Why are we not talking about false accusations of s3xual assault?

[Ginevra]

We had such a long and ultimately locked thread about this during the Kavanaugh hearings. Now that there are admissions of false accusations and the FBI report says no evidence to support claims, we haven’t mentioned this. I find this to be a huge step backward for victims of assault! “We” have been trying to urge people to believe claims of assault and some politically motivated people just made that less likely and gave weight to fears about false accusations corrupting reputations for political purposes. 

All found instances of false accusations and perjury should be punished to the full extent of the law. 

ETA: Sorry, senate report, not FBI. 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Quill

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Arctic Mama said:

I assume because a) it’s political if you hoot about how you knew a bunch of this was hooey all along and b) it’s political if you comment that it doesn’t matter because he’s a creep and deserved to be investigated and ripped apart anyway, even if three accusationa were perjured to one extent or another.

 

Just a guess.  But yeah, these need to be prosecuted hard to discourage future falsified statements and lying.  However I am glad they were investigated so that the truth could come out, whichever way that was.  

Agreed; I am in the interesting position of not really caring politically about Kavanaugh one way or the other, mostly because I was distracted by my emerging health issue as the hearing was happening. So politically, I don’t care about him. 

But if I were a victim of s3xual assault who was just weeks ago pleading for victims to be heard and believed, I would be ballistically furious over the discrediting this brings to my cause. 

[gardenmom5]

6 minutes ago, Quill said:

We had such a long and ultimately locked thread about this during the Kavanaugh hearings. Now that there are admissions of false accusations and the FBI report says no evidence to support claims, we haven’t mentioned this. I find this to be a huge step backward for victims of assault! “We” have been trying to urge people to believe claims of assault and some politically motivated people just made that less likely and gave weight to fears about false accusations corrupting reputations for political purposes. 

All found instances of false accusations and perjury should be punished to the full extent of the law. 

ETA: Sorry, senate report, not FBI. 

I am a woman who wants to see women who make false accusations prosecuted.  I have been assaulted - and I consider these women to make it harder for real victims.

I'm also a mother of sons - and a false accusation is something that can ruin their lives, not to mention the legal bills.

and if crystal magnum (the woman in the duke lacrosse case) had been prosecuted, she would have been in jail, instead of walking around and shot one boyfriend and stabbed another to death.

[zimom]

nm

<edit>

 

Edited December 11, 2018 by ZiMom

[gardenmom5]

there's irony in this case against four dentists charged with sexual assault being dropped in the middle of the kavanaugh hearings.

they had video evidence the woman was lying.

[gardenmom5]

5 minutes ago, ZiMom said:

Someone I know has recently been accused.  He is a coach but someone I do not consider a friend, just an acquaintance.  He has received a lifetime ban as a coach and my understanding is that it happened around 20 years ago.  The one thing that I keep asking is why now?   He isn't anyone famous.  I understand those that come forward now for a sports figure, political figure, actor, etc.  I was molested 35 years ago.  I totally understand why someone did not say anything when it happens.  But I have nothing to gain by now going to the authorities for this guy who is a nobody.   Sure if my molester was running for office or something else in the public eye I would likely stand up, but otherwise, it serves no purpose.  

Where I am struggling is that this is a he said/she said situation and he is receiving a lifetime ban.  Does this also mean he should not be allowed at sports activiies at all when his child competes???      What do we believe??   There was no legal investigation, just processed through SafeSport who sided with the accuser.   

Thoughts????  

 

I was molested as a very young child - details of which I never forgot. (I was even taken to the pediatrician around that time with an infection, but it was attributed to my bubble bath.)  I think it was a teen just . . being a s3xually curious teen (more serious than that) - but I don't think he grew up to be a pedophile.  if I thought he was, yes I would report it for the paper trail.  even this many years later.

My niece was repeatedly abused by her cousin.  he was only four years older than her, so the court tossed their criminal complaint. . . he's in prison as a pedophile.

 

eta: I do think we need to go back to due process and evidence.  he said/she said is getting way too much support from some "advocacy groups" that are soliciting "stories" online - and naming names.   I also think university campuses have no business investigating s3xual assault - refer them to the police.

Edited November 5, 2018 by gardenmom5

[Carol in Cal.]

