• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

An Unbelievable Story of Rape

RavenSky

The Doctor's Wife
Joined
Oct 19, 2011
Messages
10,705
Location
Miami, Florida
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Yes, I'm sorry... it's another thread about rape, and false rape reports...

but I am sincerely hoping that some people will actually read the article. I warn you in advance, it is very long. It is also necessary to read all of it to understand what happened, how and why...

An 18-year-old said she was attacked at knifepoint. Then she said she made it up. That’s where our story begins.

She had reported being raped in her apartment by a man who had bound and gagged her. Then, confronted by police with inconsistencies in her story, she had conceded it might have been a dream. Then she admitted making the story up. One TV newscast announced, “A Western Washington woman has confessed that she cried wolf when it came to her rape she reported earlier this week.” She had been charged with filing a false report, which is why she was here today, to accept or turn down a plea deal.
Her lawyer was surprised she had been charged. Her story hadn’t hurt anyone — no suspects arrested, or even questioned. His guess was, the police felt used. They don’t appreciate having their time wasted.
The prosecution’s offer was this: If she met certain conditions for the next year, the charge would be dropped. She would need to get mental health counseling for her lying. She would need to go on supervised probation. She would need to keep straight, breaking no more laws. And she would have to pay $500 to cover the court’s costs.

Marie wanted this behind her.

She took the deal.

By early March, a forensic computer specialist cracked into files that O’Leary had stored on his hard drive. He found a folder called “girls” — and pictures that O’Leary had taken of his victims in Golden and Westminster. Galbraith recognized them by sight.

But then Galbraith stumbled across an image of a woman she didn’t recognize. It was a young woman — far younger than the Colorado victims, perhaps a teenager. The pictures showed her looking terrified, bound and gagged on a bed. Galbraith felt sick. How would she identify her? How would she find justice for her?
After looking through the images, she found an answer. It was a picture of the woman’s learner’s permit, placed on her chest. It had her name. And it had her address.

Lynnwood, Washington.

O’Leary pleaded guilty to 28 counts of rape and associated felonies in Colorado. On Dec. 9, 2011, almost a year after his arrest, O’Leary was sentenced to 327½ years in prison for the Colorado attacks — the maximum allowed by law. He is currently housed in the Sterling Correctional Facility in the barren, remote northeastern corner of Colorado. He will never be released.

After O’Leary was linked to Marie’s rape, Lynnwood Police Chief Steven Jensen requested an outside review of how his department had handled the investigation. In a report not previously made public, Sgt. Gregg Rinta, a sex crimes supervisor with the Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office, wrote that what happened was “nothing short of the victim being coerced into admitting that she lied about the rape.”

That Marie recanted wasn’t surprising, Rinta wrote, given the “bullying” and “hounding” she was subjected to. The detectives elevated “minor inconsistencies” — common among victims — into discrepancies, while ignoring strong evidence the crime had occurred. As for threatening jail and a possible withdrawal of housing assistance if Marie failed a polygraph: “These statements are coercive, cruel, and unbelievably unprofessional,” Rinta wrote. “I can’t imagine ANY justification for making these statements.”

Two and a half years after Marie was branded a liar, Lynnwood police found her, south of Seattle, and told her the news: Her rapist had been arrested in Colorado. They gave her an envelope with information on counseling for rape victims. They said her record would be expunged. And they handed her $500, a refund of her court costs.

https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story

If you choose not to actually read the article, that's fine. But don't bother commenting in this thread either.
 
I skimmed it, pretty sickening...

This story could easily be made into a very good (or very exploitive) movie.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?

The system is not infallible. Sometimes it gets things wrong. We should strive to make it better, and not one-sided by giving a pass to false rape accusers.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?

The system is not infallible. Sometimes it gets things wrong. We should strive to make it better, and not one-sided by giving a pass to false rape accusers.

I think that people must think that there is a clear and clean symmetry and equity between the acts of rape and false rape accusation and the prosecution of each. Different things are different. Proving a false rape accusation is different from proving a real rape. No matter how hard you try you can't make them the same.

This reminds me of this video on The Young Turks where Jimmy Dore talks about whether Madonna groped a minor (who looked 25 years old IMO) on stage was treated like a male singer (say Kid Rock) would have been.



He totally shut down this air headed woman (they also have air headed men on the panel at times) down with logic.

You Derec are often air headed about denying that different things are different. So blinded by ideology or some weird animus.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?
I don't see anywhere in the article or this thread where any of that was suggested. You must have imagined all that.

I think the moral of the story is that having police officers intimidate and threaten the people who ask for their help is not productive or acceptable.

Yes, every crime reported could be a prank or a lie. But without substantive evidence of a lie, all reports should be taken seriously.

