A woman's false accusations are "evidence in itself"

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2007-04-14 16:54

More nonsensical reactions to the Duke scandal from a public official. (Link goes to page two of article, where this gem can be found - emphasis mine):

"I think the district attorney went to the grand jury far sooner than he should have. If the district attorney had waited and gathered more information and tried to understand it, I think he would have had a better understanding of what the case was, and what is was not. On the other hand, he did have someone that said she was sexually assaulted, and that creates evidence in itself." — Lewis Cheek, Durham County commissioner who lent his name to a campaign last November to unseat Nifong

A potentially false accusation not supported by any actual evidence (and with a 41% chance of being a lie) is "evidence in itself"? When is a man's word ever considered "evidence", particularly regarding crimes where the accuser has been shown to be lying nearly half the time?

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

What is missing in all the reactions of these various officials is an explicit condemnation of the accuser, said in no uncertain terms. If roles were reversed, of course any man who was a false accuser of three women of any given crime would be utterly pilloried if even the smallest part of his story seemed inconsistent. In this case, the accuser's story plot was utterly inconsistent with verifiable facts but that seems like it's the 800-lb. gorilla in the room no one really wants to get to. They are fast to judge Nifong, and that is good that they do. They seem incapable of passing judgment though on the accuser, who is in no uncertain terms as guilty of a crime as Nifong.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by mcc99 on Sat, 2007-04-14 19:03

Our friend Wendy M. had something on her web site a while back, about how the 41% false accusation number is probably too high. Someone (I think it was her) did an analysis of Department of Justice statistics (Bureau of Justice Statistics - BJS)/FBI data, and came up with about 25% (1 in 4 are false). I don't remember if that included date rape, but even if it did that would not make it 41%. In fact the 41% might be for date rape itself - does anyone know?

Of course 25% is still ridiculously high. If only the public knew..
She also stated the obvious, that valid scientific studies need to be done on this issue, since she could not find any existing reliable large-scale ones that have been done.
-ax

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Sat, 2007-04-14 22:24

I absolutely agree with mcc99. I've noticed a consistent failure on the part of pundits, attorneys, legal analysts, etc to condemn the false accuser, Crystal Mangum. Bill O'Reilly makes excuses for her saying that she is troubled and it wouldn't serve any purpose for him to tear into her. Others say similar things about her mental state to justify going soft on her. Shawn Hannity, to his credit, has spoken out against her and, I believe, has said that she ought to be prosecuted.

It's true that if the genders were reversed, the reaction from the public, the media, legal analysts, and law enforcement would be entirely different. This is just one of many cases that illustrates a double standard favoring females over males.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by gregory on Sun, 2007-04-15 00:54

The 41% statistic for false rape reporting comes from a 1994 study by Eugine Kanin from Purdue University (Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 1994). He examined rape reports from a "mid-size" town and found 45 out of 109 complaints to be false. For a rape accusation to be considered false, the woman had to recant her accusation with full knowledge that a false police report was a crime. I believe that the evidence, or lack of, also had to suggest that the accusation was false. These are fairly stringent requirements. Using this methodology, the Duke case would *not* be considered a false accusation. Hence, it is likely that the 41% figure under estimates the true percentage, at least for this relatively small sample size and demographic.

Kanin was primarily interested in the reasons women give false accusations, as opposed to the percentage. The primary reasons were alibi, revenge, and attention.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by shawn on Sun, 2007-04-15 02:09

Both are "troubled". Both are psychopaths.
Both destroy lives that they come in contact with.

Biggest difference?
One has a penis and one has a vagina.
It seems to make all the difference in the world in terms of punishment.

oregon dad

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by oregon dad on Sun, 2007-04-15 03:51

She said some guy did a good solid study but it was just on two universites (hmmm..maybe it's not the same study); but I don't think that is representative of the general populace and neither does she. Besides, young people are more likely to be frivolous (not to insult any one, but I know I myself was more whimsical at that age); so a female students may make a frivolous date rape claim, for example if she is rejected in the morning, or she percieves the guy "cheats" on her later.

You have to figure that if some typical girl "dates" once or twice each with, say, 6 guys during her 4-year academic career (vice the ones who have a couple of steady boyfriends), there is a lot more likelihood for a false rape accusation, than for some older, settled woman being raped on the street (or even by someone who knows her).

Maybe I'm completely wrong, but it just seems like common sense :)

-ax

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Sun, 2007-04-15 22:19