Rebecca Palmer – 5 years for false rape allegation

Rebecca Palmer – 5 years for false rape allegation

69
SHARE
Photo from the BBC / Wiltshire Police

Introduction and facts

Cases where false allegations of rape (or other sexual offending) are prosecuted are very rare, but they always attract the attention of the media.

Recently, the case of Rebecca Palmer was in the press. On 19th October 2017, Ms Palmer was sentenced to 5 years having been convicted of four counts of perverting the course of justice.

It was also reported that she had pleaded guilty to three further counts of perverting, as well as 5 counts under the malicious communications act.

In Court it was said that Ms Palmer had “ indulged in consensual sexual activity” with the victim, 22, and launched a “malicious campaign” after he rejected her“.

 

Comment

Our first reaction on hearing the sentence of 5 years was that that was very high for this offence.

As a vague guide, the starting point for this offence goes up to about 2-3 years (see here for one example, and some links to others).

This sentence is well above that, and more akin to what the victim would have got had he been convicted of rape. It may be that there is more to it than was reported – it is not clear what the 3 other counts of perverting the course of justice were and what they related to, as well as the malicious communications (although it appears that those may have related to harassment type offences against the victim).

Even with that, the sentence is a high one. It would be useful to know more about the facts, as it would probably be the case that that will resolve it. As it is, we will have to wait for the Court of Appeal if they decide to hear it, to say whether it was merited on its facts, an indication of higher sentences for such offences, or a sentence that was (perhaps too) harsh.

SHARE

69 COMMENTS

  1. The sentence does seem on the long side, although it may be that there were other facts that weren’t reported.

    I think that the incidence of false accusations is a lot higher than is generally reported though (although I appreciate that there are different definitions of ‘false accusation’ and indeed of what constitutes a ‘sexual offence’).

  2. I’d like to see the evidence for what constitutes false accusations. Too many rapists and sexual harassers wondering around out there getting away with it who are the first to scream false accusation because they’re not about to admit that they are actually a rapist.

    • Its not so much the evidence for what constitutes false accusations as the definition of false accusation. Estimates of false accusations vary enormously, from around 2% to around 90%, and much depends on how ‘false accusation’ is defined. Around 5-10% of allegations are false in that the accused is able to prove that they are false, but the majority of allegations are unsubstantiated and many of these include some element of embellishment, uncertainty or deliberately biased way of describing events. If these are included then the amount of false allegations is high, much higher than commonly reported. The solution is not to blindly believe people making accusations, or to blindly believe those accused. Any complaints need to be looked at fairly.

      There are offenders, and not just sexual offenders, who ‘get away with it’, but that is unfortunately a function of having a system of presumed innocence. There are also innocent people who have been accused and convicted of sexual offences.

      Sexual harassment isn’t the same as rape although clearly both are wrong.

      • In cases of people who rape and assault – Ian Huntley was accused numerous times (10) of rape/assault including under aged girls and was never charged presumably all of these count as false accusations, same with Alexander Pacteau acquitted of rape by a majority verdict of 10 idiots to two normal people. His acquittal counts as a false accusation, Kirk Reid was acquitted of sexual assault prior to being convicted of assaulting up to 70+ women. Each each these men all pleaded not guilty thus falsely claiming to be falsely accused and getting away with it. You’re right the figure for false accusations may well be considerably higher but in the majority of cases it’s unproven guilt rather than being falsely accused and you bet these guys embellished their innocence and smeared their victims. False accusations eh.

        • I regard as a false accusation a case in which the complainant has been convicted of (or has pleaded to) a charge of perverting the course of justice or perjury – and only such a case. Not, therefore, Huntley or Pacteau or Reid.

          But where are you getting the figures from in Pacteau? There are fifteen on a jury in Scotland for serious criminal cases.

          • Yes, these cases are unlikely to be regarded as ‘false accusations’ for most statistical purposes (that said, I’m not aware of the details behind each of the individual instances where decisions were made not to charge or where there were acquittals). I’d define false accusation slightly wider than you, Andrew, to include for example cases where the accuser’s story is embellished to the point where there is reasonable doubt as to its accuracy, or where there is significant omission or ambiguity.