One of the things about this that bugs me is how little coverage of the reversal is in the media, compared with the coverage of the accusations.  There was a pretty good op ed about that recently.  http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/31/why-did-media-and-democrats-abandon-their-investigation-into-brett-kavanaugh/?fbclid=IwAR2img9QrCAm0YCLhaoL51fkrFzrMelAobYK4KR2CryaN7IxZR8d9vdmzCc

[Lecka]

I have only heard the beginnings of the news, it seems like there is more news that is going to come out.  That is why I haven't discussed it, I guess.

As far as news I am surprised isn't more discussed, I am shocked about this:  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/world/asia/taliban-attack-raziq-alliance.html  It blows my mind!  My husband and I are both shocked!  There was also an early report saying that the American General was shot in the chest but was wearing body armor (this is not substantiated and not mentioned in this later report).  

[goldberry]

I think false accusations shown to be deliberate and malicious should absolutely be prosecuted. I would hate to see that open a door, however, to prosecuting women deemed just to "not have enough proof". That's not the same.

[Ravin]

More cameras in situations where 

10 minutes ago, ZiMom said:

Someone I know has recently been accused.  He is a coach but someone I do not consider a friend, just an acquaintance.  He has received a lifetime ban as a coach and my understanding is that it happened around 20 years ago.  The one thing that I keep asking is why now?   He isn't anyone famous.  I understand those that come forward now for a sports figure, political figure, actor, etc.  I was molested 35 years ago.  I totally understand why someone did not say anything when it happens.  But I have nothing to gain by now going to the authorities for this guy who is a nobody.   Sure if my molester was running for office or something else in the public eye I would likely stand up, but otherwise, it serves no purpose.  

Where I am struggling is that this is a he said/she said situation and he is receiving a lifetime ban.  Does this also mean he should not be allowed at sports activiies at all when his child competes???      What do we believe??   There was no legal investigation, just processed through SafeSport who sided with the accuser.   

Am I making myself clear?

Thoughts????  

 

 

This kind of thing is troubling to me. There should be some kind of procedure for due process in such private organizational decisions, absent adjudicated evidence such as a past criminal conviction. I don't think it should take the same standard of proof as a criminal conviction, but there should still be some opportunity to answer, some kind of arbitration or hearing process, and a clear standard for what actions warrant either a temporary or a permanent a ban from the organization, and in most cases it should be focused on the person's recent conduct and especially conduct in the context of the organization.  It should definitely take more than an unsubstantiatable claim of conduct decades in the past.

[Carol in Cal.]

PS  The Google story about Mr. Rubin is one of the most appalling things I have ever read.  What are we coming to?  And that was deemed credible by the company.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Carol in Cal.

[gardenmom5]

the irony about the thing with the coach being banned - and larry nasser is given unfettered access and the victims told they weren't really victims by higher up in the organization.   same with sandusky.

 

I think cases like nasser or sandusky make people afraid and they over react.  like schools and their no weapon policy punishing a 6 yo boy for using his finger as a gun.

Edited November 5, 2018 by gardenmom5

[SKL]

Yes.  It should say something that people who have been assaulted (myself included) believe that false accusations must be prosecuted.  Of course the prosecutor would have the burden of proof just like in any other case.  And it is probably pretty hard to prove someone made up a story like that.  But when it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then it should be punished in a real way.

In a way it's similar to the self-defense cases where one person says "I shot him but he's really the bad guy."  While it can be hard or even impossible to prove one way or the other, I don't think most people oppose investigating and trying the case.

False accusation is such a serious crime, it merited a whole commandment in the Judeo-Christian religions (and other religions clearly forbid it as well).  People who say they just don't care because women are always victims lose my respect right there.

[gardenmom5]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

Yes.  It should say something that people who have been assaulted (myself included) believe that false accusations must be prosecuted.  Of course the prosecutor would have the burden of proof just like in any other case.  And it is probably pretty hard to prove someone made up a story like that.  But when it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then it should be punished in a real way.

In a way it's similar to the self-defense cases where one person says "I shot him but he's really the bad guy."  While it can be hard or even impossible to prove one way or the other, I don't think most people oppose investigating and trying the case.

False accusation is such a serious crime, it merited a whole commandment in the Judeo-Christian religions (and other religions clearly forbid it as well).  People who say they just don't care because women are always victims lose my respect right there.

 

there's video posted by an uber driver of a woman who is making all sorts of demands and if he doens't do what she wants, how she's going to go to the police and say he raped her . . . . she's sitting in the back seat fully clothed - he's driving the car.   don't know if she actually did it, but no man should ever be alone with her.

