Woman walks free after admitting she lied about boyfriend raping her

The Purveyor of Truth

Unbelievable story here of a woman that claimed her boyfriend raped her. he gets locked for a short time but later bailed until the trial date and then five months later, with the court date looming, she suddenly goes to the Police and admits that she lied.. yet only gets a suspended sentence along with a six month 8pm curfew:

Boyfriend was locked up in high-security Belmarsh jail when woman lied that he raped her after split - but SHE walks free

A man spent 12 days locked up in a high security prison after his ex-girlfriend lied to police and falsely accused him of raping her.

April Bailey, 34, of Woolwich, south east London, gave officers a detailed account of the fictional 'assault' by Andrew Frith, 36, and attended a rape suite where she agreed to DNA swabs being taken.

Mr Frith spent 12 days in Belmarsh Prison, home to some of Britain's most dangerous criminals, before being allowed out on bail, and it was five months before Bailey eventually confessed to police that he hadn't raped her after all.

Yesterday Bailey walked free from court, despite admitting perverting the course of justice by accusing an innocent man and despite the judge telling her: 'What you did was an appalling thing.'

'She said he tried to kiss her and she declined and he later threw her to the floor and punched her in the back, likening herself to a punchbag,' added Mr Temple.

'They went to sleep, she alleged, but as she woke he forced himself on her and made her have sex with him.'

Bailey claimed: 'I was crying and telling him: "No, I don't want to have sex with you".'

Mr Frith was arrested on January 27 and immediately told the officers: 'I think I know who this girl is. Was it April? That girl is crazy.'

However five months later, Bailey went to police saying Mr Frith had not in fact raped her and admitting she had lied.

'Her friend convinced her it was rape and was wrong. She's a vulnerable young woman and her friend saw her emotional, upset and with bruises.'

Bailey was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment, suspended for two years, given an 18-month supervision order, given a six-month 8pm-8am curfew. The court heard that Mr Frith has since forgiven Bailey for what she did.

Think this is absolute madness considering the sentence her boyfriend most likely would have received had she not admitted in the end that she had lied.

Mr. Incognito

well,

here comes the generalisation trains..........

choooo

Sociopath2

What's the big deal? It's not like being accused of rape and locked up in a maximum security prison would have any effect on a mans life.

If anyone ever googles his name im sure it wont lead straight to those reports and sure no one will remember him as "that guy who was in prison for rape".

anncoates

Your user name is really irritating.

Nib

Sociopath2 wrote: »

What's the big deal? It's not like being accused of rape and locked up in a maximum security prison would have any effect on a mans life.

If anyone ever googles his name im sure it wont lead straight to those reports and sure no one will remember him as "that guy who was in prison for rape".

I hope you're being sarcastic.

loremolis

Did she never hear of the boy who cried wolf?

Sociopath2

Nib wrote: »

I hope you're being sarcastic.

Extremely sarcastic

Turtyturd

loremolis wrote: »

Did she never hear of the boy who cried wolf?

So she gets another free accusation?

ABajaninCork

The recent story about the Brazilian lady who claimed to have been raped in Dublin was false too.

What was the really frightening part was the fact the Gards were about to lift some poor sod on that wicked cow's say-so...

The Purveyor of Truth

ABajaninCork wrote: »

The recent story about the Brazilian lady who claimed to have been raped in Dublin was false too.

Can't be discussed as cases before the courts can't be discussed on Boards.

ABajaninCork

Fair enough. I didn't see that...

mrDerek

fckn bitch and women bang on about equal rights.... suppose the shoe was on the other foot i know its implausible lol but if it was do you think the guy would get off with such a light repercussion

entropi

She should be sent to prison for longer than the 12 days the lad spent in there tbh. Accusations of that nature could stick with him for a long time, while she gets off with basically a slap on the wrist.

Bipolar Joe

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

well,

here comes there generalisation trains..........

choooo

I bet you're the funniest guy in your office.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Horrible thing to do to a man.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Reminds me of a girl that was a year above me in school, accused a 50 something year old of rape. Married man, kids, well respected, was running in the local elections just as the story broke.
Went on for years, maybe 4 or 5 years before it went to the high court. It was thrown out because she was lying and he was aquitted. Still never managed to clear his name though, and she's still walking around the place no worse off than when she accused him.

