An Unbelievable Story of Rape

[Malintent]

No it doesn't. This is not the same police force or DA as the other cases in your hobby horse list.

No, but false rape accusations are almost never prosecuted throughout the US. So it doesn't matter which police force/DA we are talking about. Unless you think police acted maliciously Marie led them to believe she was lying about her rape.

I think there is some question as to how much Marie "led" the cops to disbelieve her, so much as how much the cops "led" Marie into backing down.

But yes, she was crazy... and we are programmed to mistrust crazy. As we should be.

 

[laughing dog]

No, but false rape accusations are almost never prosecuted throughout the US. So it doesn't matter which police force/DA we are talking about. Unless you think police acted maliciously Marie led them to believe she was lying about her rape.

I think there is some question as to how much Marie "led" the cops to disbelieve her, so much as how much the cops "led" Marie into backing down.

An outside investigator (who is a police officer) found that the police did not follow established protocols and that she was bullied. So there was no question to the investigator nor to the captain of the police force who accepted the findings of the investigation.

Whether she "led" them to "disbelieve" her, can you offer an intelligent rationale for them to threaten her with charges in order for her to change her story? After all, they could have just concluded that they did not believe her and left it at that.

But yes, she was crazy... and we are programmed to mistrust crazy. As we should be.

You came to this diagnosis based on your expertise and many years of practice or by pulling something out of the air?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Wow. What type of character does it take for a person to remark that a woman who was abused as a child, and then just recently was brutally sexually assaulted has "psychological problems" because of the way she reacted?

Seems quite inhuman.

Unfortunately the only way we could really tell is from the questioning interviews but we don't have them.

I was talking about Derec's response. Not the police.

- - - Updated - - -

No, but false rape accusations are almost never prosecuted throughout the US. So it doesn't matter which police force/DA we are talking about. Unless you think police acted maliciously Marie led them to believe she was lying about her rape.

I think there is some question as to how much Marie "led" the cops to disbelieve her, so much as how much the cops "led" Marie into backing down.

But yes, she was crazy... and we are programmed to mistrust crazy. As we should be.

Are we Poe'ing again here?

 

[Malintent]

Proportionately, far fewer rapes are prosecuted.

But leave it to you to blame her.

Not so much blame her, but I do not think police were malicious either. They really thought she was lying. As I said, I do not blame her - she seems to have some psychological problems which is why she seemed "off". It was a tragic mistake by police, but I see no malice.

You are blaming her. Her reactions to her rape were not "off". If you had bothered to read the articles linked in this thread, you would know that. Had the police and her idiot foster mother bothered to get the training both should have had, they would have known that, too. And the police ARE 100% to blame for their bullying. That was pure malice.

Stop blaming the victim.

First of all, Raven, please stop accusing people of not bothering to read what you linked, because you don't like the conclusions they draw. It is rather impolite, and slightly against forum policy here (calling someone a liar). I spend a good 20 minutes reading that long ass story, and while I didn't notice you making that accusation at me, Arct did. And it is offensive. So stop that, please.

Second of all, in addition to the article mentioning that they should have known that women sometimes react to rape in a non-intuitive way, they also said that when suspects asks, "am I in trouble?", it "usually means they know they did something wrong". so the article is also perpetuating other bad stereotypical criminology. Point being, cops sometimes get 'false hunches'... and it is not targeted to rape victims exclusively.

It is hard not to phrase it in a way that sounds 'victim blaming' (Marie was a victim.. and should not be blamed). But the problem does sound like the victims need to "pull their shit together" slightly better when dealing with the criminal system, so as to give the cops usable information to help protect others. Perhaps if sex wasn't such a taboo topic, rape reports would be more consistent with other types of assault reports, in terms of how the victim handles themselves.

Why is the assault where an attacker penetrates a woman's vagina with a penis so radically different than when an attacker penetrates a woman's stomach with a knife, in terms of how the woman reports the assault? The latter is so much more physically damaging and life threatening, but the former is so much more emotionally damaging.. to the point of being difficult to report in a useful, consistent way.. why?

