Should those who make false rape allegations against others be punished.

Mutant z

Its now got to a stage where every man is considered to be a rapist even if found to be not guilty in a court of law, by radical feminists which is a toxic man hating ideology.

It doesnt seem to matter whether someones innocent of rape or not they are now found to be guilty by online mobs without having the sufficient evidence to prove it to be the case so they are quite happy to see someones career and life destroyed on baseless allegations without the facts to back it up.

I have nothing but sympathy for rape victims and they should get all the help they can get and those rapists can burn as far as im concerned but i believe those who lie and make up false allegations against others should also be punished with a prison sentance or a large fine to make them think twice before they do something as damaging to someone as falsely accuse them of a crime as henious as rape. Some sort of serious punishments should be enforced on those who make up lies which are extremely damaging to the welfare of others who may actually be innocent.

Yer Da sells Avon

If someone is proven, beyond all reasonable doubt, to have deliberately made a false rape allegation, then yes, they should obviously be punished.

Why? Has someone done this recently?

Rubberchikken

Yes. If proven to be guilty then definitely.
A persons life can lie in ruins for a lot less.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

If someone is proven, beyond all reasonable doubt, to have deliberately made a false rape allegation, then yes, they should obviously be punished.

Agreed, but obviously it would require a second court case, as an acquittal in a rape case does not in itself prove the allegation was false.

GetWithIt

I don’t think anyone has ever considered this scenario before.

Mint Sauce

If they are found to have made a false rape claim, and convicted of it, then they should face the same sentence, that a convicted rapist would have got.

However, being found not guilty of rape, does not mean the victim made it up. Only that there was not enough evidence to convict, or versions of events were not enough to convict.

dieselbug

A person who alleges they were raped is not necessarily lying, they may believe they were raped but a court may decide otherwise ie not legally raped.
It doesn't mean it's a made up false allegation or deliberate lie.

However a deliberate false allegation with the intention of damaging someone should certainly be heavily punished.

Mutant z

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of but they will still have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives even when you look at Twitter and the mobs who were accusing them of all sorts it shows how much damage these kind of lies can do to someone.

punisher5112

If it's found to be without a doubt false then of course yes.

The case with the rugby players is a sad one as there are no winners and to be honest all of them now will be known as those guys.

If they done it it's a sad day for the woman.
If they didn't then shame on her.

It's extremely difficult to tell and sometimes it works out well for the wrong side.

Hopefully they can all move on with their lives.

Mint Sauce

punisher5112 wrote: »

If it's found to be without a doubt false then of course yes.

The case with the rugby players is a sad one as there are no winners and to be honest all of them now will be known as those guys.

If they done it it's a sad day for the woman.
If they didn't then shame on her.

It's extremely difficult to tell and sometimes it works out well for the wrong side.

Hopefully they can all move on with their lives.

Why shame on her, just because they were found not guilty, does not mean she made it up. Something certiainly happened in Paddy Jacksons bedroom, but only the ones present in the room know what that was. Women should still not fear going to the Guards here, or the Police anywhere else, if they feel they have been a victim.

ceadaoin.

Obviously if someone maliciously makes up a rape allegation to hurt someone then they should be punished. The fact is though that false allegations of rape are no higher than false allegations of other crimes. There are many times more unreported rapes than false allegations. It's just not as prevalent as some would have you believe.

Also, the automatic assumption that if an accused is found not guilty then the accuser must be lying is also wrong.

Sidebaro

Mutant z wrote:

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of but they will still have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives even when you look at Twitter and the mobs who were accusing them of all sorts it shows how much damage these kind of lies can do to someone.

She wasn't found guilty of lying so whatever damage you think actual lies show is irrelevant in this instance as this wasn't the case in that example.

wakka12

Mutant z wrote: »

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of but they will still have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives even when you look at Twitter and the mobs who were accusing them of all sorts it shows how much damage these kind of lies can do to someone.

A very important distinction to recognise here is that they were proven not guilty, not 'innocent',as there was not sufficient evidence to prove they did it, it was NOT proven that she her allegations were lies at all.

Arghus

In real terms all that would accomplish is next to nobody taking a case of sexual assault as far as the courts.

Mutant z

wakka12 wrote: »

A very important distinction to recognise here is that they were proven not guilty, not 'innocent',as there was not sufficient evidence to prove they did it, it was NOT proven that she her allegations were lies at all.

But still found not guilty regardless which usually means you are cleared of the crime you have been accused there was just too many inconsistencies in that case to take it at face value regardless the point im making those who tell blatant lies to falsely accuse others should definitely be punished which is the point of this.

