nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

False rape accusation...who would you believe?

jeanjolie

False rape accusation is an unlikely though possibly frightening thing that can happen to a man. He can lose his job, lose friends, go on the sex offender list, and even if he's removed of it, vigilantes will probably attack him. I'm not aware of anyone in Ireland who has been accused but then again I don't have many male friends.

Getting to the point, rape is a pretty difficult crime to prosecute due to the nature (the act is legal itself), however on the unfortunate flip side, your 'character' and 'reputation' is usually judged regardless of evidence.

An example is n the US, a high number of false rape cases involved poor African American males due to their generally low socioeconomic status, high crime rates (for that racial group, not every black person). Even if they would never harm their children or girlfriend, the idea that 'If you've done this in the past, then you've probably done this or are capable of this' is very prevalent.

So now using an Irish example, if you go back to you secondary school as a teenager and knew this weird quiet lad who was quite creepy and made some sexual jokes and inappropriate jokes on and off. A girl you know in your social circle befriends this guy, they hang out and have rough anal sex, she doesn't like it, falls out with this guy and then she spreads this rumor that she was sodomized by this guy. Would you believe her? This guy is very weird and she does share weird things that he has said to her, but denies rape.

It's scary to think that a bunch of teen lads from my school would probably beat up the guy based of a lie like that, but then again he doesn't have a good reputation.

Realistically, what would you do?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

jimwallace197

bubblypop wrote: »

I have never ever claimed any such thing.
Never.
Post reported.

Go ahead with your reporting, its all your good for. You have claimed many times to be a member of AGS and then you come onto threads like this deliberately antagonizing posters

...Ghost...

bubblypop wrote: »

There's no talking to some posters, the belief that every not guilty verdict equals a vexatious complaint, is just ridiculous.

I very much agree with you here. Some guilty people walk free because of a lack of evidence, or the jury couldn't be convinced beyond reasonable doubt and it's a tragedy for the person wronged.

But then there are the innocent men who rightfully receive a "not-guilty" verdict, but are still tarred for life.

The false accusers don't have to face that problem and are supported by their cheer leaders even when their version of events turns to BS.

...Ghost...

bubblypop wrote: »

I have never ever claimed any such thing.
Never.
Post reported.

Never claimed to be a member of the Gardaí. Or the AGS protection services unit? I've never heard of the latter tbh.

jimwallace197

bubblypop wrote: »

I have never ever claimed any such thing.
Never.
Post reported.

So you say you're not claiming to be one but you're not denying it either.

Which is it? Either you are or are not a member of AGS.

I could've sworn you have posted many times on the garda recruitment thread amongst many others claiming to be one.

iptba

With regard to any statistics, just to point out that as well as false reports, there are also other types of cases which are in a more grey area. For example, the NI case involving rugby players I doubt would be counted as a false report.

Smee_Again

iptba wrote: »

With regard to any statistics, just to point out that as well as false reports, there are also other types of cases which are in a more grey area. For example, the NI case involving rugby players I doubt would be counted as a false report.

You’re probably right, but they’d barely make a dent in the figures I posted above.

Only a faction of rapes actually get reported and only a fraction of those are false reports.

As long as unreported rapes are > reported rapes then false allegations will be < unreported rapes.

Wibbs

jimwallace197, you were warned a couple of pages ago about musing on another poster's job and you didn't heed it. Take a week off from the forum. No more on this score and let's keep this tidy and civil or more bans will be handed out. One warning is all that will be posted. Thanks.

Lisha

"Caquas wrote: »

The Judge's comment you quote is extraordinary:

If there was a sexual element in this case, why was he not so charged? Is the Judge saying his is a sex offender who will not be on the sex offenders register?

Let me reiterate my basic points: the facts of this case as reported in the media do not amount to the crime of coercion and, even assuming there are facts which validate the charge, this man was subjected to a sentence which was in line with those for vicious assaults although there was no violence involved.

I’ve been stunned reading some of the comments in this case. To put it bluntly, I have an 11yr old daughter, if any person, be it an adult or an older teenager approached her and asked her to go for a walk, I would see it as a threat to my child’s safety. And I would want the judicial system to act appropriately so no other child would be in danger from someone who thinks it’s ok to see children as ‘dates’.

And if I didn’t have a daughter I’d still feel the same.

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

You’re probably right, but they’d barely make a dent in the figures I posted above.

Only a faction of rapes actually get reported and only a fraction of those are false reports.

As long as unreported rapes are > reported rapes then false allegations will be < unreported rapes.

Genuine question. How much weight would you give to a report showing a near reversal of those figures commissioned by a mens rights group?