- - - Updated - - -

Proportionately, far fewer rapes are prosecuted.

But leave it to you to blame her.

Not so much blame her, but I do not think police were malicious either. They really thought she was lying. As I said, I do not blame her - she seems to have some psychological problems which is why she seemed "off". It was a tragic mistake by police, but I see no malice.

You are blaming her. Her reactions to her rape were not "off". If you had bothered to read the articles linked in this thread, you would know that. Had the police and her idiot foster mother bothered to get the training both should have had, they would have known that, too. And the police ARE 100% to blame for their bullying. That was pure malice.

Stop blaming the victim.

Was the $500.00 refund to stop a massive lawsuit? The police have an inherent problem of assuming some people are guilty because they think they are. Sifting through evidence even if there are inconsistencies is still essential. Some are stupid and assume guilt and then tailor their investigations accordingly.

No. It was just the right thing to do. And (spoiler alert for those that didn't read the whole thing, WP) there WAS a lawsuit, and she was awarded something like $100,000.

 

[laughing dog]

First of all, Raven, please stop accusing people of not bothering to read what you linked, because you don't like the conclusions they draw. It is rather impolite, and slightly against forum policy here (calling someone a liar). I spend a good 20 minutes reading that long ass story, and while I didn't notice you making that accusation at me, Arct did. And it is offensive. So stop that, please.

When the conclusions are either baldy contradicted by the facts in the linked article or based on facts not in evidence or just incredibly stupid, it is more reasonable and polite to wonder if the poster had read the piece.

 

[Malintent]

I think there is some question as to how much Marie "led" the cops to disbelieve her, so much as how much the cops "led" Marie into backing down.

An outside investigator (who is a police officer) found that the police did not follow established protocols and that she was bullied. So there was no question to the investigator nor to the captain of the police force who accepted the findings of the investigation.

Whether she "led" them to "disbelieve" her, can you offer an intelligent rationale for them to threaten her with charges in order for her to change her story? After all, they could have just concluded that they did not believe her and left it at that.

But yes, she was crazy... and we are programmed to mistrust crazy. As we should be.

You came to this diagnosis based on your expertise and many years of practice or by pulling something out of the air?

LD, you are so contrarian I no longer have interest in responding to you. I can't discuss things in extreme polar black and white terms that you seem to always dwell in.

 

[laughing dog]

LD, you are so contrarian I no longer have interest in responding to you. I can't discuss things in extreme polar black and white terms that you seem to always dwell in.

I completely understand why you are afraid to defend your views.

 

[Rhea]

Why is the assault where an attacker penetrates a woman's vagina with a penis so radically different than when an attacker penetrates a woman's stomach with a knife, in terms of how the woman reports the assault? The latter is so much more physically damaging and life threatening, but the former is so much more emotionally damaging.. to the point of being difficult to report in a useful, consistent way.. why?

Is this a serious question?
You don't know?


It's because scars heal, but the way society treats women about sex does not.
It's because people no longer say in public that women "asked for" a beating (they used to, and women didn't report it as often) but they still say women "asked for" a man to put a penis inside her when she doesn't want it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why is the assault where an attacker penetrates a woman's vagina with a penis so radically different than when an attacker penetrates a woman's stomach with a knife, in terms of how the woman reports the assault? The latter is so much more physically damaging and life threatening, but the former is so much more emotionally damaging.. to the point of being difficult to report in a useful, consistent way.. why?

President Obama just spoke to the nation, from the White House, to urge calm despite thousands of explosions being witnessed across the nation.

"We need to remain calm as a populace," stated the President. "What we do know is this was not an act of terrorism. Our intelligence has quickly ascertained that these explosions were Poe meters that were clearly overstressed to unbelievable levels."

The President went on to indicate while the cause of the Poe meters exploding in unison across the nation, the FBI was already in full force investigating the situation, and they do have a lead and believe the Internet was involved.

