Falsely-accused Man Denied Right to Sue

	posted by Matt on 06:03 PM September 27th, 2005
	Anonymous User writes "M is for Malevolent reports on a case from the Rapid City Journal where a young man's life was worth far less than the testimony of a few young girls who needed an excuse for truancy. The alibis of the young man from his job and those who were with him that day didn't matter, and neither did the evidence. What mattered was that he was male, and the girls picked his picture out of a police book of photos. He spent 86 days in jail, was severely beaten by other prisoners, lost his job, his home, and his car. Just for being a man."

<  Lynndie England Goes Down | Fathers-4-Justice, UK is back in the news  >

  

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tea anyone ? (Score:1) by Gang-banged on 12:12 AM September 28th, 2005 EST (#1) (User #1714 Info) No taxation without representation, was once the cry, and this lead to the creation of a new country and a Bill of Rights. Whilst the Boston Tea Party may be difficult to re-enact . . surely someone can come up with a similar way to make the point.

no suprise (Score:1, Interesting) by Anonymous User on 08:26 AM September 28th, 2005 EST (#2) this is what brought me here... ex used false DV allegations in MA USA, and I got arrested, name in paper, spent a week in jail waiting for bail to get set as the "system" prolonged things for me. My ex got every upperhand in divorce and used the false allegation to cover the disgrace of the lesbian affair she had for years while married. nice...huh I tell other men, and it is like they are conditoned to think that "i must have done somethign wrong..." the feminist revolution is at hand. their enemy is the truth. They will fail. lies die.

This seriously stinks (Score:0) by Anonymous User on 12:20 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#3) No recourse just because the police believed the kids. This blows. As one acquited Reagan aide asked, "Where do I go to get my reputation back?" Are the kids going to at least be prosecuted in juvenille court for their false statement? Believe it when you see it.

Re:This seriously stinks (Score:0) by Anonymous User on 08:50 AM September 29th, 2005 EST (#5) It sounds reasonable to me as those little skanks did knowingly file false police reports. Also don't forget the boyfriend. I find it hard to believe that South Dakota's age of consent is 12 or 13.

A couple of interesting notes (Score:0) by Anonymous User on 08:37 AM September 29th, 2005 EST (#4) Did you notice in the article that the judge found the MOTHERS of those brats liable. Note not parents or fathers. No father involvement apparently, so why do these women have custody in the first place?! The other interesting item: One of the girls admitted to having sex that same day. The older one was thirteen (13) at the time of that incident. What in heaven's name is a 13 or 12 year old doing screwing around. Could she be simply following mommy's stering [sarcasm] example? If this case is not a strong argument for father custody, you tell me what is...

[an error occurred while processing this directive]