          • “I regard as a false accusation a case in which the complainant has been convicted of (or has pleaded to) a charge of perverting the course of justice or perjury”

            That’s a reasonable line to take if you are going to regard accusations as false only if you have compelling evidence that they are false. However, by the same token, you would have to regard an accusation as true only if the accused has been convicted of (or has pleaded to) a serious sexual offence. That would mean that the vast majority of allegations made to the police (probably more than 90% of them) should be regarded, even after investigation, as neither true nor false. I am not suggesting that is an unreasonable position, just that it the one that follows from the sceptical position that you have adopted (and with which I would agree).

    • The examples you’ve chosen are of three men who are guilty of terrible crimes, which I suspect is why you chose them as examples. Most statistics, though, wouldn’t classify the crimes they were acquitted of or weren’t tried for as false accusations. False accusations arent’ just limited to sex crimes, they cover all types of crimes. However tempting it is given what these men did, its important not to just assume that because they were guilty of terrible crimes, that they must be guilty of anything else they’re accused of. I understand the thinking behind this, but its important to look at each claim individually in order to establish guilt, otherwise miscarriages of justice can occur, such as guilty parties getting away with crimes which are assumed to be the work of serial offenders. Kirk Reid wasn’t actually convicted of 70 assaults, although he was convicted of a large number of assaults, although the police believe he may have committed up to 70. Its not helpful to accuse jury members of being ‘idiots’ or not ‘normal’ because they didn’t reach the verdict you think they ought to have – there is no reason to think that they didn’t reach what they felt to be the correct verdict based on what they knew at the time.

      I’m not sure that in cases where people are found not guilty at trial that for most of them its ‘unproven guilt’, although I’m sure some of them are, but I think a lot of them (and some people found guilty) are falsely accused.

      You do believe the woman in the above case made a false accusation though, or do you think the man in that case was ’embellishing his innocence’?

      • Interesting if not telling that you don’t count raping, assaulting and sexually abusing women, then calling them liars – false accusers, making them stand up in a court of law and face cross examination while details of your previous history are withheld from jury as terrible crimes. They are. Everything else you’ve said is deflection, background noise.

        • I didn’t say I thought that so it can’t be ‘interesting if not telling’. If someone is accused of something and they believe that they are innocent, then they are entitled to present their defence. If someone deliberately puts accusers or witnesses through a trial when they know they are guilty as charges, then that is wrong. If someone falsely accuses someone when they know them to be innocent and puts them through a trial then that is wrong. This article is about false accusations, so I asked if you believe that the woman in this case made a false accusation, its not deflection or background noise.

    • Hear the cognitive dissonance so loud it’s enough make your blood run cold.

      ‘I would never make an attempt to sexually assault this woman,’ he said. ‘I believe rape is the lowest of the low. I’d rather be charged with murder than attempted rape.’ Alexander Pacteau on trial for rape.

      Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3194080/Loner-Alexander-Pacteau-previously-tried-attempted-rape-sexual-assault-2013-walked-free-court.html#ixzz4wml07rHD

      • Maybe, and if he was guilty, he obviously shouldn’t have said that, but I doubt anyone would say otherwise. Did he subsequently admit his guilt to the charge?

  3. Messrs Huntley, Reid, Pacteau were just unlucky that nearly every woman, and in the case of Huntley girls, who encountered them accused them of rape and or sexual assault. It’s just as well there is the law of innocent unless proven guilty to protect them from these women and girls the false accusers. Also Worboys the black cab driver same.

    In fact the law worked so successfully to protect these ‘innocent’ men that it allowed them to proliferate and make victims of hundreds of women and in the case of Huntley it meant he went unchallenged into a role in a school allowing him free access to underage girls, one would have thought he’d have steered clear of them given their propensity to falsely accuse him of child abuse and assault.

    Why doesn’t this matter to anyone and why the focus on the rights of the perpetrator(s), gender, man-made laws designed by men to protect themselves and other men from the darkness in their souls knowing that the victims are predominantly women and children and that it will always be someone else’s child or just some woman so what does it matter. And that is the misogynistic patriarchy at work.

