > The accused man is not in any way a part of the
>proceedings,
>> > much
>> > > >> > > > > less as the victim of a crime, and the charges are for a
>> > > >misdemeanor,
>> > > >> > > > > not a felony.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > I see what you (and Daran) are getting at - false
>> *accusations*,
>> > in
>> > > >> > > > which a specific person is maliciously identified as the
>> > > >perpetrator,
>> > > >> > > > as opposed to false *allegations*, in which a specific
>> > perpetrator
>> > > >may
>> > > >> > > > or may not be identified (as in the cases posted). It's an
>> > extremely
>> > > >> > > > important distinction, and I ought to have spotted it myself.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > I suspect whether making a false report is a misdemeanour or
>a
>> > > >felony
>> > > >> > > > varies, perhaps from state to state; the liars in Kanin's
>study
>> > were
>> > > >> > > > told they would be charged with a felony. It'd be interesting
>> to
>> > > >learn
>> > > >> > > > whether maliciously accusing someone of (for example) theft
>> > attracts
>> > > >> > > > criminal charges.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > While I'm far from an expert on law, I'd have little
>objection
>> to
>> > a
>> > > >> > > > specific crime of false accusation, as long as rape was not
>the
>> > only
>> > > >> > > > crime it applied to. Not only is a false accusation a vicious
>> > > >> > > > injustice, but it hands woman-haters and rapists more
>> ammunition
>> > > >> > > > for their quest to smear all rape victims as "lying bitches".
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > However, I've seen no good evidence that false reports are a
>> > large
>> > > >> > > > proportion of reports, and false accusations are only a
>> > proportion
>> > > >> > > > of false reports. When women do lie, it's not usually out of
>> > malice:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > According to a FEMALE spokeswoman for the NYC DA's office,
>> > > >> > > 40% of their rape accusations are subsequently recanted.
>> > > >> > > and
>> > > >> > > 40% of their rape accusations are DISPROVEN upon investigation.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > No mention was made of how many recantings take place after
>> > > >> > > the police disprove the accusation.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > And of course, there will always be the false accusation which
>> > > >> > > is neither recanted, nor disproven...which means there are EVEN
>> > > >> > > MORE false accusations then what these figures show.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > So, at least in NYC, the DA's statistics show that AT LEAST
>> > > >> > > 40% to 80% of all rape accusations are false False FALSE!
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Not necessarily. Rape accusations may be recanted, but still
>arise
>> > > >> > from a bona-fide rape.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> If the police have any evidence that the rape DID take place, then
>> > > >> the DA's will prosecute despite her, and put her on the stand as a
>> > > >> hostile witness.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > The same as domestic violence accusations may
>> > > >> > be recanted, but still arise from a real situation of abuse.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Let's not forget that over 50% of domestic abuse is committed by
>> women.
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >Do tell. And are the 50% of these "abuse victims" who happen to be
>male
>> > > >hospitalized or embalmed in the same proportions as the 50% who
>happen
>> to
>> > be
>> > > >women?
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > Typical soc.men twisting of the facts, data collected from the
>> > > National Crime Victimization Survey (Bureau of Justice Statistics)
>> > > consistently find that no matter what the rate of violence or who
>> > > initiates the violence, women are 7 to 10 times more likely to be
>> > > injured in acts of intimate violence than are men.
>> >
>> > Still peddling the same ol' shtick here, eh Rauni?
>> >
>> > Men are bigger and stronger than women for the most part.  It stands to
>> > reason
>> > when you start a fight with a Mac truck, you lose, and lose badly.  I've
>> > asked you
>> > before to give us some insight into what this might mean other than the
>> > obvious.
>> > But no, you just keep throwing this out there - kind of like the soc.men
>> you
>> > accuse of doing
>> > the exact same thing.  Women are hurt more!  This proves everything!
>Well
>> > in fact it
>> > does little to prove who initiated what, and it simply reaffirms the
>> > obvious:  most men are physically
>> > stronger than most women.
>> >
>>
>> Okay - using your analogy.
>>
>> You have a Mac truck and  a subcompact. Which would you think would be
>more
>> risky and potentially damaging to use if you planned to weave in and out
>of
>> traffic?
>>
>> Rules of the road (as in all things) apply equally, but practical
>allowance
>> is made for capability (ya don't see too many Coopers at weigh in
>stations -
>> even though highway weight codes technically apply to them as well).
>
>No, but occationally I see one of the fly in front of a Mac, slam on the
>brakes, and nearly cause an
>accident.  You see, the Mac truck being built as it is - can't stop on a
>dime.
>
>>
>> If you're driving a Mac, its a given that you're expected to keep that
>fact
>> in mind. If you're capable of putting another person in the hospital with
>> your greater upper body strength keep that in mind as well.
>
>I see your point, but like I said, there are many variables to consider.
>My point was that Rauni's trotting out of that statistic does little to show
>the interpersonal

I trotted out the *actual* statistic because of the sloppy research
reported on this newsgroup. The 50% of domestic abuse is committed by
women that the men on this newsgroup keeps reporting is just as
misleading.

>dynamics that exist in violent relationships, or the rate of DV comitted
>and/or initiated by both men and women.
>On top of this, men are socially conditioned to 'never hit a woman', whereas
>the reverse does not apply.
>Add to this the hundreds of empirical studies that have shown violence to be
>intiated at relatively equal
>rates in intimate relationships, and you have a different picture than what
>Rauni would like to present.

I didn't present *anything* I quoted the *actual* statistic no more or
less. You chose to give that number all sorts of emotional
implications.

More of the soc.men's victim mentality
>
>For instance, were the wounds inflicted in self-defense?   If a woman
>punches a man in the face, and he strikes her back,
>as a generalization - who do you think will be hurt more?  Are these violent
>acts somehow 'less' or 'more' than equal to one another?
>
>You raise an interesting question though.  If men are required to restrain
>themselves in violent altercations with women,
>than what are women doing in the military?  I can assure you the enemy makes
>no such fru-fru distinctions.  This is an example of claiming victim status
>where suitable, and equality when convienent.

Pot kettle black
>
>I'm not a violent person, so given pretty much any amount of agrivation,
>it would still take something akin to flight or fight for me to even use
>violence in self-defense.    That makes
>this topic somewhat more philosphical for me, i.e. I have no vested
>interest.
>Personally, I think to _some_ degree these types of people seek each other
>out.  Not in every case, or maybe
>not even in the majority of cases, but nevertheless certainly in some cases
>there is a fucked up dynamic going on here.
>
>
>
>>
>> DFooK
>> > >
>> > > "The pure and simple truth is rarely pure
>> > >  and never simple." -- Oscar Wilde
>> >
>> > BTW:  Why don't you actually READ your .sig.  Maybe then we wouldn't be
>> > having this conversation.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>



Life is not the way it's supposed to be.  It's the way it is.  The way you
cope with it is what makes the difference.

Virginia Satir