A woman's rage

[Revoltingest]

Danish woman in jail for defamation.
Woman jailed for falsely accusing teenager of raping her in toilets | Metro News

IN SPITE of all those people who claim that women never lie about rape

No one here says that false accusations never happen.
The argument is over the frequency.

 

[ChristineM]

No one here says that false accusations never happen.
The argument is over the frequency.

The fbi claim about 8% of rape cases are proven to be false accusations. Other figures range between 2% and 10%.

The thing is with false accusations they tend to be high profile media frenzy cases which slews public awareness

 

[Revoltingest]

The fbi claim about 8% of rape cases are proven to be false accusations. Other figures range between 2% and 10%.

The thing is with false accusations they tend to be high profile media frenzy cases which slews public awareness

Highly publicized cases look relatively few in number to me....
Cases which come to mind right now....
Tawana Brawley
Duke lacrosse
Btw, even then, there is minimal or no punishment for the perp.
The Duke accuser is in prison, but not for what she did to those
guys....she's there for murdering someone.

About figures which deal only with what's "proven"....
Only a small percentage of rapes are proven (in criminal court) to have happened.
So we know that conviction frequency is only a lower limit for rape frequency.
Similarly, the small percentage of rape accusations proven false would also be a
lower limit. The actual frequencies would be hard, if not impossible, to determine.
Ref....
How Often Do Rape Charges Lead to Sex Crime Convictions?
More recently, RAINN estimates that out of every 1,000 incidents of rape, only seven perpetrators will be convicted of a felony. This is compared to 22 felony convictions per 1,000 robbery cases and 41 felony convictions for every 1,000 assaults. And it's not only under-reporting that leads to fewer convictions: of those crimes reported to police, just 2 percent of rape reports resulted in conviction, while 3.5 percent of reported robberies and 6.5 percent of reported assaults saw perpetrators convicted.

 

[ChristineM]

Highly publicized cases look relatively few in number to me....
Cases which come to mind right now....
Tawana Brawley
Duke lacrosse
Btw, even then, there is minimal or no punishment for the perp.
The Duke accuser is in prison, but not for what she did to those
guys....she's there for murdering someone.

About figures which deal only with what's "proven"....
Only a small percentage of rapes are proven (in criminal court) to have happened.
So we know that conviction frequency is only a lower limit for rape frequency.
Similarly, the small percentage of rape accusations proven false would also be a
lower limit. The actual frequencies would be hard, if not impossible, to determine.
Ref....
How Often Do Rape Charges Lead to Sex Crime Convictions?
More recently, RAINN estimates that out of every 1,000 incidents of rape, only seven perpetrators will be convicted of a felony. This is compared to 22 felony convictions per 1,000 robbery cases and 41 felony convictions for every 1,000 assaults. And it's not only under-reporting that leads to fewer convictions: of those crimes reported to police, just 2 percent of rape reports resulted in conviction, while 3.5 percent of reported robberies and 6.5 percent of reported assaults saw perpetrators convicted.

But you and joe public remembers them.

My figures of false accusation were those proven, compared to proven rape.

Yes rape is hard to prove without evidence, confession or witnesses. Confession is just about non existent, witnesses the same. Other evidence (usually DNA) needs to be taken immediately after the incident which for several reasons is problematical. You want a list of problems just ask a rape victim.

 

[Revoltingest]

But you and joe public remembers them.

My figures of false accusation were those proven, compared to proven rape.

Yes rape is hard to prove without evidence, confession or witnesses. Confession is just about non existent, witnesses the same. Other evidence (usually DNA) needs to be taken immediately after the incident which for several reasons is problematical. You want a list of problems just ask a rape victim.

Isn't it significant that actual rapes occur far more often than proven rapes?
FWIW, 80% of convictions are guilty pleas (from the link).

 

[ChristineM]

Isn't it significant that actual rapes occur far more often than proven rapes?
FWIW, 80% of convictions are guilty pleas (from the link).

Not significant in this context, which is proven compared to proven.

But yes, a high percentage of rape cases are never tried, on that track, consider unreported rapes to add to the mix.

Guilty pleas, yes, far better to accept the inevitable conclusion of the legal argument and evidence than be stuck with the extra time dished out for bring found guilty when pleading innocence.

Sometimes lawyers can give good advice.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not significant in this context, which is proven compared to proven.