    • Nice oxymoron at the end of the diatribe. I don’t believe Shakespeare used that one.

      Meanwhile the subject matter, calumniator Rebecca Palmer, appears to have been forsaken.

    • Accused and perpetrator aren’t the same thing. Its partly because of people who believe that it is that the presumption of innocence is so important. I don’t think its true that the presumptions of innocence and the laws of the country were designed by men to protect men from ‘the darkness in their souls’.

      • The presumption of innocence served Ian Huntley, Kirk Reid, John Worboys, Harbinder Khatkar, Alexander Pacteau, Brian Witty ad nauseaum rather well. If that’s not protection by the law what is it. It was not illegal for men to rape their wives within living memory. The law is exactly there to protect men from the darkness of their souls. Admit it. Then you can move on to “not all men”

        • The presumption of innocence is there in part to protect people from false accusations, because there are people who can’t accept that some accusations are false. You are only picking examples of men who have been acquitted or suspected of crimes and have gone on to be convicted of crimes, but there are innocent people (men and women) who have been cleared at trial or who have had false accusation made against them which haven’t made it to trial. The majority of them haven’t subsequently been convicted of crimes similar to the ones they were cleared of.

          I don’t think the law is there to protect men from ‘the darkness of their souls’. Are you saying that you think all men have ‘darkness in their souls’?

  4. Four men alone account for falsely accusing more than one hundred women and girls of being false accusers. What it also says is the actual figures for the victims of guilty rapists who were acquitted or never charged must run into the hundreds of thousands.

    • Accusations (false or otherwise) are generally understood to be made by the accuser. Statements (false or otherwise) made by the accused in defence are not generally understood to be included as false accusations. While I have a huge amount of sympathy for anyone, male or female, who has been the victim of any crime where the guilty party gets away with it, the presumption of innocence is essential, partly because of people who make false accusations such as Rebecca Palmer. Do you acknowledge that she made a false accusation?

  5. I know that Karen Buckley, Holly Wells, Jessica Chapman would still be alive today if men had not set up systems to protect men who rape and sexually abuse women.

    In answer to your question about Rebecca Palmer I have not seen any information about this case in order to come to a conclusion I’d like to know more about the bloke and his past history and previous allegations of rape by other women the sort of stuff that’s kept hidden.

    • I don’t agree that the legal system has been set up to protect men who rape and abuse women.

      Thanks for answering my question. I disagree though – it was Rebecca Palmer who was on trial for the false accusation she made in this case so I don’t see the relevance of the man’s history. It would be interesting to know if Rebecca Palmer’s defence team thought that this would have been relevant.

      The problem is that even where a false accusation has been proven in court, there are people who will not accept it. That is part of the reason why the presumption of innocence is so important. It is terrible when people, male or female, get away with crimes and then go on to commit other crimes, but presuming that anyone who is accused of anything must be guilty is not the solution.

      • You don’t see the relevance of the man’s history in the case of Rebecca Palmer. Similarly I’ve never seen the relevance of a woman’s past history in rape trials and yet it’s allowed in court while his, the man on trial for rape, is kept from the jury. That’s an unjust and misogynistic system at work before your own eyes. Admit it.

        If I were on a jury where a man who was 6ft 4″ told me he fell over on top of a woman who’d mysteriously slapped him across the face for no reason and in that fall his belt had somehow become unbuckled, not broken, but unbuckled itself and he’d hidden behind a van when this same women starting screaming for help, so loudly it drew people out of their homes, only to be found when police searched the area and found him cowering, then too right I would not accept a not guilty verdict as being equal to a false accusation no matter what.

        I hear the denials on the mouths of rapists and sex offenders too often and watch them get away with it most of the time to retain a healthy scepticism about the lies men tell to get themselves off the hook.

        • I think information on the history of the accuser showed be allowed if it is relevant to the particular case, whether the accuser and accused are male of female. I wouldn’t support ‘fishing expeditions’ into the history of the accuser or accused, be they male or female. I don’t support the disclosure of previous convictions, and certainly not previous allegations, about accusers or accused, male or female, as I believe they can prejudice the jury. Previous convictions are taken into account in sentencing. I don’t agree that the current system is misogynistic, although I believe that some verdicts are unjust.