AllForIt

Nathaniel Microscopic Muslin wrote: »

Agreed, but obviously it would require a second court case, as an acquittal in a rape case does not in itself prove the allegation was false.

I think it would be useful to get to the bottom of what is really going on.

I was listening to a piece on LBC a couple of months back where men, who were accused of rape and subsequently it was proven that the accuser was lying, recounted their stories. There lives were totally ruined and never recovered to the way it was despite it being proven to a certainty that they were completely innocent. It was quite horrific to listen to what they went though.

FrKurtFahrt

I think this is dangerous territory as the threat of being branded a malicious liar (and the subsequent possibility of prison or whatever) might deter some women from reporting a rape.

I'm sure false allegations have been made previously, and people wrongly punished, but all I'm saying is that it would be a fierce dilemma for anyone who had been raped.

Plus, the complainant in the Belfast case did not press any charges, it was the Crown Prosecution. Should that office be punished also?

AllForIt

wakka12 wrote: »

A very important distinction to recognise here is that they were proven not guilty, not 'innocent',as there was not sufficient evidence to prove they did it, it was NOT proven that she her allegations were lies at all.

A very important point also is that the accuser may not be lying but that does not mean to a certainty that the accused are guilty either.

How about not naming people when they have merely been charged with a crime? Name them by all means if they've been found guilty and the appeals process is complete, but in the meantime we do not have a "right to know" the name of a person who is only charged with an offence.

In a country where so many people think "there's no smoke without fire", a mere allegation against a publicly named individual carries guilt in the eyes of many. Innocent until proven guilty should mean something real. The courts and legislators should be telling the media where to get off with their claims that they have a right to publicise the names of innocent people.

These guys may have been cleared, but as they have been publicly identified there will always be a doubt attached to their names.

And I absolutely 100% agree with people like this being publicly named.

Sidebaro

Mutant z wrote:

But still found not guilty regardless which usually means you are cleared of the crime you have been accused there was just too many inconsistencies in that case to take it at face value regardless the point im making those who tell blatant lies to falsely accuse others should definitely be punished which is the point of this.

Anyone found guilty of telling blatant lies should be punished. This is not the case here. Not guilty implies innocence but in this case it was that they couldn't prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not saying they did it or they didn't do it, I'm just saying that they can't technically say that they are innocent or that she was lying because that hasn't been proven.

Donald Trump

FrKurtFahrt wrote: »

Plus, the complainant in the Belfast case did not press any charges, it was the Crown Prosecution.  Should that office be punished also?

Obviously the Queen should be met in the car park of Buckingham palace, cleverly locked into the boot of an Opel Corsa. In that boot, she can smear the walls with shit, and starve to death

Donald Trump

---Double post somehow

---

Fix the stupid site yiz useless hoors

There was an interesting (well, awful) case in my hometown where a girl lied about a guy raping her.

Basically she lied that this guy raped her and her boyfriend went out and murdered the guy that was falsely accused of rape. Don't know what happened in the end with her but just goes how important it is not to lie about these things. Info about the case here: https://www.independent.ie/regionals/kerryman/news/teen-girl-i-lied-that-stephen-lyne-raped-me-27417309.html

stimpson

wakka12 wrote: »

A very important distinction to recognise here is that they were proven not guilty, not 'innocent',as there was not sufficient evidence to prove they did it,

I’ve read this a million times today and it’s getting on my tits. There is an important legal principal called “presumption of innocence”. It’s up to the prosecution to prove guilt which they have not been able to do, therefore the presumption of innocence still stands. Courts don’t find people innocent - that’s not how it works.

somefeen

No because even though they have been found not guilty there is a chance that more evidence could come to light later on.

It would be an unnecessary deterrent against people reporting rape.

A more sensible option would be to protect the identities of all parties including the accused until a guilty verdict.

Surely false accusations would come under libel laws anyway?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

AllForIt wrote: »

I think it would be useful to get to the bottom of what is really going on.

I was listening to a piece on LBC a couple of months back where men, who were accused of rape and subsequently it was proven that the accuser was lying, recounted their stories. There lives were totally ruined and never recovered to the way it was despite it being proven to a certainty that they were completely innocent. It was quite horrific to listen to what they went though.

Not sure why you quoted me, but I agree with you. However, it doesn't negate the need for a second court case with the same burden of proof required.

Mrs OBumble

Mutant z wrote: »

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of

Even though their behaviour didn't get them convicted of rate, it has certainly brought the sport into disrepute.

That disrepute is why their careers [should be] destroyed. But only time will tell if they were actually destroyed, or enhanced.