With respect to the OP, the frequency of unproven assaults looks extremely significant.
Greatly more victims of sexual assault never see any satisfaction of a court conviction.
I argue that their dissatisfaction drives social phenomena more than the lesser number
of those proven.

 

[ChristineM]

With respect to the OP, the frequency of unproven assaults looks extremely significant.
Greatly more victims of sexual assault never see any satisfaction of a court conviction.
I argue that their dissatisfaction drives social phenomena more than the lesser number
of those proven.

It was not significant to my figures that compared like with like. I.e. proven in law. Adding unproven, untried etc makes for messy, misleading and inaccurate statistics

However i agree with regarding the high quantity of sexual assaults that never reach court, are thrown out of court if the accused can afford a good lawyer, or are never reported.

Sometime ago I read somewhere that estimates of between 50 and 80% of women have at sometime been sexually abused. I have been looking for the source but cant find it.

 

[Revoltingest]

It was not significant to my figures that compared like with like. I.e. proven in law. Adding unproven, untried etc makes for messy, misleading and inaccurate statistics

But I've noticed that many people are using "proven" statistics to paint the whole picture.
This is misleading, given that unproven stats can greatly exceed proven ones.
A complete picture requires both.

However i agree with regarding the high quantity of sexual assaults that never reach court, are thrown out of court if the accused can afford a good lawyer, or are never reported.

Sometime ago I read somewhere that estimates of between 50 and 80% of women have at sometime been sexually abused. I have been looking for the source but cant find it.

"Sexuallly abused" would need defining criteria.
Some might conflate violent rape with mere unwanted touching.

 

[Nous]

I don't personally see people doing things differently from a few years ago.

Actually just the other day I read or maybe heard on All Things Considered about some kind of recent effort to encourage young men to seek during foreplay verbalized consent for sex. One of the ways was for the guy to ask whether he should retrieve a condom now. Such a clever question serves two purposes. I thought all this sounded quite good, a good way for a man to conduct himself, especially for those who fear false accusations.

Of course, the most important strategy is for all parties to be clear about and respectful of the fact that no means no.

Consider the Ford v Kavanaugh context.
It's the court of public opinion.

If Kavanaugh wanted to be judged according to the standards of a criminal trial, he would have asked for the FBI to conduct a thorough investigation by which to at least assess his credibility. Instead he displayed all the traits of someone conscious of his guilt: He resisted and even exhibited hostility toward all efforts of investigation that could establish his credibility in his testimony, if he were credible, and he apparently lied under oath on a variety of issues, such as his teenage alcohol consumption, his college behavior, and the meaning of terms in his yearbook. He destroyed his own credibility. And further, Trump and the Republican majority on the Judiciary Committee prevented the public from having information that suggests his guilt of sexual assault, such his reported efforts to suppress statements by Ramirez before she made any public statements.

Btw, I was once falsely accused of peeping a female tenant. The allegation
evaporated because my accuser admitted to a friend that it was a joke.
The friend was my employee at the time. So it was defused.
Sure, sure, it wasn't nearly as serious as assault. But if you've never been
so accused, you might not appreciate the gravity of it, the potential for it to
become newsworthy if she persisted, enter the court of public opinion, &
how it can color one's perception of risk.

I remember you telling about this incident.

If this woman had taken this allegation to, say, the real estate board or some other agency, would you have refused to call for a thorough and proper investigation that could at least help to establish your credibility, as Kavanaugh refused to do during the Judiciary Committee hearing?

 

[Revoltingest]

Actually just the other day I read or maybe heard on All Things Considered about some kind of recent effort to encourage young men to seek during foreplay verbalized consent for sex. One of the ways was for the guy to ask whether he should retrieve a condom now. Such a clever question serves two purposes. I thought all this sounded quite good, a good way for a man to conduct himself, especially for those who fear false accusations.
Of course, the most important strategy is for all parties to be clear about and respectful of the fact that no means no.

I've said get in writing.
There should be a phone app for that.
The union could even be recorded for evidence.
But beware security flaws which might result in it being broadcast.

If Kavanaugh wanted to be judged according to the standards of a criminal trial, he would have asked for the FBI to conduct a thorough investigation by which to at least assess his credibility. Instead he displayed all the traits of someone conscious of his guilt: He resisted and even exhibited hostility toward all efforts of investigation that could establish his credibility in his testimony, if he were credible, and he apparently lied under oath on a variety of issues, such as his teenage alcohol consumption, his college behavior, and the meaning of terms in his yearbook. He destroyed his own credibility. And further, Trump and the Republican majority on the Judiciary Committee prevented the public from having information that suggests his guilt of sexual assault, such his reported efforts to suppress statements by Ramirez before she made any public statements.

