A MOTHER of two who falsely accused her estranged husband of rape because she wanted him out of her life was jailed for four months yesterday.
Surprising really, given how rare we\’re told such cases are.
A MOTHER of two who falsely accused her estranged husband of rape because she wanted him out of her life was jailed for four months yesterday.
Surprising really, given how rare we\’re told such cases are.
Only because she is one of the dumbest people on the planet.
Aside from this it is almost impossible for someone to be falsely accussed under the new rules where, from what I understand, you can decide you have been raped after you have finished having sex and the guy has long gone.
Best just killing your one night stands just in case. You get less time as well.
Should there be some kind of benchmark for rarity? So after x number of these cases have been found, you can express that it isn’t a rare event, rather than just sniping after each news report.
“Best just killing your one night stands just in case. You get less time as well.”
Heh! Well, why not? That’s always one of the arguments the do-gooders raise when capital punishment is discussed, after all…
“Should there be some kind of benchmark for rarity? “
Johnb did once (here? or some other blog?) confidently predict that these only came along ‘about once every six months’. All I can say is, he needs a new calendar…
Well, this lady got what she wanted so she’ll be happy.
And quit whinging Lord T. Certainly in Scotland, the distress, or lack of it, of a woman in the aftermath of an alleged rape, and the length of time taken to report an incident to the police are factors which may influence the outcome of a case if it makes it to court. So the longer a woman leaves it, the less convincing her allegation will be. At least, that’s the law in Scotland as I understand it. Don’t know about you wacky English peeps.
“At least, that’s the law in Scotland as I understand it. Don’t know about you wacky English peeps.”
In which case you are conceding that Lord T may well have a valid point. Still, at least you got to show off how non-reactionary and right-on you are, so that’s the main thing.
As always, if these cases weren’t rare, they wouldn’t be reported. An ‘ex rapes ex’ story would be lucky to make the local rag, nevermind the nationals.
(and IIRC I last made that point the last time one of these cases came round, which was – shock horror – about six months ago…)
“(and IIRC I last made that point the last time one of these cases came round, which was – shock horror – about six months ago…)”
Oh, really?
Gosh.
It seems that six months just flies by, doesn’t it?
Maybe it’s just a court logjam?
Can’t be that johnb is full of crap, could it?
So your megatrawl of all UK news comes up with five cases[*] over the last six months. Do we think the number of rapes over the same timeframe is closer to 5, 50, 500, 5,000 or 50,000 (clue: it’s closer to 50,000).
Does that suggest a) false rape cases are very rare, and that’s why they make the news or b) there is an EVIL FEMINAZI CONSPIRACY!!!!! to LOCK UP INNOCENT MENZ? (clue: a)
[*] fairly obviously, the one from 2007, and the one where a pissed-up chavette got confused over which bloke touched her up, don’t count.
Tim adds:
“The data published today showed that the number of rapes reported to the police has increased from 7,128 in 1998 to 11,634 in 2007 while only 6 per cent of the latter resulted in a court conviction. ”
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/policing-and-crime/rape-conviction-rates-fall-$1306070.htm
Nearer 5,000…..as of course false reports to the police of rape are only going to be a subset of all rapes reported, are they not?
“So your megatrawl of all UK news comes up with five cases[*] over the last six months.”
It’s certainly more than the ‘one’ you claimed, isn’t it?
And I didn’t trawl any further back than whacking ‘lying about rape’ into my own blog and picking up those first tagged examples. You see, I keep an eye on such things, but I don’t post on all of them.
I haven’t, for instance, posted on the one Tim highlighted…
Chris,
I think conceding Lord T’s point that you might as well kill your one night stand to avoid a rape charge is a little pointless. He wasn’t being serious, just frustrated and emotional.
So Lord T gets to have a whinge, I get to look right-on and non-judgemental and you get to be po-faced and earnest. Everybody wins!!!!
Is it always like that on this blog?
Johnb,
> As always, if these cases weren’t rare, they wouldn’t be reported.
Excellent. So, next time I read a report of a white person being racist towards a black person, I can use that as evidence that most white people are not at all racist. Next time I read a report of a pop star taking drugs, I can use that as evidence that most pop stars don’t touch drugs. Next time I read a fauning report of Barack Obama saying something intelligent, I can use that as evidence that the guy’s a bloody idiot.
Glad we cleared that up.
The brisk and severe rogering the hapless johnb’s taken in this thread is stirring a faint sense of…something…in me.
Could it be pity?
Your shrieking denunciations don’t even count as a mild pasting, nevermind a rogering. Tim’s point on order-of-magnitude is fair, but 5000 to 5 is still a pretty wide margin. And while clearly S2’s examples are amusing, it doesn’t alter the fact that ‘for a given level of seriousness, the rarer something is, the more likely it is to make the news’ is a principle that’s hard to deny.
Attaboy! Don’t let reality get you down.
You’re a winner, you keep telling yourself that… 😉
Gosh!
Just a couple of dayslater, we have yet another rare case.
Care to comment again, johnb?
Or are you licking your wounds somewhere?
Pingback: The world is speeding up.