Girls who do that make a complete mockery of women who have been raped, and they should face a serious prison sentence, destroying a mans good name and reputation.

Shakespeare's Sister

It's absolutely ****ing reprehensible. And on top of it there's always the "No smoke without fire" mob.

GerB40

entropi wrote: »

She should be sent to prison for longer than the 12 days the lad spent in there tbh. Accusations of that nature could stick with him for a long time, while she gets off with basically a slap on the wrist.

I think anybody who accuses an innocent person of such an atrocious crime should be given the maximum sentence the innocent person would've got.

This man's life will probably be ruined because of a liar (not to mention his reputation forever tarnished) yet the woman who lied is basically told not to do this again.

I understand that some level of leniency be given to the liar because she did own up to it but to walk away free is unacceptable..

alex03

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Horrible thing to do to a man.

Horrible thing to do to the man but also to all women who have been genuinely raped and will now be scrutinised and suspected because of false claims from liars like her. THey will now be subjected to a second assault of sorts.

GerB40

alex03 wrote: »

Horrible thing to do to the man but also to all women who have been genuinely raped and will now be scrutinised and suspected because of false claims from liars like her. THey will now be subjected to a second assault of sorts.

That's a very good point. Liars like this woman trivialise the thousands of genuine cases in Ireland alone. Not only does she tarnish an innocent man but an indirect result could be that rape victims might be afraid to come forward for fear of being labelled liars.

A very sad situation..

Sociopath2

alex03 wrote: »

Horrible thing to do to the man but also to all women who have been genuinely raped and will now be scrutinised and suspected because of false claims from liars like her. THey will now be subjected to a second assault of sorts.

I was wondering when someone would paint women as the real victims in all this. Not how I thought it would be done, marks for originality.

Shakespeare's Sister

Sociopath2 wrote: »

I was wondering when someone would paint women as the real victims in all this. Not how I thought it would be done, marks for originality.

I don't think they said women are the real victims, just that it is something that, when the full picture is taken into consideration, can have an effect on women who are actually rape victims, as it potentially opens the floor to them being doubted.
The men who are falsely accused though are of course the primary victims.

alex03

Sociopath2 wrote: »

I was wondering when someone would paint women as the real victims in all this. Not how I thought it would be done, marks for originality.

Woah, how to misconstrue a post for your own agenda. It is well known many rapists walk free/ are never even charged. It is a crime against both sexes for someone to accuse an innocent party of rape. It is wrong for the accused and wrong for those who are then under suspicion after genuinely being raped. It's not a competition, it's in nobody's interest to tolerate false accusations such as this. The law should come down heavy on these type of people as they hurt the accused and other victims.

Shakespeare's Sister

GerB40 wrote: »

I think anybody who accuses an innocent person of such an atrocious crime should be given the maximum sentence the innocent person would've got.

This man's life will probably be ruined because of a liar (not to mention his reputation forever tarnished) yet the woman who lied is basically told not to do this again.

I understand that some level of leniency be given to the liar because she did own up to it but to walk away free is unacceptable..

I fully agree someone who does this should serve time (and not just a piddling few weeks either) but the maximum sentence that would be served for rape - dunno. Doesn't seem plausible.

Sociopath2

alex03 wrote: »

Woah, how to misconstrue a post for your own agenda. It is well known many rapists walk free/ are never even charged. It is a crime against both sexes for someone to accuse an innocent party of rape. It is wrong for the accused and wrong for those who are then under suspicion after genuinely being raped. It's not a competition, it's in nobody's interest to tolerate false accusations such as this. The law should come down heavy on these type of people as they hurt the accused and other victims.

What agenda?

Frank Lee Midere

If the system jailed women for voluntarily admitting they lied it would be worse for all.

wp_rathead

Sociopath2 wrote: »

I was wondering when someone would paint women as the real victims in all this. Not how I thought it would be done, marks for originality.