I think it's above your & my pay grade to advise Kavanaugh
on how best to handle a primarily political controversy.
He had more knowledgeable advisors.

I remember you telling about this incident.
If this woman had taken this allegation to, say, the real estate board or some other agency, would you have refused to call for a thorough and proper investigation that could at least help to establish your credibility, as Kavanaugh refused to do during the Judiciary Committee hearing?

I don't remember your hypothetical.
But the real estate licensing board's involvement
would've been a legal proceeding of sorts.
They'd decide what they need, not I.
But I'm sure glad to have dodged that bullet.
Without her admission of lying, such an accusation
could've lingered on & on.

Let's not pursue it further in this thread, lest it derail.

 

[Nous]

Btw....
A pox on those who claimed certainty that either Ford or
Kavanaugh lied.

What other conclusion can one logically draw from his claims about the meaning of the terms in his yearbook ("Renate Alumnus," "devil's triangle")? I think he may have intentionally misrepresented the "drinking age" in Maryland and/or the legality of his teenage drinking.

 

[Revoltingest]

What other conclusion can one logically draw from his claims about the meaning of the terms in his yearbook ("Renate Alumnus," "devil's triangle")? I think he may have intentionally misrepresented the "drinking age" in Maryland and/the legality of his teenage drinking.

If you judge guilt from that, then this might help with the pox.

 

[Nous]

I don't remember your hypothetical.
But the real estate licensing board's involvement
would've been a legal proceeding of sorts.
They'd decide what they need, not I.
But I'm sure glad to have dodged that bullet.
Without her admission of lying, such an accusation
could've lingered on & on.

Let's not pursue it further in this thread, lest it derail.

I don't think it would derail for you to answer my question: would you have refused to encourage a thorough investigation that could help establish your credibility?

 

[Nous]

If you judge guilt from that, then this might help with the pox.

I'll ask again:

What other conclusion can one logically draw from his claims about the meaning of the terms in his yearbook ("Renate Alumnus," "devil's triangle")? I think he may have intentionally misrepresented the "drinking age" in Maryland and/or the legality of his teenage drinking.

 

[Revoltingest]

....I think he may have....

Well, there's a confidence inspiring accusation prefix.

I don't think it would derail for you to answer my question: would you have refused to encourage a thorough investigation that could help establish your credibility?

I'd have raised no objection to investigation.
But I wouldn't have encouraged it, especially if it were politically charged.
(Investigations can raise the profile.)

Now, please...let's be done with this before mods rap knuckles.
You can always use another thread.

 

[Nous]

Now, please...let's be done with this before mods rap knuckles.
You can always use another thread.

A person's credibility in his/her denial of allegations of sexual assault certainly seems to be relevant to the topic of this thread.

Obviously you can't tell us any logical conclusion one can draw from Kavanaugh's claims other than that he lied under oath about the meaning of the terms in his yearbook ("Renate Alumnus," "devil's triangle"). Right?

 

[ChristineM]

But I've noticed that many people are using "proven" statistics to paint the whole picture.
This is misleading, given that unproven stats can greatly exceed proven ones.
A complete picture requires both.

"Sexuallly abused" would need defining criteria.
Some might conflate violent rape with mere unwanted touching.

So what you are saying is unproven, untried stats should carry the same weigh as proven in law stats? I dont see the logic of that.

Sure unproven abuse should be acknowledged, even taken to court should evidence be sufficient.

But it will always remain that, for a variety of reasons, some cannot get justice.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

A pox on those who claimed certainty that either Ford or
Kavanaugh lied.

We know he did... the fact checking websites were all over his several falsehoods.

But the GOP simply didn't care, even though LYING to congress was their "justification" for impeaching Clinton.

Hypocrites? Yep-- the whole lot of'em.

 

[Revoltingest]

A person's credibility in his/her denial of allegations of sexual assault certainly seems to be relevant to the topic of this thread.

Obviously you can't tell us any logical conclusion one can draw from Kavanaugh's claims other than that he lied under oath about the meaning of the terms in his yearbook ("Renate Alumnus," "devil's triangle"). Right?

Logical conclusion:
You don't know.
You believe.