[gardenmom5]

5 minutes ago, texasmom33 said:

Yes. This 1000x over. They're academics and bureaucrats. Not law enforcement. Let the police do their job and then your code of ethics can step in afterward. 

more than that - they take in money from mommies and daddies who are entrusting their precious to them.  it is in the universities interests to have a low number of assaults and to cover them up so parents will continue to send their kids to their school.

 

eta; one thing that angers me, is the "believe all women crowd' who seem to have zero problem with the damage caused to peoples lives by fake accusations.   (and even then, if they like they public figure accused - they will attack the accuser no matter how credible her physical evidence.)

Edited November 5, 2018 by gardenmom5

[catz]

I haven't read all the comments, but he was confirmed so it's a non issue.  If his confirmation would have been delayed, we would be talking about it more.  It is in the news, I'm not sure what else is expected.  Making up stories is horrible, no argument with me there.  I'm not against prosecuting in cases like that.  However, very few cases of sexual assault are prosecuted so I have a problem with that as well.

[Ravin]

4 minutes ago, FuzzyCatz said:

I haven't read all the comments, but he was confirmed so it's a non issue.  If his confirmation would have been delayed, we would be talking about it more.  It is in the news, I'm not sure what else is expected.  Making up stories is horrible, no argument with me there.  I'm not against prosecuting in cases like that.  However, very few cases of sexual assault are prosecuted so I have a problem with that as well.

 

I for one don't think it's a non-issue. When you also have stuff like this going on: http://fortune.com/2018/10/30/conspiracy-theorists-try-to-discredit-reporters-on-mueller-accusation/

That is to say, when it comes to Justice Kavenaugh, yes, that's over and done with, but there are still people out there trying to manipulate the #metoo movement into political advantage, by spreading false accusations either for their direct impact, or in order to be able to turn around and blame "the media" if journalists take such bait, and in either case, it can be used to undermine genuine reports and the calls for genuine social change around this issue. The world will be a better place if #metoo leads to a sea change in how we handle sexual offenses (in both the criminal and civil contexts), and probably a worse one if it turns into nothing more than the latest modern witch hunt. 

[Sneezyone]

False claims are wrong, period. I've no problem prosecuting people who willfully and maliciously make false claims. One of the false allegations mentioned re: Kavanaugh (the CA lady) wasn't even on my radar during the hearings so I'm not sure how much that influenced things and there was certainly plenty of skepticism of Mr. Avenatti's claimant. I do think one has to be careful in promoting the idea that the false claims of one or more women invalidate those other other women and exonerate someone, even with respect to the same individual. Andrea Constand, for ex, had a credible and legitimate claim even as other hangers on may have put forth falsehoods against the same perp.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sneezyone

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, FuzzyCatz said:

I haven't read all the comments, but he was confirmed so it's a non issue.  If his confirmation would have been delayed, we would be talking about it more.  It is in the news, I'm not sure what else is expected.  Making up stories is horrible, no argument with me there.  I'm not against prosecuting in cases like that.  However, very few cases of sexual assault are prosecuted so I have a problem with that as well.

I do not think it is a non-issue since he was confirmed. His reputation was severely corrupted! His years and years of service as a justice were not even glanced at as having any bearing on his present-day character. 

It is in the news, yes, but where is the big story? This is barely getting a mention, even as CNN just reported on how Kavanaugh is not doing the traditional walk of the stairs due to security threats. Doesn’t that seem like a good time for CNN to say, “...though we now know there were false accusations against Kavanaugh...”? 

Count me among those who is the mother of two sons who find it VERY CONCERNING that false accusations can totally wreck a person’s (let’s face it, a man’s) reputation. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Ravin said:

 

I for one don't think it's a non-issue. When you also have stuff like this going on: http://fortune.com/2018/10/30/conspiracy-theorists-try-to-discredit-reporters-on-mueller-accusation/

That is to say, when it comes to Justice Kavenaugh, yes, that's over and done with, but there are still people out there trying to manipulate the #metoo movement into political advantage, by spreading false accusations either for their direct impact, or in order to be able to turn around and blame "the media" if journalists take such bait, and in either case, it can be used to undermine genuine reports and the calls for genuine social change around this issue. The world will be a better place if #metoo leads to a sea change in how we handle sexual offenses (in both the criminal and civil contexts), and probably a worse one if it turns into nothing more than the latest modern witch hunt. 

EXACTLY

[Sneezyone]

Just now, Quill said:

I do not think it is a non-issue since he was confirmed. His reputation was severely corrupted! His years and years of service as a justice were not even glanced at as having any bearing on his present-day character. 