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

Genuine question. How much weight would you give to a report showing a near reversal of those figures commissioned by a mens rights group?

Does one exist?

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

Does one exist?

I'll get to that later. How much weight would you put into a similar report commissioned by a mens rights group?

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

I'll get to that later. How much weight would you put into a similar report commissioned by a mens rights group?

How long is a piece of string, impossible to say without seeing the report.

If you have such a report post it and I’ll look at it and give you an honest answer.

It might take me a while to read it and understand the methodology so you’ll have to bear with me.

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

How long is a piece of string, impossible to say without seeing the report.

If you have such a report post it and I’ll look at it and give you an honest answer.

It might take me a while to read it and understand the methodology so you’ll have to bear with me.

Take it as a hypothetical. A mens rights group commission a report using the same approach, only it shows 92% of rape allegations are false and only 6% are credible. Ask yourself honestly how much credit you would give to such a report. And if it's a different weighting to report you referenced, why?

I am of the view that a report which favours the agenda, beliefs or financial interests of those who commissioned it is not worth wiping your @rse with. This is especially true when the data collected cannot be independently verified.

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

Take it as a hypothetical. A mens rights group commission a report using the same approach, only it shows 92% of rape allegations are false and only 6% are credible. Ask yourself honestly how much credit you would give to such a report. And if it's a different weighting to report you referenced, why?

I am of the view that a report which favours the agenda, beliefs or financial interests of those who commissioned it is not worth wiping your @rse with. This is especially true when the data collected cannot be independently verified.

I’d take issue with the methodology because they’ve only accounted for 98% of the allegations.

But even if 92% are false that means the ratio of false allegations to unreported rapes is still 12.5 unreported rapes for every 1 false allegation.

So even with your hypothetical made up figures you can’t refute my claim that there are far more unreported rapes than false allegations of rape.

Again I’m happy to read such a report if one exists, otherwise I’ll continue to treat your posts as the nonsense that they are.

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

Genuine question. How much weight would you give to a report showing a near reversal of those figures commissioned by a mens rights group?

Smee_Again wrote: »

Does one exist?

...Ghost... wrote: »

I'll get to that later. How much weight would you put into a similar report commissioned by a mens rights group?

...Ghost... wrote: »

Take it as a hypothetical.

By "get to that later" did you mean just making one up?

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

I’d take issue with the methodology because they’ve only accounted for 98% of the allegations.

But even if 92% are false that means the ratio of false allegations to unreported rapes is still 12.5 unreported rapes for every 1 false allegation.

So even with your hypothetical made up figures you can’t refute my claim that there are far more unreported rapes than false allegations of rape.

Again I’m happy to read such a report if one exists, otherwise I’ll continue to treat your posts as the nonsense that they are.

Interesting that you would treat someones posts as nonsense simply for having a different critical view, rather than treating each post based on it's own content. That attitude shows that you wouldn't consider a similar study on its merits were it to be commissioned by a mens rights group, because you're so caught up in trying to prove the unprovable.

I don't treat your posts as nonsense. I see most of them as incorrect and at odds with my own take, but nonsense, no. While I might often disagree with certain posters in various forums, I'm not so blind as to mark them as some sort of enemy. I simply contribute and debate and ask questions such as is the point of boards.ie . I've even been known to thank a couple of bubblys posts even though we are usually at opposite ends of the spectrum.

The only nonsense is the report you have relied upon to prove a point. Despite the opening line of the executive summary outlining that the figures are unknown and are an estimate (based on an unverifiable data group) you decided to knuckle down anyway. Sorry to be the one to burst your bubble, but that's no reason to write off my posts as nonsense. Perhaps when someone you know falls foul of a clear false accusation, your cough might soften.

I personally would not trust any report commissioned by an organisation with bias agenda. Had the report been independently commissioned, I wouldn't trust it anyway because the sample size is too small and the data cannot be verified. I haven't gone through the full report, because I know it's nonsense and the people making the phone calls were no doubt trained by DRCC and had a set of questions designed by the DRCC. Low figures would not have been to their favour, so it was in their interest to have such a report done in that way.

I didn't see any control measure for those who claimed to have been raped, but which were actually false. What do people have to gain by lying in an anonymised interview you might ask. Well, people do strange sh1t all the time and a lie told once is easily told twice.

Smee_Again

That's a very long winded way of saying the report you alluded to previously doesn't exist.

So in the absence of any contradicting evidence, real or hypothetical imaginary, I'll stick to my original statement, backed by evidence, that there are far more unreported rapes than false allegations of rape.

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

That's a very long winded way of saying the report you alluded to previously doesn't exist.

So in the absence of any contradicting evidence, real or hypothetical imaginary, I'll stick to my original statement, backed by evidence, that there are far more unreported rapes than false allegations of rape.