Alex03 made a legitimate point. dafuq you on about? "marks for originality"? It is not a competition ffs :rolleyes:

catallus

It is touching that he forgave her for what she did.

jank

There should be mandatory sentences for this type of stuff.

Sociopath2

wprathead wrote: »

Alex03 made a legitimate point. dafuq you on about? "marks for originality"? It is not a competition ffs :rolleyes:

Some people always have to be the victim, regardless of the circumstances dear.

GerB40

Sociopath2 wrote: »

Some people always have to be the victim, regardless of the circumstances dear.

"Some people always have to be the victim"?

What about the actual victim of a miscarriage of justice?

Sociopath2

GerB40 wrote: »

"Some people always have to be the victim"?

What about the actual victim of a miscarriage of justice?

You mean like the guy in this story almost was? Terrible thing to happen to him, the sentence was an insult to what he'd been through.

kowloon

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

well,

here comes there generalisation trains..........

choo-choooo

FYP

GerB40

Sociopath2 wrote: »

You mean like the guy in this story almost was? Terrible thing to happen to him, the sentence was an insult to what he'd been through.

I completely agree. I suggested in a previous post that the liar should get the full sentence the innocent man would've got if found guilty.

Perhaps slight leniency for fessing up but she definitely deserves a few years behind bars. To walk free is beyond disgraceful..

Sociopath2

GerB40 wrote: »

I completely agree. I suggested in a previous post that the liar should get the full sentence the innocent man would've got if found guilty.

Perhaps slight leniency for fessing up but she definitely deserves a few years behind bars. To walk free is beyond disgraceful..

The argument will be made, and I think someone already did, that if there's any real penalty beyond a slap on the wrist it will stop women voluntarily admitting they made it all up. You could end up with more innocent men being sent to prison then.

But that's effectively means there can be no punishment for any woman who falsely cries rape. I don't think some people fully appreciate what it means for a man to be accused of rape.

kylith

GerB40 wrote: »

That's a very good point. Liars like this woman trivialise the thousands of genuine cases in Ireland alone. Not only does she tarnish an innocent man but an indirect result could be that rape victims might be afraid to come forward for fear of being labelled liars.

A very sad situation..

I think it's one of the reasons that liars like this woman get off so easily; women who have actually been raped could be put off reporting it if they think they could go to jail because no-one believes them.

Grayson

kylith wrote: »

I think it's one of the reasons that liars like this woman get off so easily; women who have actually been raped could be put off reporting it if they think they could go to jail because no-one believes them.

It would also discourage a woman who did lie from telling the truth. If this woman was sentenced to a year in prison it might stop the next woman who makes a false claim from recanting.

I do think she should have gotten some community service or something though.

kylith

Grayson wrote: »

It would also discourage a woman who did lie from telling the truth. If this woman was sentenced to a year in prison it might stop the next woman who makes a false claim from recanting.

I do think she should have gotten some community service or something though.

Hopefully having her name published will be enough punishment. If anyone Googles her this will come up.

I don't understand this bit
'Her friend convinced her it was rape and was wrong. She's a vulnerable young woman and her friend saw her emotional, upset and with bruises.'

What bruises?

oh sorry, clicked the link now

Mr Temple said: 'She said the bruising and injuries were nothing more than the result of heavy drinking and being restrained by Mr Frith.'

Bailey's lawyer, Frances Ridout, told the court: 'Mr Frith "tried it on", to use her words, and she was resisting and after numerous attempts she gave in and that's when consensual sex happened.

So like ... he did attack her?
Restrained to the point of leaving bruises on her, badgered her til she "gave in" - that's pretty borderline if not over the line entirely.
If a woman did make it up out of the blue then absolutely there should be consequences but this is not a situation where I think she should be locked up, headline notwithstanding

nope

pickarooney

Did she make it all up or just the rape? Did they clarify if the bruises were from an assault or something else?

Rubberchikken

it's a horrible thing to accuse anyone of, and the reason why all names should be kept annonymous until someone is found guilty by a court.