It is in the news, yes, but where is the big story? This is barely getting a mention, even as CNN just reported on how Kavanaugh is not doing the traditional walk of the stairs due to security threats. Doesn’t that seem like a good time for CNN to say, “...though we now know there were false accusations against Kavanaugh...”? 

Count me among those who is the mother of two sons who find it VERY CONCERNING that false accusations can totally wreck a person’s (let’s face it, a man’s) reputation. 

 

The false claims are a story. They are no longer *THE* story because he's no longer up for a promotion. He has not, however, been exonerated and it's a mistake to suggest he has been.

[umsami]

I think because inspite of some well-publicized false accusations, they are still *exceedingly* rare.  (As are false accusations of child abuse.)

97% of rapists never do a day of jail in life.  At this point, it's a false equivalency IMHO.

The larger, and more prevalent problem is that most sexual abusers/harassers get away with it.  If they're in positions of power, they're even more likely to.   Proving harassment is very difficult.  Proving assault, especially when you are talking about assault that took place years ago.... perhaps in a different climate (there was no date rape back in the early 80s) is very rare.

When Nicole Brown went public about her DV, it was at a time when domestic violence was still seen as a private issue between a husband and a wife.

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by umsami

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

False claims are wrong, period. I've no problem prosecuting people who willfully and maliciously make false claims. One of the false allegations mentioned re: Kavanaugh (the CA lady) wasn't even on my radar during the hearings so I'm not sure how much that influenced things and there was certainly plenty of skepticism of Mr. Avenatti's claimant. I do think one has to be careful in promoting the idea that the false claims of one or more women invalidate those other other women and exonerate someone, even with respect to the same individual. Andrea Constand, for ex, had a credible and legitimate claim even as other hangers on may have put forth falsehoods against the same perp.

The false accusations of rape or attempted rape in the car (I forget which) boosted the claim of Dr. Ford in order to frame it as “Kavanaugh is a rapist,” instead of drunken high schoolers getting out of control. That was one point argued on this board. So the false claims were meant to give weight to Dr. ford’s claim (of which I have no opinion as to veracity). So while, no, one person’s claims being admitted as false does not mean all claims are false, it goes the other way, too. The piled-on false claims were used to beef up the accusation by Dr. Ford; it is the reason Ford’s claim was framed as “attempted rape” (purely my opinion, not citing any fact in that instance). 

[ktgrok]

For in general? Same reason I don't often discuss false claims of arson or muggings. Do you often discuss those false crime reports? If not, why false rape but not those?

In the Kavenaugh case, I honestly haven't seen the news. After the Kavenaugh thing, and seeing people say terrible, hurtful things, I stopped listening to the news, and unfollowed everyone on facebook, even my own mother. And stopped going to the political club here. So, I honestly have not seen anything, but will check your link. 

Edited after reading link  - None of the hearing at the time had to do with that woman's claims, so her lying has nothing really to with how I felt about it or still feel about it. 

As for the FBI report - no evidence that it happened is NOT the same thing as evidence that it didn't happen. MOST rapes have no evidence that they happened. I have no evidence mine happend, doesn't make me a liar. 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Ktgrok

[umsami]

1 minute ago, happysmileylady said:

Because I want to clarify, when you are using the term "false accusations" are you specifically referring to accusations where the accuser is deliberately lying?  

Yes.

As for Dr. Ford, she said she was 100% sure that she knew who it was.  Similarly, the woman in law school he exposed himself to, not only was 100% sure, but also multiple other classmates verified her story.

[Sneezyone]

12 minutes ago, Quill said:

The false accusations of rape or attempted rape in the car (I forget which) boosted the claim of Dr. Ford in order to frame it as “Kavanaugh is a rapist,” instead of drunken high schoolers getting out of control. That was one point argued on this board. So the false claims were meant to give weight to Dr. ford’s claim (of which I have no opinion as to veracity). So while, no, one person’s claims being admitted as false does not mean all claims are false, it goes the other way, too. The piled-on false claims were used to beef up the accusation by Dr. Ford; it is the reason Ford’s claim was framed as “attempted rape” (purely my opinion, not citing any fact in that instance). 