Of course it is your choice to stick to whatever "evidence" you wish. But if that is all you have to rely on, i'll stick to my belief that the "evidence" put forward is at best, biased and manipulated. At least they have enough integrity to point out themselves that the report is essentially fairytale figures and can't be relied upon. In fairness, had they not included that, the report would have been attacked and rubbished at every level. They are basically saying it's a fiction piece.

...Ghost...

Here is a more recent report I gleamed https://web.archive.org/web/20180101025446/https://icdv.idaho.gov/conference/handouts/False-Allegations.pdf . It's more recent and shows that 2-10% of false allegations that are investigated were PROVEN to be false. We don't have a more recent Irish equivalent, but given the incompetence often seen with our Gardaí and the DPP, I wouldn't hold much value in their willingness to tackle false allegations.

It's fair to assume that many were unproven, but were still false.....same as it is fair to assume that some rapists go free because it could not be proven. Oh and these are only figures reported to authorities, so there weren't any anonymous phone calls made by activists employees of rape crisis organisations.

Although not based in Ireland, I see no reason why the figures would not be comparable.

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

Here is a more recent report I gleamed https://web.archive.org/web/20180101025446/https://icdv.idaho.gov/conference/handouts/False-Allegations.pdf . It's more recent and shows that 2-10% of false allegations that are investigated were PROVEN to be false. We don't have a more recent Irish equivalent, but given the incompetence often seen with our Gardaí and the DPP, I wouldn't hold much value in their willingness to tackle false allegations.

It's fair to assume that many were unproven, but were still false.....same as it is fair to assume that some rapists go free because it could not be proven. Oh and these are only figures reported to authorities, so there weren't any anonymous phone calls made by activists employees of rape crisis organisations.

Although not based in Ireland, I see no reason why the figures would not be comparable.

I read this before and it is referenced in the second report I linked earlier, footnote 31 if you're interested.

So, lets go with 10% are false. That puts the ratio of unreported rapes to false allegations at 110:1.

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

I read this before and it is referenced in the second report I linked earlier, footnote 31 if you're interested.

So, lets go with 10% are false. That puts the ratio of unreported rapes to false allegations at 110:1.

Well, no, let's not. If we are to work off the 10% proven, then it's only fair to work off the percentage of proven rapes and that wouldn't work very well for you at all. The proven false allegation figure compared to the proven rape figure would have heads spinning.

I'll stick to my assertion that the DRCC commissioned survey is b0llix, because that's essentially what they say themselves in the executive summary, first line.

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

Well, no, let's not. If we are to work off the 10% proven, then it's only fair to work off the percentage of proven rapes and that wouldn't work very well for you at all. The proven false allegation figure compared to the proven rape figure would have heads spinning.

I'll stick to my assertion that the DRCC commissioned survey is b0llix, because that's essentially what they say themselves in the executive summary, first line.

Post a sourced figure of the % of rapes that are reported.

I already have but you seem reluctant to, it doesn’t have to be from Ireland.

You alluded to a report yesterday but then posted imaginary figures that didn’t actually refute or contradict my points

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

Post a sourced figure of the % of rapes that are reported.

Any such source would not be credible, because there is no way to know how many go unreported and there is no way to know how many are false. We can guess and put forward studies and biased commissioned surveys, but the fact is, nobody knows and I don't pretend to.

I already have but you seem reluctant to, it doesn’t have to be from Ireland.

Once again. Your report has about the same integrity as a chocolate kettle and this is stated in the report itself. You seem to have difficulty accepting that. If you are holding the report up as your proof, then at least have the rectitude to accept that the report admits it's at best, an estimate and they actually don't know the percentages.

You alluded to a report yesterday but then posted imaginary figures that didn’t actually refute or contradict my points

I never claimed there was a report. I asked you how much weight you would put in such a report. I suspect the dancing around the answer was to prevent yourself from being rabbit holed just incase I produced one.

I don't know if there is such a report and if there were, I wouldn't believe it, or hold it up as proof of anything, because I know it would be biased and that it is simply not possible to gather the data and present it credibly.

How do you think a human rights report in China might look if it were commissioned by the CCP? I'm sure they would hold their hands up and admit to all their wrongs, aren't you?

I have no need to contradict the report you linked, because it clearly says the figures are estimates and none of the data can be verified. It's as credible as the work of fiction it is. But, sure.... you keep holding that up as proof. It's just not proving what you hoped it would.

Smee_Again

We'll leave it there so, I've given you ample opportunity to present some figures and the best you could do was to make some up. Everyone can take from that what they want.

...Ghost...