Grayson

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't understand this bit
'Her friend convinced her it was rape and was wrong. She's a vulnerable young woman and her friend saw her emotional, upset and with bruises.'

What bruises?

oh sorry, clicked the link now



So like ... he did attack her?
Restrained to the point of leaving bruises on her, badgered her til she "gave in" - that's pretty borderline if not over the line entirely.
If a woman did make it up out of the blue then absolutely there should be consequences but this is not a situation where I think she should be locked up, headline notwithstanding

I'm going to side with the judge and the woman who said that no sexual assault took place. She said that he did not rape her and the judge found her guilty of lying when she said he did.

She also said the bruises were when he restrained her. That would imply that he was 100% not attacking her, but was probably defending either himself or someone else from her. In other words, she was the one attacking someone. So not only did she lye about him assaulting her, but she probably assaulted him.

by all means feel free to interpret this as he attacked her and she's blameless.

Riskymove

bluewolf wrote: »

I

So like ... he did attack her?
Restrained to the point of leaving bruises on her, badgered her til she "gave in" - that's pretty borderline if not over the line entirely.

indeed, it's not so black and white when you read the article and many unanswered questions

something seems to have happened between them but we are missing a lot of detail

padd b1975

Riskymove wrote: »

something seems to have happened between them but we are missing a lot of detail

Missing a rape for starters.

pickarooney

pickarooney wrote: »

Did she make it all up or just the rape? Did they clarify if the bruises were from an assault or something else?

My reading of it is that they were drinking and he restrained her and insisted til she gave in and she was left with bruising from it. But if that were the case the comments from the judge etc seem awfully harsh if she really was assaulted.
I guess we just couldn't know from a DM article (google search: Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe ), but if there's anything to it I wouldn't be as quick to call the lynch mob on her. I think there are other genuine cases where there were complete false accusations made and for those I support the woman being in trouble for it

Rubberchikken wrote: »

it's a horrible thing to accuse anyone of, and the reason why all names should be kept annonymous until someone is found guilty by a court.

I agree with this much either way

Riskymove

bluewolf wrote: »

My reading of it is that they were drinking and he restrained her and insisted til she gave in and she was left with bruising from it. But if that were the case the comments from the judge etc seem awfully harsh if she really was assaulted.

well, actually she claimed they went to sleep after the physicality and the alledged sexual encounter occurred later

while the later part of the article seems to suggest this wasn't true and that she left the house

then there is talk that some friend of hers either got the wrong idea and in talking with her things "got out of control" as the article said and the friend became convinced that a rape had occurred resulting in her encouraging her to go to the police



as the judge said, taking 5 months to admit the truth is the issue here.

tritium

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't understand this bit
'Her friend convinced her it was rape and was wrong. She's a vulnerable young woman and her friend saw her emotional, upset and with bruises.'

What bruises?

oh sorry, clicked the link now



So like ... he did attack her?
Restrained to the point of leaving bruises on her, badgered her til she "gave in" - that's pretty borderline if not over the line entirely.
If a woman did make it up out of the blue then absolutely there should be consequences but this is not a situation where I think she should be locked up, headline notwithstanding

Defence lawyer in mitigating claims shocker!

Given we're only hearing one side, and from a now convicted liar and criminal, I'm going to add a sizeable pinch of salt here. Not saying there isn't a smidgen of truth in there but she and her defence team don't exactly have stacks of credibility right now....

Yeah no I was just confused what was going on with the whole bruises thing

fair enough

tritium

Riskymove wrote: »

well, actually she claimed they went to sleep after the physicality and the alledged sexual encounter occurred later

while the later part of the article seems to suggest this wasn't true and that she left the house

then there is talk that some friend of hers either got the wrong idea and in talking with her things "got out of control" as the article said and the friend became convinced that a rape had occurred resulting in her encouraging her to go to the police



as the judge said, taking 5 months to admit the truth is the issue here.

With friends like that ..........

Kimbot

Even if the Girl in this case got a community service sentance whereby she has to work around rape victims for a few hundred hours would have been better than her walking away scot free. Maybe she might learn how serious the accusation was then.