 

The VAST majority of people that I know never saw Kavanaugh's issues as 'he's a rapist' although I know that extreme view was commonly promoted and repeated to cast doubt on the far more credible claims of Ms. Blasey Ford. Those false allegations were never part of the Congressional testimony or record and, quite frankly, weren't discussed with any sense that they were credible by the left-leaning TV programs that I watch. By "goes the other way too" I assume you mean that those rape allegations don't make Ms. Blasey Ford's allegations true? If so, we agree. I based my belief in her testimony on those who were also in that social circle at the time and came forward to say they witnessed heavy drinking and forward behavior on Kavanaugh's part.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sneezyone

[Bluegoat]

1 hour ago, Quill said:

We had such a long and ultimately locked thread about this during the Kavanaugh hearings. Now that there are admissions of false accusations and the FBI report says no evidence to support claims, we haven’t mentioned this. I find this to be a huge step backward for victims of assault! “We” have been trying to urge people to believe claims of assault and some politically motivated people just made that less likely and gave weight to fears about false accusations corrupting reputations for political purposes. 

All found instances of false accusations and perjury should be punished to the full extent of the law. 

ETA: Sorry, senate report, not FBI. 

 

I think people are very uncomfortable with the possibility of this.  For some the idea that such things are very rare isn't just a factual statement - it's almost ideological, as if it could never happen that people would do such a thing, and if it became less true or untrue it would really shake their sense of how things work. 

But here is the thing to me with false accusations - the real concern about this has never been whether it is a super-common thing to happen at this time.  It's that if it becomes an easy way to damage people, with no or few repercussions for the person making the false accusation, it will become more common, a tool for unethical people to use to assert power.  

That's bad for the person falsely accused, but really it is worse for the justice system as a whole and undermines attempts to prevent or prosecute all the real examples of sexual assault.  It doesn't have to be hugely common even then, IMO, it just has to be widely seen to happen.  You can see similar dynamics play out with other instances where the law becomes even a little corrupted.

The possibility of making damaging media accusations with no need to have them stand legally is probably the worst case scenario.

[SanDiegoMom]

6 minutes ago, Quill said:

The false accusations of rape or attempted rape in the car (I forget which) boosted the claim of Dr. Ford in order to frame it as “Kavanaugh is a rapist,” instead of drunken high schoolers getting out of control. That was one point argued on this board. So the false claims were meant to give weight to Dr. ford’s claim (of which I have no opinion as to veracity). So while, no, one person’s claims being admitted as false does not mean all claims are false, it goes the other way, too. The piled-on false claims were used to beef up the accusation by Dr. Ford; it is the reason Ford’s claim was framed as “attempted rape” (purely my opinion, not citing any fact in that instance). 

During the hearings and news surrounding it I never heard of this accusation -- I don't think it had come out? Or maybe it already didn't have enough substance so it wasn't mentioned? I don't see it at all as having given weight to Dr. Ford's claim.  

[ktgrok]

8 minutes ago, Quill said:

The false accusations of rape or attempted rape in the car (I forget which) boosted the claim of Dr. Ford in order to frame it as “Kavanaugh is a rapist,” instead of drunken high schoolers getting out of control. That was one point argued on this board. So the false claims were meant to give weight to Dr. ford’s claim (of which I have no opinion as to veracity). So while, no, one person’s claims being admitted as false does not mean all claims are false, it goes the other way, too. The piled-on false claims were used to beef up the accusation by Dr. Ford; it is the reason Ford’s claim was framed as “attempted rape” (purely my opinion, not citing any fact in that instance). 

I don't even remember hearing about that, at all, and I followed it all fairly closely. But the only story I was ever commenting on was Dr. Ford as it was the only one where we got to see actual testimony, etc. I pretty much ignored claims by anyone else because they were not fleshed out at the time. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

For in general? Same reason I don't often discuss false claims of arson or muggings. Do you often discuss those false crime reports? If not, why false rape but not those?

In the Kavenaugh case, I honestly haven't seen the news. After the Kavenaugh thing, and seeing people say terrible, hurtful things, I stopped listening to the news, and unfollowed everyone on facebook, even my own mother. And stopped going to the political club here. So, I honestly have not seen anything, but will check your link. 

I know that you, in particular, took a break from it all, since I am (or was?) your friend on FB and I saw you. 

However, that is part of what I mean - people who took a break, like you, are not even hearing about the false accusations. IMO, it is being downplayed by certain news outlets in the hopes that it will just pass on by without attention. 

 

[ktgrok]

Just now, Quill said:

I know that you, in particular, took a break from it all, since I am (or was?) your friend on FB and I saw you. 

However, that is part of what I mean - people who took a break, like you, are not even hearing about the false accusations. IMO, it is being downplayed by certain news outlets in the hopes that it will just pass on by without attention. 