          I’m not aware of the case you refer to so I can’t comment on it, all I would say is that , not specifically concerning your example but in general, anyone on a jury should be impartial. Not all not guilty verdicts mean that an accusation was false, but some do, and this article was about a woman who was found guilty of making a false accusation. I think false allegations discourage people from speaking out in the long run, and I think that being in denial of false allegations is ultimately harmful to the cause of those who have true allegations and wish to be believed.

  6. Another example of our heavy handed aspergic anachronistic law system. A vulnerable women goes to the police not quite understanding the difference between “consensual but brutalising sex” and rape and ends doing 2 half years in clink. Too many vulnerable people continue to get abused by our navel gazing aspergic law system. All this means is normal people have a fear and distrust of the British Judiciary and will learn to avoid it like the plague. Makes you wonder who was representing young miss Palmer, they didn’t do a very good job, did they even turn up?

    • I didn’t get that from the link in the article above – are you saying that she didn’t make a false accusation, but that she was confused about what happened and that she was prosecuted because of that? Was that reported elsewhere?

    • Thanks, interesting article detailing the gradual erosion of the presumption of innocence, but I’m not sure how it applies to the case in point.

      • Perhaps it highlights how the victim of the case in point could have easily ended up (in denial) at Albany prison due to the calumny of the lovely Miss Palmer and the “we WILL believe you” campaigns of certain police forces ?

    • Yes, falsely accused of something that he is not guilty of.

      Moreover, should the defendant’s legal team pass on any fees collected to the judge for doing their job for them ?

  7. He was not falsely accused of anything he was completely guilty and walked away scot free anyway. That is the biggest scandal here that it happens time and time again. And that you or anyone would seek to in anyway condone it is reprehensible.

    With these men who will insist on filming up women’s skirts (I mean FFS) all it would take is one judge to have the balls to stand up and wham them into jail with an eyewateringly long sentence to send the message out to the others.

    • Your example wasn’t a false accusation, more a case of the CPS charging him with things different to what he had been accused of. The false accusations which should be called out are those such as Rebecca Palmer’s – they’re the ones which reduce the credibility of other accusers. I don’t support mob rule or knee-jerk sentencing though.

      • It’s exactly what the “false accusations” chorus like to do take any acquittal (but only for cases of rape and sexual assault) and conflate it with being falsely accused this is how it works and therefore whilst you might wish to explain away my example it stands exacly as I intended and further condoning what this pervent did is reprehensible.

        • But it wasn’t a false accusation, it was a case where the CPS charged him with things different to what he had been accused of. Those are the facts of the matter, not a condonement or otherwise. Probably not a good idea to try and downplay the prevalence of false accusations by making a false accusation yourself! False accusations such as those made by Rebecca Palmer are the ones which should be called out when they occur – they take away credibility from genuine accusers.

          • Some people like you want to define false accusations only in rape and sexual offences and only when a man is the accused. Nowhere else is there concern expressed about false accusations with any other crime and in no other crime does the existence of false accusations take credibility away from ‘genuine’ accusers. Furthermore the fact that men routinely get up in the dock and falsely claim to be falsely accused of rape and sexual offences should actually strengthen the case for ‘genuine’ accusers but it doesn’t and that is the inequitable and misogynistic system at work for it’s own ends.

            A man who films up the skirts of women and girls should be charged and convicted for it not allowed a get out of jail free card and there should be no admiration or reverence for a criminal justice system which allows it.

  8. He was accused of (presumably) acting in contravention of sections 67 and 68. Assuming he acted on legal advice, he pleaded guilty to an offence he was not guilty of.

    Every court I have been in has a note on the wall instructing the accused not to plead guilty to something they have not done and I do not condone that they do either.

    I know little about the accused in this case or his actions. What actions I have been informed of, I do not condone any.

    It seems I may be a victim of a false accusation. #ME TOO

    To satisfy my curiosity, what offence are you going to charge the filmmaker with prior to the eye wateringly long incarceration?