Smee_Again wrote: »

We'll leave it there so, I've given you ample opportunity to present some figures and the best you could do was to make some up. Everyone can take from that what they want.

Like the DRCC did?

Yeah, best leave it there.

Smee_Again

...Ghost... wrote: »

Like the DRCC did?

Yeah, best leave it there.

If you don't like the DRCC report I'll use the estimates from the report you helpfully linked above.

It said that estimates put the number of reported rapes and sexual abuse at between 36% and 4%.

Using these figures, and 10% as the number of false allegations (again provided by you) that puts the range of unreported rapes to false allegations at between 18:1 and 240:1.

That higher range is much worse than I previously thought, so thanks for highlighting that.

...Ghost...

So much for leaving it there eh?

Smee_Again wrote: »

If you don't like the DRCC report I'll use the estimates from the report you helpfully linked above.

I don't trust the report from the DRCC and wouldn't put much weight in the report I linked to either. The point was to show the figures are all over the place. But when investigated, the PROVEN false allegations is far higher than you thought.

It said that estimates put the number of reported rapes and sexual abuse at between 36% and 4%.

Using these figures, and 10% as the number of false allegations (again provided by you) that puts the range of unreported rapes to false allegations at between 18:1 and 240:1.

That higher range is much worse than I previously thought, so thanks for highlighting that.

:pac: Try again.

I'll say again that these reports are fantasy and the wildly fluctuating figures show this to any person with comprehension skills. I could direct you to the report and point out that a cited report within it showed a false allegation rate of just below 64%.

The thing is, I personally believe (unreported) false allegations are above 60% and I don't care to guess how many reported allegations are false. The fact is, I don't know, the DRCC doesn't know and neither do you. By all means, keep working the ratios, but in the end, the result is a complete guess.

ittakestwo

...Ghost... wrote: »

So much for leaving it there eh?

I don't trust the report from the DRCC and wouldn't put much weight in the report I linked to either. The point was to show the figures are all over the place. But when investigated, the PROVEN false allegations is far higher than you thought.

:pac: Try again.

I'll say again that these reports are fantasy and the wildly fluctuating figures show this to any person with comprehension skills. I could direct you to the report and point out that a cited report within it showed a false allegation rate of just below 64%.

The thing is, I personally believe (unreported) false allegations are above 60% and I don't care to guess how many reported allegations are false. The fact is, I don't know, the DRCC doesn't know and neither do you. By all means, keep working the ratios, but in the end, the result is a complete guess.

What is an unreported false allegation. Surly a false allegation needs to be reported to make it a false allegation?

And how can you come up with a figure of 60% when you say statistics are not reliable..... is this from your own observations in life?

Smee_Again

ittakestwo wrote: »

What is an unreported false allegation. Surly a false allegation needs to be reported to make it a false allegation?

And how can you come up with a figure of 60% when you say statistics are not reliable..... is this from your own observations in life?

Don't waste your time. I've shown, using facts and figures provided by that poster, how rare false allegations are but when faced with that he relies on personal beliefs.

It's impossible to actually have a discussion when facts are dismissed for beliefs.

...Ghost...

ittakestwo wrote: »

What is an unreported false allegation. Surly a false allegation needs to be reported to make it a false allegation?

And how can you come up with a figure of 60% when you say statistics are not reliable..... is this from your own observations in life?

An unreported false allegation is one not reported to the Gardaí, but instead is spread among the accusers friends/family/community to smear the innocent person accused.

I was pretty clear when I said the figure of 60% was my own belief. There is no way to back up ANY figures and if I were to by my own observations, I would have to say 100% are false, because I know of a couple of false accusations which were made and I know of zero rapes that happened within my own extended circle over the years.

Whether a false allegation is reported or not, damage is done and I believe it's far more common than the like of the DRCC and its cheer leaders on here would like to believe.

Smee_Again wrote: »

Don't waste your time. I've shown, using facts and figures provided by that poster, how rare false allegations are but when faced with that he relies on personal beliefs.

It's impossible to actually have a discussion when facts are dismissed for beliefs.

And now you're talking nonsense. I've put forward my views and said several times why I would not trust figures you linked, but you are willfully ignoring the fact that the report self cancels by its own admission to the fact that their figures are an estimate.

It's impossible to have a logical discussion with someone who claims biased, unverifiable data is the same as fact. At least I have the decorum to clearly state that the figures I may put forward are my own guess and i'm not trying to back them up with data I wouldn't wipe my @rse with.

If you seriously hold the DRCC funded report up as some beacon of truth/fact, I don't think anyone can or should take you seriously.

Your only hope is to open that report you hold so dear and write the first line of the executive summary 100 times. It's not too late.