One eyed Jack

Mutant z wrote: »

Its now got to a stage where every man is considered to be a rapist even if found to be not guilty in a court of law, by radical feminists which is a toxic man hating ideology.

It hasn't gotten to that stage at all, it was always like this. People believed who they wanted to believe, and what they wanted to believe, and just as there will always be people who believe the men were innocent, so too will there be people who believe the woman made a false accusation against them. There will also be people who believe the opposite in both cases, less based upon evidence and more based upon their own experiences and prejudices.

It's nothing to do with "toxic feminism" or any of the rest of that nonsense, but you can choose to keep believing that if you want. See how it works?

Atoms for Peace

Reading between the lines, considering the current news headlines, the jist of this thread is quite nasty.

Professor Moriarty

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Even though their behaviour didn't get them convicted of rate, it has certainly brought the sport into disrepute.

That disrepute is why their careers [should be] destroyed. But only time will tell if they were actually destroyed, or enhanced.

How could their careers be enhanced?

Mutant z

Mutant z wrote:

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of but they will still have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives even when you look at Twitter and the mobs who were accusing them of all sorts it shows how much damage these kind of lies can do to someone.

Did I miss the part where she was convicted of perjury for lying? Being found innocent in a court of law does not mean that you are, particularly in rape cases where more often than not it boils down to a he said, she said situation.

Outlaw Pete

Can anyone honestly imagine if someone lied about another person either violently assaulting them, or stealing from them, or any of whole myriad of other crimes, that anyone would have the gall to suggest that we shouldn't prosecute these people for their lies as that could mean that real victims of those crimes might not report them. Is this the bloody Twilight Zone or what.

But yet with rape, we hear it all the bloody time. It's ridiculous. If someone lies about someone raping, and it can be proven in a court that they did so (not saying it has been here) then of bloody course that person should be punished for it. It angers me (but doesn't remotely surprise me) that feminists campaign for lighter sentences for these women.

Here's just one example of that happening:

A trainee barrister has been jailed after being found guilty of falsely accusing her former boyfriend of a series of rapes and assaults.

Sentencing Rhiannon Brooker, 30, to three and half years, the judge Julian Lambert said she had acted in an "utterly wicked" way and argued that false claims made it more difficult for real rape victims to be believed in court.

There was anger from women's rights campaigners who claimed that such severe sentences would put off rape victims from going to the police for fear they could face prosecution if allegations were not proven. There were cries of "Shame" and "Miscarriage of justice" as Brooker's sentence was handed down.

Brooker's former partner Paul Fensome, a railway signalman, was held behind bars for 37 days after she accused him of a string of rapes and assaults. While in custody, Fensome was held in a secure wing after rumours went around that he was a paedophile. He has since received £38,000 compensation.

stimpson

Deleted User wrote: »

Did I miss the part where she was convicted of perjury for lying? Being found innocent in a court of law does not mean that you are, particularly in rape cases where more often than not it boils down to a he said, she said situation.

Nobody is found innocent. You are presumed innocent. The burden of proof is on the accuser.

Vladimir Poontang

dieselbug wrote: »

A person who alleges they were raped is not necessarily lying, they may believe they were raped but a court may decide otherwise ie not legally raped.
It doesn't mean it's a made up false allegation or deliberate lie.

However a deliberate false allegation with the intention of damaging someone should certainly be heavily punished.

We need to teach our women to understand what rape actually is and the seriousness of making a false rape claim.

There should be classes in schools and colleges about it.

Sidebaro

Vladimir Poontang wrote:

We need to teach our women to understand what rape actually is and the seriousness of making a false rape claim.

Why only teach the women?

TheChizler

Vladimir Poontang wrote: »

We need to teach our women to understand what rape actually is and the seriousness of making a false rape claim.

Your phrasing isn't coming across particularly well there.

Gosh, where would our women be without us to teach them things.

One eyed Jack

TheChizler wrote: »

Your phrasing isn't coming across particularly well there.

Gosh, where would our women be without us to teach them things.

Its actually put brilliantly, because it's making exactly the point about how absurd it is the suggestion that men need to be "taught" what is rape. Women don't need to be "taught" what is rape either, and that's the point.

Vladimir Poontang

TheChizler wrote: »

Your phrasing isn't coming across particularly well there.

Gosh, where would our women be without us to teach them things.

I agree. I merely co-opted the language used to push consent classes in our schools and universities and swapped rape and women for consent and men.

Mrs OBumble

Vladimir Poontang wrote: »

We need to teach our women to understand what rape actually is and the seriousness of making a false rape claim.