    • If there is no suitable offence in UK law for this sort of thing which there probably won’t be because the law is made by men to protect men. I’d line him up and allow each of his victims, then their mothers and then the no doubt absent fathers once they can be located to kick him as hard as possible in the nuts every day for six months to a year with time off for good behaviour. It’s called restorative justice.

      • I don’t agree that the law was made up to protect men. I don’t agree with your proposed punishment. I don’t agree that the all fathers in the case you mention are no doubt absent or difficult to locate, and I have seen no evidence to suggest that this is the case.

  9. “Some people like you want to define false accusations only in rape and sexual offences and only when a man is the accused. Nowhere else is there concern expressed about false accusations with any other crime and in no other crime does the existence of false accusations take credibility away from ‘genuine’ accusers. Furthermore the fact that men routinely get up in the dock and falsely claim to be falsely accused of rape and sexual offences should actually strengthen the case for ‘genuine’ accusers but it doesn’t and that is the inequitable and misogynistic system at work for it’s own ends.

    A man who films up the skirts of women and girls should be charged and convicted for it not allowed a get out of jail free card and there should be no admiration or reverence for a criminal justice system which allows it.”

    And another false accusation! I actually believe that false accusations can and do occur in virtually all crimes, where both men and women are accused. People defending themselves against an accusation, even if that defence involves lying, is not generally regarded as a ‘false accusation’ as it is a defence rather than an accusation.

    I don’t agree that the court process is ‘the inequitable and misogynistic process at work for its own ends’.

    Failure to condemn false accusations such as the one made by Rebecca Palmer and attempts to steer the discussion around false accusations towards cases where men have been accused only reduce the credibility of other accusers, some of whom may be making genuine accusations. Unfortunately there is no getting away from this.

  10. If you stand up in court and lie by denying you have raped or sexually assaulted a woman that you have actually raped or sexually assaulted you are falsely accusing her of making a false accusation. Put as many words around it as you like Anon that’s the fact. You appear to suggest there is a hierarchy of false accusations there isn’t.

    And for the sake of clarity, once again, I couldn’t care less whether you agree with me or not.

    • But statements made in a defence, even if they are untrue, are not what is generally understood by the term ‘false allegation’. Nor do they excuse failure to call out false accusations such as those made by Rebecca Palmer, which weaken the credibility of other accusers.

      • Then how come the denials of the guilty rapists don’t strengthen the credibility of other accusers or weaken the case of other rapists. Men accused of rape get treated as individuals whereas women complaining of rape are treated as a homogeneous group whatever one rape complainant says or does reflects on the entire gender.

        And in the case of Rebecca Palmer I would still want to know whether the alleged rapist had ever been accused of rape or sexual assault before, what the circumstances where and how many times he’d been accused if it was more than once. It is relevant. That’s what juries need to know they can still make a decision but an informed decision.

        • To a large extent it is due to the presumption of innocence. Having said that, if someone is accused of a crime, lies in their defence and gets away with it, and is then found guilty of a similar crime, people who don’t believe in the presumption of innocence will attempt to use that to say that anyone who is accused of anything must be guilty. So people who are guilty but lie and say they are not can weaken the case of other accuseds. I don’t agree that accused men are treated as individuals and accusing women treated as homogenous groups – the focus is on accused/accuser, not female/male. But the specific case here is about a female who was found guilty of making false accusations.

          In the case here any previous unsubstantiated accusations against her victim quite properly shouldn’t be taken into account – they are not relevant to deciding on guilt in this particular case. If previous unsubstantiated allegations were allowed as evidence, this would play into the hands of jury members who are in denial about the existence or extent of false accusations, and would lead not so much to informed decisions, but ones made on the basis of cognitive dissonance or unconscious bias.

          • “Fuck me harder” was recently used in an appeal case by the defence team of a former rapist, where it was alleged that because his victim has allegedly used these words when having sex with another man on a different occasion that therefore she could not have been raped.

            Therefore as the previous sexual conduct rape victims, who are not on trial (but who are in everything but name), is deemed suitable for the jury to hear then similarly the previous sexual conduct including unproven allegations of rape against someone accused of rape, and who is on trial, is equally as relevant. Take Ian Huntley as a good example someone should have been joining up the dots he should not have be allowed anywhere near any female and certainly not children. This is man made laws working to protect guilty men in action.