 

Well, even when I was paying attention I never heard about her accusations in the first place. Seems they were not taken credibly in the first place, if I never heard about them really? In other words, her initial accusation passed on by without much attention, same as it being held false. 

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Well, even when I was paying attention I never heard about her accusations in the first place. Seems they were not taken credibly in the first place, if I never heard about them really? In other words, her initial accusation passed on by without much attention, same as it being held false. 

 

Yep. I never heard of that lady because her initial allegations were treated with heavy skepticism by the evil media and were not widely reported.

[Pawz4me]

25 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

The false claims are a story. They are no longer *THE* story because he's no longer up for a promotion. He has not, however, been exonerated and it's a mistake to suggest he has been.

This.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Well, even when I was paying attention I never heard about her accusations in the first place. Seems they were not taken credibly in the first place, if I never heard about them really? In other words, her initial accusation passed on by without much attention, same as it being held false. 

Well, I’m not interested in pointing fingers, but I thought I recalled you in particular in the other thread, when I suggested that the words “attempted rape” were framing to make it a bigger deal, said that one accusor said he did actually rape (or attempt to rape, I forget) her in a car. 

If that is not how it went down, I recant. As I said I have been minimally involved from the beginning because of my health preoccupation. 

[Sneezyone]

I think this is a big reflection of the different types of media we consume. If you've routinely watched broadcasts or read things that promoted the 'rape' allegation as credible and outrageous then you may have a more extreme reaction to the apparent lack of coverage the retraction/false allegation investigation is getting. We're not all watching programs that gave air time to those incredible allegations tho. There would be little/no need for a retraction from media outlets that never aired those claims in the first place.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, texasmom33 said:

The Avital Ronnell and Asia Argento accusations have been interesting to me to see how things are being handle and presented when prominent women are the ones accused. 

The wagons certainly circled around Ronnell, while Argento was hung out to dry by her "sister in the movement" Rose McGowen, who later than backpedalled a slight bit under threat of lawsuit. 

A lot of MeToo in general  reminds me of the daycare accusations that started coming out in the 1990's. Does anyone else remember those? When it seemed as if scores of daycare owners and workers were being accused of molestation by children recovering memories during therapy? And you had no clue who to believe, because you know it happens, but then again how do you know? 

 

ETA: And for anyone not familiar with the Ronnell situation, here's a decent summary link. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/nyregion/sexual-harassment-nyu-female-professor.html

 

Oh yes, I remember the day care thing well, except I put it earlier than that because one of my best friends family was torn apart over this. (Although I do not think that was false; my friend was also abused by her step-father, the accused day care proprietor.) 

[Bluegoat]

22 minutes ago, umsami said:

I think because inspire of some well-publicized false accusations, they are still *exceedingly* rare.  (As are false accusations of child abuse.)

97% of rapists never do a day of jail in life.  At this point, it's a false equivalency IMHO.

The larger, and more prevalent problem is that most sexual abusers/harassers get away with it.  If they're in positions of power, they're even more likely to.   Proving harassment is very difficult.  Proving assault, especially when you are talking about assault that took place years ago.... perhaps in a different climate (there was no date rape back in the early 80s) is very rare.

When Nicole Brown went public about her DV, it was at a time when domestic violence was still seen as a private issue between a husband and a wife.

 

 

I don't really see what equivalency has to do with it.  Rape and sexual assault cases are difficult because the circumstances involved don't lend themselves to being prosecuted, and because people often feel very private or even embarrassed about sexual issues.  I am not convinced that even in a perfectly functioning system, rape accusations would be easy to prosecute.

False accusations are just a different kind of crime, with different motives.  The problem they create however has real systemic implications for the justice system, and these crimes can also potentially be very influenced by policy decisions around assault prosecutions.  Those are the things that make them seem important, even when the frequency is low.

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I think this is a big reflection of the different types of media we consume. If you've routinely watched broadcasts or read things that promoted the 'rape' allegation as credible and outrageous then you may have a more extreme reaction to the apparent lack of coverage the retraction/false allegation investigation is getting. We're not all watching programs that gave air time to those incredible allegations tho. There would be little/no need for a retraction from media outlets that never aired those claims in the first place.

My reaction, which is strong, to the false allegations and the senate report, is not based on any media outlet. It is based entirely on the discussion we had on this forum. 

I read the senate report thing on a friend’s FB post. 