What kind of country is this where you call to report a crime and the police threaten you with fines and imprisonment unless you recant? And then punish you further even after you recant? This is a problem. I don't know exactly how big of a problem this is, but it clearly has happened at least once, so it must exist.

Blind defenders of the status-quo criminal justice system may think this situation is good enough, but I don't.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?

The system is not infallible. Sometimes it gets things wrong. We should strive to make it better, and not one-sided by giving a pass to false rape accusers.

Wipe the spittle off your monitor and read the OP before responding.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?

The system is not infallible. Sometimes it gets things wrong. We should strive to make it better, and not one-sided by giving a pass to false rape accusers.
If you are not going to read the OP article, then don't comment on it.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?

The system is not infallible. Sometimes it gets things wrong. We should strive to make it better, and not one-sided by giving a pass to false rape accusers.
If you are not going to read the OP article, then don't comment on it.
Yeah, I'm confused. The Police were guilty of falsely accusing the woman of being a false accuser of rape. Not that they couldn't corroborate her story, not that they couldn't make a case, but they accused and charged her.

So why is Derec talking about false accusals of rape? No one is guilty of that in the OP.
 
So if police getting it wrong on a case of false rape claim means we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims does that mean that police getting it wrong on rape (there have been many cases of men wrongfully prosecuted and convicted of rape) means that we should stop prosecuting men for rape?

The system is not infallible. Sometimes it gets things wrong. We should strive to make it better, and not one-sided by giving a pass to false rape accusers.

You were the person I had most hoped (and least expected) to actually read the article. It is clear that you did not, so I will have to spoon-feed you:

First of all, NO ONE has suggested that "we should stop prosecuting women for filing false rape claims" so take that asinine strawman right off the table.

What IS suggested factually evidenced by the article is that, contrary to your constant claims in other threads, some women really will recant a rape report EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE IN FACT RAPED. This means that when you insist that XYZ women are lying liars who lied, YOU DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THAT. You just prefer to believe it.

Here is what the article did say:

Marie’s case led to changes in practices and culture, Rider said. Detectives receive additional training about rape victims. Rape victims get immediate assistance from advocates at a local healthcare center. Investigators must have “definitive proof” of lying before doubting a rape report, and a charge of false reporting must now be reviewed with higher-ups.

That is not the same as "lack of evidence for rape" or that the prosecution declines to take a case to trial or even that the woman withdraws her complaint. None of these means a woman has lied about being raped, and should therefore be prosecuted. Without CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF AN ACTUAL LIE there should not be any prosecution of a person who files a rape report.

Again from the article:

By the time Marie reported being assaulted, sex crime specialists had developed protocols that recognized the challenges and sensitivity of investigating rape cases. These guidelines, available to all police departments, detailed common missteps.

Investigators, one guide advised, should not assume that a true victim will be hysterical rather than calm; able to show clear signs of physical injury; and certain of every detail. Some victims confuse fine points or even recant. Nor should police get lost in stereotypes — believing, for example, that an adult victim will be more believable than an adolescent.

Police should not interrogate victims or threaten to use a polygraph device. Lie-detector tests are especially unreliable with people who have been traumatized, and can destroy the victim’s trust in law enforcement. Many states bar police from using them with rape victims.

But this is what the police did:

From what Mason wrote up later, he wasted little time confronting Marie, telling her there were inconsistencies between her statements and accounts from other witnesses. Marie said she didn’t know of any discrepancies. But she went through the story again — only this time, saying she believed the rape had happened instead of saying it for certain. Tearfully, she described her past — all the foster parents, being raped when she was 7, getting her own place and feeling alone. Rittgarn told Marie that her story and the evidence didn’t match. He said he believed she had made the story up — a spur-of-the-moment thing, not something planned out. He asked if there was really a rapist running around the neighborhood that the police should be looking for. “No,” Marie told him, her voice soft, her eyes down.

“Based on her answers and body language it was apparent that [Marie] was lying about the rape,” Rittgarn later wrote.
Without reading Marie her rights — you have the right to an attorney, you have the right to remain silent — the detectives asked Marie to write out the true story, admitting she had lied, admitting, in effect, that she had committed a crime. She agreed, so they left her alone for a few minutes. On the form she filled in her name, address and Social Security number, and then she wrote, in part:
I was talking to Jordan on the phone that night about his day and just about anything. After I got off the phone with him, I started thinking about all things I was stressed out and I also was scared living on my own. When I went to sleep I dreamed that someone broke in and raped me.

When the detectives returned, they saw that Marie’s new statement described the rape as a dream, not a lie.

Why didn’t you write that you made the story up? Rittgarn asked.