            Any man with a propensity for a cycle of rape and denial who declares himself innocent of one rape in a sea of many overwhelming convictions and allegations can hardly blame anyone other than himself if no-one believes him and justice is well served with him behind bars. And innocent unless proven guilty is a legal concept it doesn’t mean the accused is innocent in reality, and as has been proved time and time again it is this attitude that has led to the entirely avoid deaths, rapes and sexual assault of women and girls.

            So back to the case of Rebecca Palmer yes the jury should know whether the man she is alleged to have falsely accused of raping her has ever been accused before how often and what were the circumstances, he’s not on trial just like the victim in the Ched Evans case wasn’t on trial. Juries need to know the facts to prevent the travesty where the hunter gets to don the role of the preyed upon.

  11. The presumption of innocence isn’t just a legal concept, it is a fundamental human right. As part of the presumption of innocence, if there is evidence in the past conduct of the accuser that is relevant to the case being tried, and that evidence casts doubt on the accusation, then it is right that the evidence should be heard.

    During the trial process, there are alleged victims, not victims, so there is no victim to go on trial. I don’t agree that the alleged victim is on trial. I don’t agree that the presumption of innocence is ‘man made laws working to protect guilty men.’

    As mentioned, in Rebecca Palmer’s case it would not be appropriate to disclose unsubstantiated allegations. If previous unsubstantiated allegations were allowed as evidence, this would play into the hands of jury members who are in denial about the existence or extent of false accusations, and would lead not so much to informed decisions, but ones made on the basis of cognitive dissonance or unconscious bias. Unsubstantiated allegations and accusations are not facts.

    While I genuinely sympathise with accusers who have seen a guilty party walk away, the way to improve the system is not to erode the presumption of innocence. Instead, it is to call out false accusations, such as Rebecca Palmer’s when they occur. Failure to do so reduces the credibility of other accusers.

  12. Cognitive dissonance suddenly you are all over it and trying to manufacture equivalence with rapists in denial that they are rapists. Pathetic.

    Ian Huntley, Alexander Pacteau, John Worboys, Kirk Reid ad nausea (sic) should have been locked up the first time around but were protected by law made by men to protect men and at the detriment of victims.

    A victim of a crime is a victim of a crime whether or not there is a guilty verdict. If someone steals a car, commits murder and is never caught there is not an alleged victim there is a victim. If a crime cannot be proved to a criminal standard that does not make it any less of a crime and does not negate that it it happened, something men appear to struggle with but only in cases of rape and sexual assault.

    Men who lie and get away with rape do not weaken the credibility of other men accused of rape and neither do their lies strengthen the case of women who are victims of rape. That’s misogyny in action.

    And yes men accused of rape should have it known to the jury, to the court to all their friends and family how many other times they’ve been accused. Same when there is an allegation that there is a false accusation let’s see how many other times this poor man has been falsely accused surely that can only strengthen the jury’s sympathies towards him. Think of ‘poor’ Ian Huntley wrongly accused on ten separate occasions. It’s important that a jury know this innocent little lamb was frequently accused of raping underaged girls. Misogyny in action protecting the rights of men to rape at the expense of the female victims.

    • Cognitive dissonance doesn’t just apply to men, and it isn’t pathetic to say so.

      I don’t agree that the men you mention were ‘protected by laws made by men to protect men and at the detriment of victims’.

      Until someone is found guilty, they are the alleged victim, not the victim, of the accused, as in many cases the alleged crime didn’t actually happen.

      I don’t agree that men struggle to understand that if a crime can’t be proved to a criminal standard, that doesn’t make it any less of a crime or negate that it happened, but only in cases of rape and sexual assault. I believe that the presumption of innocence should apply for all crimes.

      Men who lie and get away with rape does weaken the credibility of men accused of rape. This is shown by the fact that you are attempting to use men who you believe to be guilty of crimes which they were acquitted of as somehow justifying a woman convicted of making a false accusation. To accuse me of ‘misogyny in action’ for expressing this view is a false accusation.