[zimom]

5 hours ago, Ravin said:

More cameras in situations where 

 

This kind of thing is troubling to me. There should be some kind of procedure for due process in such private organizational decisions, absent adjudicated evidence such as a past criminal conviction. I don't think it should take the same standard of proof as a criminal conviction, but there should still be some opportunity to answer, some kind of arbitration or hearing process, and a clear standard for what actions warrant either a temporary or a permanent a ban from the organization, and in most cases it should be focused on the person's recent conduct and especially conduct in the context of the organization.  It should definitely take more than an unsubstantiatable claim of conduct decades in the past.

 

Thanks Ravin.  Yes, this.  This is what I have come to learn and why I am struggling so much about what has happened with this man I know.  Again, I consider him more of an acquaintance than a friend.  

<edit>

 Again, he isn't some big wig coach.  I'm trying to keep as much identifiable information out as possible and will remove the rest later.   

Edited November 5, 2018 by ZiMom

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, Quill said:

My reaction, which is strong, to the false allegations and the senate report, is not based on any media outlet. It is based entirely on the discussion we had on this forum. 

I read the senate report thing on a friend’s FB post. 

 

This forum is also a type of media. Social media is, also, media. Our consumption habits do color our views.

[KathyBC]

5 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

Our consumption habits do color our views.

So very, very true.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

This forum is also a type of media. Social media is, also, media. Our consumption habits do color our views.

I understand that, but what I was saying is my reaction is not based on CNN or Fox or whichever news outlet reported with their own slant. The discussion on this board was about assault and accusations and the potential for false allegations. 

[Terabith]

34 minutes ago, Quill said:

The false accusations of rape or attempted rape in the car (I forget which) boosted the claim of Dr. Ford in order to frame it as “Kavanaugh is a rapist,” instead of drunken high schoolers getting out of control. That was one point argued on this board. So the false claims were meant to give weight to Dr. ford’s claim (of which I have no opinion as to veracity). So while, no, one person’s claims being admitted as false does not mean all claims are false, it goes the other way, too. The piled-on false claims were used to beef up the accusation by Dr. Ford; it is the reason Ford’s claim was framed as “attempted rape” (purely my opinion, not citing any fact in that instance). 

Dr. Ford's claim was framed as attempted rape because that is what she described.  That term was used the same day her account came out in the Washington Post, before any other claims came forward.  

[DesertBlossom]

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/briannaheldt/2018/10/10/parents-sue-after-son-is-falsely-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-mean-girls-at-high-school-n2527344

I saw this reported on several news outlets a couple weeks ago. Multiple girls (who were friends) accused a classmate of sexual assualt. When there are multiple victims or witnesses, it gives credence to the accusations and points to a pattern of behavior. This classmate faced serious repercussions, including bullying at school. It turns out, the girls just didn't like him and wanted to ruin his life. 

The criticism is that the girls who later confessed to making up the accusations did not face any consequences for it. Not only does this make it harder for other sexual assault victims be believed, what kind of precedent does this set when women can falsely accuse men with no consequences when the truth finally comes out?

[Bluegoat]

Just now, DesertBlossom said:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/briannaheldt/2018/10/10/parents-sue-after-son-is-falsely-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-mean-girls-at-high-school-n2527344

I saw this reported on several news outlets a couple weeks ago. Multiple girls (who were friends) accused a classmate of sexual assualt. When there are multiple victims or witnesses, it gives credence to the accusations and points to a pattern of behavior. This classmate faced serious repercussions, including bullying at school. It turns out, the girls just didn't like him and wanted to ruin his life. 

The criticism is that the girls who later confessed to making up the accusations did not face any consequences for it. Not only does this make it harder for other sexual assault victims be believed, what kind of precedent does this set when women can falsely accuse men with no consequences when the truth finally comes out?

 

A close family member of mine made a false accusation against someone - an adult - when she was in jr high.  She took it back as soon as it started to be taken to the next level by the adults around, though in a very blasé way as if it was all no big deal.  It could have been really terrible for everyone - and now as an adult, she even finds it a little mystifying - what the heck was she thinking or hoping would happen?    

[Sneezyone]

19 minutes ago, Quill said:

I understand that, but what I was saying is my reaction is not based on CNN or Fox or whichever news outlet reported with their own slant. The discussion on this board was about assault and accusations and the potential for false allegations. 