Casualties were reported in 40 states, including 15 deaths.

When will the nonsense end?

 

[Malintent]

They are prosecuted much more frequently than false claims of rape.

Not so much blame her, but I do not think police were malicious either. They really thought she was lying. As I said, I do not blame her - she seems to have some psychological problems which is why she seemed "off". It was a tragic mistake by police, but I see no malice.

Wow. What type of character does it take for a person to remark that a woman who was abused as a child, and then just recently was brutally sexually assaulted has "psychological problems" because of the way she reacted?

Seems quite inhuman.

Why are you saying that Marie, based on how she was treated as a child, is not entitled to have a set of psychological problems? How heartless of you.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Wow. What type of character does it take for a person to remark that a woman who was abused as a child, and then just recently was brutally sexually assaulted has "psychological problems" because of the way she reacted?

Seems quite inhuman.

Why are you saying that Marie, based on how she was treated as a child, is not entitled to have a set of psychological problems? How heartless of you.

Dude, we get it, you want attention.

 

[ZiprHead]

Wow. What type of character does it take for a person to remark that a woman who was abused as a child, and then just recently was brutally sexually assaulted has "psychological problems" because of the way she reacted?

Seems quite inhuman.

Why are you saying that Marie, based on how she was treated as a child, is not entitled to have a set of psychological problems? How heartless of you.

But yes, she was crazy... and we are programmed to mistrust crazy.

Fuck, man! You called her crazy!

 

[Playball40]

Wow. What type of character does it take for a person to remark that a woman who was abused as a child, and then just recently was brutally sexually assaulted has "psychological problems" because of the way she reacted?

Seems quite inhuman.

Why are you saying that Marie, based on how she was treated as a child, is not entitled to have a set of psychological problems? How heartless of you.

What are YOU saying? That Marie, based on how she was treated as a child, who may or may not have psychological problems, should automatically be DISBELIEVED when reporting a crime? How heartless of YOU!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'd make the penalty for a knowingly false police report automatically be treated as the crime thus falsely reported.

Which means - in the case of rape - virtually never prosecuted

The only way this makes sense is if most rape reports are at least partially false.

 

[RavenSky]

Unfortunately the only way we could really tell is from the questioning interviews but we don't have them.

No, "we" really don't need transcripts of the interviews. "We" have the police who reviewed the actions of the investigating police, and the investigating police themselves stating that the police bullied her.

 

[RavenSky]

Why is the assault where an attacker penetrates a woman's vagina with a penis so radically different than when an attacker penetrates a woman's stomach with a knife, in terms of how the woman reports the assault? The latter is so much more physically damaging and life threatening, but the former is so much more emotionally damaging.. to the point of being difficult to report in a useful, consistent way.. why?

Why don't you ask the people who insist women are lying about rapes? They are the ones who make reporting a rape so radically different from reporting a non-sexual assault.

 

[RavenSky]

Which means - in the case of rape - virtually never prosecuted

The only way this makes sense is if most rape reports are at least partially false.

Wrong. It means that the majority of rapes reported are not prosecuted. It has zilch to do with the reports being false (though Derec likes to pretend that is the case). It typically has to do with not enough physical evidence or the rapist is never caught. Sometimes, as with Marie, it is because the woman is disbelieved even when she is telling the truth.

 

[RavenSky]

Proportionately, far fewer rapes are prosecuted.

But leave it to you to blame her.

Not so much blame her, but I do not think police were malicious either. They really thought she was lying. As I said, I do not blame her - she seems to have some psychological problems which is why she seemed "off". It was a tragic mistake by police, but I see no malice.

You are blaming her. Her reactions to her rape were not "off". If you had bothered to read the articles linked in this thread, you would know that. Had the police and her idiot foster mother bothered to get the training both should have had, they would have known that, too. And the police ARE 100% to blame for their bullying. That was pure malice.

Stop blaming the victim.