      I don’t agree that juries, courts, friends and family should be made aware of unsubstantiated accusations. Fair minded people would pay them no heed, but they would be exploited by people who don’t believe in the presumption of innocence. I don’t agree that not publicising unsubstantiated allegations to juries, courts, friends and family is misogyny in action.

      None of the examples you have given strengthen the positions of accusers whose position has been weakened by false accusations such as those made by Rebecca Palmer. It is right to call out such false accusations when they occur.

      • You appear unable to read and comprehend

        Cognitive dissonance suddenly you are all over it and trying to manufacture equivalence with rapists in denial that they are rapists. Pathetic.

        Ian Huntley, Alexander Pacteau, John Worboys, Kirk Reid ad nausea (sic) should have been locked up the first time around but were protected by law made by men to protect men and at the detriment of victims.

        A victim of a crime is a victim of a crime whether or not there is a guilty verdict. If someone steals a car, commits murder and is never caught there is not an alleged victim there is a victim. If a crime cannot be proved to a criminal standard that does not make it any less of a crime and does not negate that it it happened, something men appear to struggle with but only in cases of rape and sexual assault.

        Men who lie and get away with rape do not weaken the credibility of other men accused of rape and neither do their lies strengthen the case of women who are victims of rape. That’s misogyny in action.

        And yes men accused of rape should have it known to the jury, to the court to all their friends and family how many other times they’ve been accused. Same when there is an allegation that there is a false accusation let’s see how many other times this poor man has been falsely accused surely that can only strengthen the jury’s sympathies towards him. Think of ‘poor’ Ian Huntley wrongly accused on ten separate occasions. It’s important that a jury know this innocent little lamb was frequently accused of raping underaged girls. Misogyny in action protecting the rights of men to rape at the expense of the female victims.

        • I read and comprehend, but I don’t agree.

          Cognitive dissonance doesn’t just apply to men, and it isn’t pathetic to say so.

          I don’t agree that the men you mention were ‘protected by laws made by men to protect men and at the detriment of victims’.

          Until someone is found guilty, they are the alleged victim, not the victim, of the accused, as in many cases the alleged crime didn’t actually happen.

          I don’t agree that men struggle to understand that if a crime can’t be proved to a criminal standard, that doesn’t make it any less of a crime or negate that it happened, but only in cases of rape and sexual assault. I believe that the presumption of innocence should apply for all crimes.

          Men who lie and get away with rape does weaken the credibility of men accused of rape. This is shown by the fact that you are attempting to use men who you believe to be guilty of crimes which they were acquitted of as somehow justifying a woman convicted of making a false accusation. To accuse me of ‘misogyny in action’ for expressing this view is a false accusation.

          I don’t agree that juries, courts, friends and family should be made aware of unsubstantiated accusations. Fair minded people would pay them no heed, but they would be exploited by people who don’t believe in the presumption of innocence. I don’t agree that not publicising unsubstantiated allegations to juries, courts, friends and family is misogyny in action.

          None of the examples you have given strengthen the positions of accusers whose position has been weakened by false accusations such as those made by Rebecca Palmer. It is right to call out such false accusations when they occur.

    • Oh no not the “cognitive dissonance” statement gain. You use this in every thread you get involved in so I doubt you actually know what it means…but hey I guess it makes you look intelligent…or so you think.

      @Anon – FFS…don’t you realise by now (me having got this point in the thread) that you are trying to reason with someone who is incapable of reason. Her starting point is that all men are rapists and she then goes on to the premise that…err…all men are rapists. So there you have the start and finish of her reasoned argument.

      If I were in the legal profession I would charge you £300 for the above advice, but I’ll let you have it free on this occasion.

      • Thanks, yes, I see where you’re coming from, but I just feel some of the comments made shouldn”t be left unanswered.

        If you were a lawyer (civil not criminal of course!), you’d be selling yourself short charging £300 per paragraph!!

      • Oh no men rape and then they deny because they can’t handle it this should never be pointed out because err men don’t like it. Gonna lose sleep over that last bit *YAWNS SO HARD JAW DISLOCATES.

        Yours in sisterhood.

    • But it remains the case that false accusations, such as in this case, damage the case of other accusers. And no amount of false accusations or name-calling changes that.

LEAVE A REPLY