POLL: Should false accusation of rape be a sexual crime?

Remove all ads!

I don't know if they are or not, but the thing to consider is not the severity of the crime, but the psychology behind it. Things like indecent exposure are often early steps to preditory behavior, so the offenders get stuck on the list because of where they're likely to go. False accusations of rape are based on a totally diffent psychology, and the risk of repetition is not known to me, so it really changes things.

 

I think false accusations are a sign of blurred distinction between truth and falsehood, so the risk should be somewhat high, but I'm not an expert here.

 

Actually, they are usually the first step to joining a fraternity. I think it's a bit over-kill to list some kid on a sex crime registry just for streaking at a frat party.

[ November 03, 2006, 05:59: Message edited by: Drew ]

 

i thnk that in this situation, there is no black and white, every crime has to be looked at individually... depending on the false accusers motive then it could be a sexual crime

 

No, unless a particularly good reason (and I can't think of one.)

Yes, it has the potential to help in instances of serial liars and may be able to help save some reputations. (i.e. knowing the accuser had a history of claiming rape might mean the case was kept quiet rather than blazened across the media). However, the case MUST still be treated as a proper investigation and not ignored because of the accusers history.

Here is a rather disturbing local case in point.

 

Examination always needs to be carried out, sure. It's just sometimes it's words vs words and they rely heavily on people's credibility. False accusers should take a credibility hit, but of course not to such a point as to make false accusers easy targets of actual rape ("Hey, your honour, you know she's already lied once!").

 

That is important to remember that rape is a traumatic event. That is not up for debate. This thread assumes that the accusations were false. Real rape is not what we're talking.

Basically, the two charges differ only on how far the false accusation is taken. Laying the boots to someone in a fight is Assault. If he dies, it's Manslaughter. Basically how far the act goes determined the charge.

Why so surprised? When we have an agreed upon set of assumptions, it's not always hard to reach the same conclusions...

Agreed. That's why I would suggest a harsher penalty upon such accusers, but the charge is the same. The only difference is in the damage done.

Now I'm scared. I agree with Drew!

But I wouldn't argue if a streaker trying to join a Fraternity got off on lesser charges. Usually he will be pissed out of his gourd, so drunk and stupid--er disorderly would be appropriate. This also assumes that some precautions are taken (like middle of the night when kids are asleep). If they streak an area frequented by children when they are likely to be there, then the gloves are off...

You know defence lawyers will try that anyway...

 

They've recently try that in a classroom gang-rape attempt on a 14 year old girl by her classmates case. They said it was crude advances. The deed was forcible public stripping and digital penetration apart from groping and verbal violence. The broken girl committed suicide after coming back to her house and locking herself in her room. The boys' families and lawyers said they shouldn't even be in the courtroom. Such a mockery of justice should get a lawyer disbarred in my opinion. The accused can say such things in his position, detestable as they sound, but a defence lawyer is hardly just doing his job when he sinks that low. Do I need to add they also tried to blame the girl for the whole event?

A wish to join an organisation is no justification for breaking the law. It's also quite apparent to me that an organisation endorsing, heck, requiring of its members a public violation of the law, should be disbanded by the court.

Streakers come in two categories: pervs and kids. Both need professional help apart from the orderly slap on the wrists for putting their sick urges or attention craving above the law of the land.

Now, what about people who don't strip bare in public but instead make up rape or molestation stories? Some will get off on the idea, some will try to deride despised superiors, some will be exacting revenge for romantic failures... all in all, this actually seems to come close to the two kinds of streakers: either pervs or kids, both pressed by urges and neither totally excusable.

 

Pervs or kids? Streaking?

Somewhat childish, certainly, attention seeking, sure, very rarely perverted imo. Also mostly conducted by young adults 18-30 at a guess. Running out on a football pitch in front of say 40,000 people and TV cameras is not likely to give them much of a sexual rush, though an adrenaline rush is perhaps a different matter.

By the way, nudity is not perverted. Streaking and exposing yourself are two completely different things.