There should be classes in schools and colleges about it.

The course code could be MNSP101


No prizes for guessing what thats short for.

Outlaw Pete

TheChizler wrote: »

Your phrasing isn't coming across particularly well there.

I took it as a piss take on all the talk of consent classes myself.

HONKEY TONK

Im just amazed that if you are being accused of rape you are push in front of the spot light for everyone to see while your accuser stands in the shadows of anonymity.

Either all parties are named or no one is named

The Backwards Man

Vladimir Poontang wrote: »

I agree. I merely co-opted the language used to push consent classes in our schools and universities and swapped rape and women for consent and men.

Maybe I'm old, but in my day it was our upbringing, our parents, our grandparents, our peers, that taught us about consent and what it means. If it's up to universities to teach consent then the battle is already lost.

Vojera

HONKEY TONK wrote: »

Im just amazed that if you are being accused of rape you are push in front of the spot light for everyone to see while your accuser stands in the shadows of anonymity.

Either all parties are named or no one is named

I think they said on the radio today that that happens in the UK justice system but doesn't happen in Ireland.

Imo, all parties should be kept anonymous until a verdict is reached.

TheChizler

Vladimir Poontang wrote: »

I agree. I merely co-opted the language used to push consent classes in our schools and universities and swapped rape and women for consent and men.

Whoosh... That was your point going over my head. Poe's law and all that.

_Dara_

Mutant z wrote: »

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of but they will still have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives even when you look at Twitter and the mobs who were accusing them of all sorts it shows how much damage these kind of lies can do to someone.

That still doesn’t mean that the accuser in this case made a malicious false allegation. The social media mob stuff is completely separate.

Posts #2 and #5 just about cover my thoughts on the topic.

punisher5112

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Why shame on her, just because they were found not guilty, does not mean she made it up. Something certiainly happened in Paddy Jacksons bedroom, but only the ones present in the room know what that was. Women should still not fear going to the Guards here, or the Police anywhere else, if they feel they have been a victim.

Are you serious....

I said if false...

In no way would I suggest what you just stated I said.

If it's true sad for her if not then shame on her.
If they did shame on them guys and if not feel bad for them.

Atoms for Peace

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Reading between the lines, considering the current news headlines, the jist of this thread is quite nasty.

agree completely. I am disgusted that this thread was started yesterday considering the deeply troubling and upsetting events up the North

But hey it could just be a coincidence

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Its actually put brilliantly, because it's making exactly the point about how absurd it is the suggestion that men need to be "taught" what is rape. Women don't need to be "taught" what is rape either, and that's the point.

With respect, in 2018 I think a lot of us need to be taught what 'rape' is. When I was growing up it was forced sexual intercourse. Now there's "digital rape", "oral rape" and others. The definition has been extended and it behoves every sexually active person to be very clear about this, and what potential charges they could face if things go wrong. I'd be very much in favour of boys (especially) from 15 on being taught this in school so that they are wise to potential consequences of actions. That, and the intrinsic smartness of being guided by basic respect in all their dealings with the opposite sex. Inculcating 'respect' is, however, "too moralistic" for some people.

Types of Rape

magnumbud

if during the investigation or the trial it becomes clear that the evidence shows the person who claims they were raped, man or woman, did lie i.e. they have text someone saying they did this on purpose , they were caught on tape admitting it or admit it to the police/courtroom then sure the person should be but as has been said them being found not guilty does not mean she's lied in this case. she may very well believe she was raped but their is no evidence to say it was non consensual forced sex so that is not a lie.

put it this way to those who view her as a liar due to the not guilty verdict. if she was put on trial now for false claims and was found not guilty in that she genuinely believed this was rape does that then flip again and mean they raped her? no it doesn't.

The main issue for these lads is the british ruling where the defendants in a trial like this can be named publicly. in an ideal world the 4 of them and herself would not be named publicly in anyway unless any of them were found guilty of the law. people could argue they were named so she should be but 2 wrongs dont make a right.

Anne1982h

Mutant z wrote: »

When you look at the case in Belfast with those rugby players who could have their whole careers destroyed because of rape allegations which they have now been cleared of but they will still have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives even when you look at Twitter and the mobs who were accusing them of all sorts it shows how much damage these kind of lies can do to someone.

Your initial comment refers to false allegations. This was not the case in this trial so it is an incorrect/bad example. They jury were asked to acquit them if they did not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that they were guilty. Given the he said she said nature of events in a rape trial it is virtually impossible to say that they 100% did it with zero doubt in any jurors mind. So they were found not guilty. It is not a situation where a false allegation was made.