Marie, crying, said she believed the rape really happened. She pounded the table and said she was “pretty positive.”
Pretty positive or actually positive? Rittgarn asked.

Maybe the rape happened and I blacked it out, Marie said.

What do you think should happen to someone who would lie about something like this? Rittgarn asked Marie.

“I should get counseling,” Marie said.

Mason returned to the evidence. He told Marie that her description of calling Jordan was different from what Jordan had reported.
Marie, her face in her hands, looked down. Then “her eyes darted back and forth as if she was thinking of a response.”

The detectives doubled back to what she had said before — about being stressed, being lonely — and, eventually, Marie appeared to relax. She stopped crying. She even laughed a little. She apologized — and agreed to write another statement, leaving no doubt it was a lie.

I have had a lot of stressful things going on and I wanted to hang out with someone and no one was able to so I made up this story and didn’t expect it to go as far as it did. … I don’t know why I couldn’t have done something different. This was never meant to happen.

This statement appeared to satisfy the detectives. Rittgarn would later write, “Based on our interview with [Marie] and the inconsistencies found by Sgt. Mason in some of the statements we were confident that [Marie] was now telling us the truth that she had not been raped.”

To Marie, it seemed the questioning had lasted for hours. She did what she always did when under stress. She flipped the switch, as she called it, suppressing all the feelings she didn’t know what to do with. Before she confessed to making up the story, she couldn’t look the two detectives, the two men, in the eye. Afterward, she could. Afterward, she smiled. She went into the bathroom and cleaned up. Flipping the switch was a relief — and it would let her leave.

The next day, Marie told Wayne Nash, her case manager at Project Ladder, that the police didn’t believe her. Recognizing the jeopardy she was in, she said she wanted a lawyer.

The Project Ladder managers instead reached out to Sgt. Mason. He told them the evidence didn’t support Marie’s story, and that she had taken her story back.

But now, Marie wouldn’t give. On Aug. 18, one week after she reported being raped, she met with the two Project Ladder managers and insisted she had signed the recantation under duress. The three then went to the police station so Marie could recant her recantation — that is, tell detectives that she had been telling the truth the first time.

While the program managers waited outside, Marie met with Rittgarn and another officer.

Rittgarn asked Marie what was going on. Marie said she really had been raped — and began to cry, saying she was having visions of the man on top of her. She wanted to take a lie detector test. Rittgarn told Marie that if she took the test and failed, she would be booked into jail. What’s more, he would recommend that Project Ladder pull her housing assistance.

Marie backed down. The police officers walked her downstairs, where the Project Ladder representatives asked if she had been raped. Marie said no.

And yet we know without any shadow of doubt that Marie was in fact raped. The rapist took photos of his assault on her, complete with putting her driver's license on her chest and taking a photo of it while he had her tied up, gagged and blinded.

So Derec, have you learned anything at all from this article?
 
So Derec, have you learned anything at all from this article?
There is nothing for him to learn. This was an unfortunate case and women still lie about rape, so they must be persecuted... I mean prosecuted.
 
What most of you seem to be missing is that her story was false--while the rape apparently was real what she told the police wasn't.
 
What most of you seem to be missing is that her story was false--while the rape apparently was real what she told the police wasn't.

wrong.

Her "story" was true. Minor details were confused, which is completely normal.


Yes, which is normal human memory especially after trauma. They should have said I'm sorry we'll try and catch him but it will be tough.
 
What most of you seem to be missing is that her story was false--while the rape apparently was real what she told the police wasn't.

You mean the bullied and coerced statement was untrue, completely unproductive, unjust and left a rapist on the loose?
Yes, that is true.
Lesson, police harm themselves, their departments and the public when they bully and coerce.
I thought we already knew that?

Also, Rittgarn is a fucking asshole and if he still has a job then it points to the problem being with the police.
 
the article said:
Despite the reviews’ tough language, no one in the Lynnwood Police Department was disciplined.

Knowing how intensely concerned Derec is with cases of false accusation, I am certain he is apoplectic over these cops not being in jail for their crime of lying about a rape and accusing an innocent person. It is, as we know, worse than the rape itself. To Derec.





(This woman, Marie, is an incredible person. I hope she is able to continue her recovery and can lead a safe and happy life.)
 
What most of you seem to be missing is that her story was false--while the rape apparently was real what she told the police wasn't.
As the OP article proved, and as Ravensky re-iterated - her story was true until she was hounded off it. WTF is wrong with you?
 
What most of you seem to be missing is that her story was false--while the rape apparently was real what she told the police wasn't.
As the OP article proved, and as Ravensky re-iterated - her story was true until she was hounded off it. WTF is wrong with you?
LP's wife has never been hounded and harassed by the police about a crime she was trying to report.
 
Back
Top Bottom