 

Exhibitionism is a perversion and for streaking, at least some measure of it is required. The more exhibitionism influences the streaker's motivation, the more he falls into the perverted category, rather than kids. The difference is that kids need to grow up and pervs need to be medicated.

Streaking and exposing yourself are not two different things because both come down to the offender baring himself or appearing naked in public. Doing it to join a stupid frat is no better than getting off on it the sexual way. Or not much. Let's not be too easy on disorderly idiots. There's way too much tolerance and then people learn such things about their children, parents, spouses, whomever, years after when they are mere embarrassment. Or a tell tale for those who never grow up. Personally, I'd rather not associate with either. And I don't have a nudity phobia, I just consider the act of public stripping to be rolling eyes stupid. And perverted, yeah. Some form of exhibitionism, always (unless we're talking about five year olds who consider clothing constrict), if not always strictly sexual.

It's actually a bit the same with false accusers who succumb to their hungry imagination, I guess. To have a tell tale, and no tell tale is being better than one of harships endured, they will exaggerate real events theoretically into another perspective, but practically into a totally different thing.

But here we have more categories. Apart from kids who confabulate and pervs who get off on it, there are also the malicious intrigue weavers or avengers (i.e. those to whom just because in their mind the accused deserves N years it doesn't matter what charge is used and if it's real). As not all perpetrators of real sexual crimes do it out of pronounced, decisive sexual motives (i.e. other than the subconscious perversions that might lead even a mala fide cold-blooded false accuser), I suppose people who accuse others falsely of sexual crimes could probably fit into the same category, as generally people exhibiting disorderly, illegal behaviour in the sexual area.

Another idea that I have is that those false accusers who have such big mental/psychological issues that they don't even end up in prison but in a psychward for some time, should probably be registered somehow also. I doubt anyone would want to marry a person with a history of rape accusations or hire a teacher with a history of accusing colleagues of molesting students (not like a male only school needs a female teacher with one or two documented cases of false rape accusation). It could be helpful in moving students to more fitting schools as well. I don't really want to stigmatise the whole lot and call them freaks as much as I have a big problem with the idea that all too often meting out a fine or even a prison term, or compulsory treatment for a fixed period of time, is enough. And that if they reoffend the story begins from scratch.

[ November 06, 2006, 17:12: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Relevant Story

Spotted this on the news. 6 months in a young offenders institute for a false claim of rape.

 

She's 18 now, she's an adult. She should have had a couple years in Jail to think about what she did. Fortunately, the guy only served 6 weeks before being cleared...

 

Still, that sucks. Granted six weeks is not an extended period of time, but I certainly wouldn't want to spend 6 weeks in prison, especially since sex crimes are usually incarcerated in high security prisons. I wonder how many times *he* was raped in that 6 week period?

 

I have not read the whole thread, but there is a danger that rapists could threaten to sue their victim for 'false' accusation of rape. Many news reports state that most victims of rape don't report their attacks for fear of being labeled a liar amongst other things.

 

The issue with a suit is usually moot. The rapist would have to prove that the accuser either acted with blatant knowledge that she was lying (i.e. PROVE that he didn't rape her and she knew it) or with no concern for the truth (which would be pretty impossible on this issue). Mearly not being able to prove he did rape her wouldn't get him anything in a civil case.

 

That's quite all right, actually. It's often very difficult to decide if the supposed rapist did it or not, so it's only normal that it's only blatant lies where a false accusation can be proven easily.

As an example, if they agree there was sex but she claims rape and he says it was consensual, their lawyers fight over the definition of consent or if she did or not indicate it/lack of it, then it's only logical that he won't be able to prove intentional false accusation on her part if he gets acquitted.

But if she makes up a story to cover up coming home late, losing virginity, putting out with the guy in question, then it's a different thing.

Even if she wakes up with an ugly hangover and an ugly guy in her bed and claims rape without thinking too much, I suppose it's still not enough. Or maybe... well, that's surely being negligent and negligently bothering the cops and prosecutor and court and all. I would leave hypocrites alone (except a fine or something for bothering the cops and court without need) and just focus on people who really know they are making it up.