Was the $500.00 refund to stop a massive lawsuit? The police have an inherent problem of assuming some people are guilty because they think they are. Sifting through evidence even if there are inconsistencies is still essential. Some are stupid and assume guilt and then tailor their investigations accordingly.

The $500 was to reimburse her for what she had to pay in court costs for her conviction of "filing a false report" since, obviously, she should have never been convicted or had to pay the $500 court costs.

She did ultimately sue, and it was settled out of court for a relatively nominal sum considering what they put her through

 

[RavenSky]

First of all, Raven, please stop accusing people of not bothering to read what you linked, because you don't like the conclusions they draw. It is rather impolite, and slightly against forum policy here (calling someone a liar). I spend a good 20 minutes reading that long ass story, and while I didn't notice you making that accusation at me, Arct did. And it is offensive. So stop that, please.

When the conclusions are either baldy contradicted by the facts in the linked article or based on facts not in evidence or just incredibly stupid, it is more reasonable and polite to wonder if the poster had read the piece.

First of all Malintent, I was not talking to you. I was talking to Derec.

Arctish, on the other hand, DID comment to you that it appears you were another one who hasn't read the articles

Not sure what this discussion is about, then...

So like several posters before you, you didn't read the OP article but you're commenting on what you suppose it might say that could be used in support of an assertion you wish to make, and the rest of us can ignore your posts until it becomes apparent you have read it and understand the topic of this thread.

Third, believing that someone has not read the article on the basis of their post content is not calling someone a liar and is not a violation of TFT TOU. It is a comment about the content of their post having no basis in the facts of the case as outlined in two articles.

I am very sure that your apology will be rapidly forthcoming. Hopefully someone will quote it so I see it.

 

[Arctish]

Yes, I am the one who posted the comment about Malintent not reading the article in the OP. Here's the exchange:

Wow the psychology is very complicated... I find it hard to imagine there can be a significant number of people that have such a fragile sense of reality, while still being as otherwise functional as Marie, in the story. Marie actually recanted her report as having possibly been a dream, after being intimidated by cops that sensed something was off about her. Something was definitely off about her, but it wasn't that she was lying.

There are two morals to this story for me.

1) Women can be very fragile, and should be treated differently than males by police... and voters... and employers... If they recant, we can't trust that. so their original stories should be held with similar distrust. Women probably are never really raped.. It just happens in the movies.
2) The penalty for filing a false police report of a rape is only a misdemeanor!!! It needs to be a felony of the same degree that rape is. Women are putting innocent men in jail and ruining their lives. There should be a penalty for even trying to file a rape claim.. Women must then prove themselves as having provided a true statement to avoid mandatory jail time.

I think you should take the time to read the article at Wired.com. You'll find that your supposition that false confessions is a female-centric problem is entirely baseless, that the notion current police interrogation tactics are effective at uncovering the truth is unsupported by research into the topic, and that better methods of interviewing witnesses and suspects have been developed.

You won't find anything about punishments for filing false reports, but that's not what this discussion is about so ...

Not sure what this discussion is about, then... OP says read the article and discuss.. no input, commentary, or any guidance as to what the point should be. so, I posted one of many possible impressions that can be taken from reading the entire serial rapist stories. It could be a mini series. However, the OP was barely a caption.

So like several posters before you, you didn't read the OP article but you're commenting on what you suppose it might say that could be used in support of an assertion you wish to make, and the rest of us can ignore your posts until it becomes apparent you have read it and understand the topic of this thread.

I believed you hadn't read the OP article because the two 'morals to this story' you posted make no sense in the context of the OP article and are thoroughly debunked in the Wired.com article, and because you said you didn't know what the thread discussion was about. I see now that it's possible you read it and still didn't know that the discussion isn't about bashing women or the punishment for filing a false report.

I apologize for jumping to the conclusion that you had not read the OP before commenting, as some other posters did. I should have asked how you got those 'morals' from the linked articles.

BTW, how did you get those two 'morals' from the linked articles?