 

Where do you suppose boardies, FB friends, etc. are getting their information? These platforms don't exist in a vacuum. You started the thread specifically referencing the Kavanaugh allegations. Yes, the discussion has broadened a bit. I'm just pointing out that the level of anger over false allegations is largely driven by whether or not one believes (or has been told) that they're a significant problem as compared to incidents of sexual assault and that is, I think, largely driven by our media consumption habits.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sneezyone

[ktgrok]

59 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

One thing I didn't realize until the other thread is that mistaken identity is all kinds of mixed up in the idea of false accusations.  I really think that needs to be viewed as something separate.  People often come down so hard on the idea that a victim could possibly mistaken, when in reality the human memory is notoriously faulty, and malleable.  Misidentification is a major issue in the issue of innocent people actually being convicted and sent to jail.  I think we need to start recognizing that trusting the victim but verifying her story doesn't mean not believing her, rather it is simply a recognition that our minds and memories are not always as accurate as we think they are.  

Not only that, but if a woman accuses someone of rape, and it turns out that something DID happen but according to the rules in that particular jurisdiction it is considered sexaul assault or some other crime, not rape, than it gets filed as a false accusation many times. When really, it was a matter of terminology (which varies from place to place) but it comes across as a woman lying and making stuff up. 

35 minutes ago, Quill said:

Well, I’m not interested in pointing fingers, but I thought I recalled you in particular in the other thread, when I suggested that the words “attempted rape” were framing to make it a bigger deal, said that one accusor said he did actually rape (or attempt to rape, I forget) her in a car. 

If that is not how it went down, I recant. As I said I have been minimally involved from the beginning because of my health preoccupation. 

I really don't think so? I coul be wrong, but I really don't think I'd heard of that particular woman before, although I think I did mention some of the other incidents. 

18 minutes ago, Terabith said:

Dr. Ford's claim was framed as attempted rape because that is what she described.  That term was used the same day her account came out in the Washington Post, before any other claims came forward.  

Yes, it fit the account she gave. Allegedly, of course. 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

Where do you suppose boardies, FB friends, etc. are getting their information? These platforms don't exist in a vacuum. You started the thread specifically referencing the Kavanaugh allegations. Yes, the discussion has broadened a bit. I'm just pointing out that the level of anger over false allegations is largely driven by whether or not one believes (or has been told) that they're a significant problem as compared to incidents of sexual assault and that is, I think, largely driven by our media consumption habits.

*sigh* I’m simply saying this board is not a news outlet with its own agenda and is not a group of people all promoting a unified view of events. 

In no way am I trying to distance from the Kavanaugh accusation specifically, though I want and intend to talk about false accusation more broadly. 

I feel like there’s some sort of misunderstanding going on here but I’m not sure what it is. 

I find it extremely worrisome that this false accusation, the Kavanaugh one, is not being broadcast widely (at least not yet) because statistics are not static and, if the plea for believing victims is being made - a good thing - we must acknowledge how wrongly that can go when claims are made falsly. We cannot rest on some past statistic saying false accusations are rare because we are trying to change the variable by saying we need to believe accusations, at least to the point of investigation and hearing. By changing the variable of who gets believed, we change the probability of who might accuse. 

[Carol in Cal.]

1 hour ago, umsami said:

 

When Nicole Brown went public about her DV, it was at a time when domestic violence was still seen as a private issue between a husband and a wife.

 

No, it was already illegal by then.

[ktgrok]

10 minutes ago, texasmom33 said:

I do wonder if conflating many things considered as "sexual harassment" into the "sexual assault" category do harm in these cases. 

I also often ponder, and have no firm ideas either way,  if there comes a time where is a victim who has not reported an assault case that he or she forfeits a right to come forward at a later point with accusations against an accuser in a public manner. I'm not talking statute of limitations, legally. I'm talking moral implications. At what point, or is there a point, where you might have to realize that coming forward publicly with no witnesses, no corroborating evidence, no physical evidence, no nothing, might do more harm than good for the present day victims because at that point it is simply down to he said, she said, and however can garner the most public support? I am sure that is an unpopular question. But I don't know that it's an unfair question. 

 

But that is the case even when people come forward only days later, not just decades later. It isn't like guys go around raping women in front of witnesses. As for evidence, if he used a condome or she showered, none. Heck, even if they find semen inside her he can claim it was consensual. 

The ugly truth is that it is ALWAYS he said, she said. We just don't want to face that. We want to pretend that if the victime does 'the right thing" the bad guy will be punished. And that isn't true. At all. As women, there is nearly nothing we can do to prove it if we are raped . And that's terrifying. So we go on pretending.