An Unbelievable Story of Rape

[RVonse]

Even if you figure it's only minor details she's still in the wrong. When confronted with the discrepancies she said she lied--at that point there's no doubt whatsoever she's lying about something.

The woman was raped. WTF is wrong with you?

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA. How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar? WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

For whatever reason police thought she was lying. Sometimes police get it wrong. That does not mean police (or anybody else) should blindly believe rape accusers and ignore inconsistencies in their statements.

Let me be clear.

NO ONE FUCKING SAID OTHERWISE!!!

Why do you always feel the need to go into a thread about a clear issue of a failure of justice, drop your pants, and lay down a rectum full load to push on your agenda about "women lie about rape"? This case did not involve a woman who lied. Yet, you felt the need to, in the third post of the thread, to deposit your fetid agenda right on the ground for all to see.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The woman was raped. WTF is wrong with you?

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA. How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar? WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

How many men were convicted that were freed thanks to DNA and the woman lied about being raped? If there is DNA, that typically indicates a rape occurred, that it was a violent random crime and the Police and prosecution team got the wrong person. Which means there was not a "little liar" or "big liar"!

 

[RVonse]

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA. How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar? WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

If there is DNA, that typically indicates a rape occurred,

Wrong. DNA only proves there was intercourse taken place.

 

[RVonse]

You are seriously saying that being the subject of a false rape allegation is worse than actually getting raped? WTF is wrong with you?

I think being falsely placed in jail for most of ones life is far worse than being raped. Besides losing ones freedom, the mere act of being in jail means that you are going to get raped anyway while in jail. Where as in the case that you are raped out of jail, you still have your freedom and also a clean record to get a job.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If there is DNA, that typically indicates a rape occurred,

Wrong. DNA only proves there was intercourse taken place.

Thanks sweety. The issue here, is that if consensual sex had taken place, there would be little confusion on the identity of the male, also no signs of rape in a rape kit.

Hence my question, how many men were freed via DNA evidence and the woman lied. The two cases don't Venn very well.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You are seriously saying that being the subject of a false rape allegation is worse than actually getting raped? WTF is wrong with you?

I think being falsely placed in jail for most of ones life is far worse than being raped. Besides losing ones freedom, the mere act of being in jail means that you are going to get raped anyway while in jail. Where as in the case that you are raped out of jail, you still have your freedom and also a clean record to get a job.

Wow... I mean... wow. WTF?!?

 

[Derec]

You are seriously saying that being the subject of a false rape allegation is worse than actually getting raped? WTF is wrong with you?

It certainly is if the falsely accused has to spend time in prison. Brian Banks spent five years for a rape he didn't commit, a rape that never happened. WTF is wrong with you?

I will tell that to innocent men after you tell actual rape victims it is worse to lie about a rape than to be raped.

It certainly can be.

Which would not have happened if the police had not acted like rape apologists.

Did they? And if so, did Marie's former foster mothers act like "rape apologists" as well when they doubted her story? Peggy even went as far as calling police and basically telling them Marie was a drama queen. That call set in motion the interview where Marie first said that she made it up.

 

[laughing dog]

It certainly is if the falsely accused has to spend time in prison. Brian Banks spent five years for a rape he didn't commit, a rape that never happened.

A terrible tragedy. Is it worse than being raped and almost beaten to death? Or raped and permanently disfigured?

It certainly can be.

Non- responsive.

Did they?

Yes, they did. Read the cited article.

And if so, did Marie's former foster mothers act like "rape apologists" as well when they doubted her story? Peggy even went as far as calling police and basically telling them Marie was a drama queen. That call set in motion the interview where Marie first said that she made it up.

Yes, they did.

 

[laughing dog]

The woman was raped. WTF is wrong with you?

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA.

Start a thread about it, because that has nothing to do with this OP. Duh.

How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar?

Good question. Start a thread about it.

WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

Nothing is wrong with me. This thread is about the police mishandling a true accusation of rape. It is proof that rape accusations that are not 100% consistent or retracted are not necessarily mistaken accusations or lies. Yet, we have one participant who feels the need to claim it is the victim's fault for being bullied into changing her story. And we have 2 participants attempting to derail the thread by changing the subject to false accusations of rape.

This thread is not about the effect of a false rape allegation on the life of an accused male or how the police should ascertain if someone is lying or not. It is a true corroborated story how police mistreatment of a rape victim can cause the victim to recant.

Do you realize how it appears that you wish to change the entire focus of this thread from the treatment of actual women who are rape victims to the effects of a false allegation on a man's life?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Even if you figure it's only minor details she's still in the wrong. When confronted with the discrepancies she said she lied--at that point there's no doubt whatsoever she's lying about something.

Bullshit Loren.

Every witness statement will have minor discrepancies (unless they are lying), and for a young woman who has been traumatized by a horrible rape there will also very possibly be confusion, missing time, weird emotional affects, etc. This is exactly what the articles (you clearly have not read) talk about. She was NOT "in the wrong" and it is really very disgusting that you would say such a thing.

You're so determined the woman is right you missed the point. Either she's lying about the rape or she's lying when she said she's lying about the rape.

 

[laughing dog]

Bullshit Loren.

Every witness statement will have minor discrepancies (unless they are lying), and for a young woman who has been traumatized by a horrible rape there will also very possibly be confusion, missing time, weird emotional affects, etc. This is exactly what the articles (you clearly have not read) talk about. She was NOT "in the wrong" and it is really very disgusting that you would say such a thing.

You're so determined the woman is right you missed the point. Either she's lying about the rape or she's lying when she said she's lying about the rape.

This is not about the woman being "right". She was raped. She did not lie about the rape. She was bullied (the verdict of the outside investigation by a police officer) into retracting her accusation. If they had followed well-established procedure, there would have been no reason for her to retract anything, and this incredibly traumatic experience for her (on top of the actual rape) and damning incident for the police would have been avoided.

Someone who has been traumatized might easily be intimidated by the police to withdraw an accusation if he or she is threatened with jail time. The point which should be obvious to anyone with a moral conscience, is that she should not have been bullied. In your kneejerk zeal to defend the police, you are blaming an actual victim of rape for failing to stand up to police mistreatment and bullying. Your position is morally repugnant. I repeat my earlier question "What the fuck is wrong with you"?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The woman was raped. WTF is wrong with you?

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA. How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar? WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

The real problem here is that when faced with a problem in her story (my suspicion is that when faced with gaps in her memory she made things up rather than admit she couldn't recall--in other words, she lied) she resorted to lying--saying the original was a lie.

- - - Updated - - -

If there is DNA, that typically indicates a rape occurred,

Wrong. DNA only proves there was intercourse taken place.

If she said "I was raped" and he says "I never had sex with her" then DNA pretty much proves rape.

On the other hand, if she says "I was raped" and he says "It was consensual" then DNA is worthless.

- - - Updated - - -

You're so determined the woman is right you missed the point. Either she's lying about the rape or she's lying when she said she's lying about the rape.

This is not about the woman being "right". She was raped. She did not lie about the rape. She was bullied (the verdict of the outside investigation by a police officer) into retracting her accusation. If they had followed well-established procedure, there would have been no reason for her to retract anything, and this incredibly traumatic experience for her (on top of the actual rape) and damning incident for the police would have been avoided.

Someone who has been traumatized might easily be intimidated by the police to withdraw an accusation if he or she is threatened with jail time. The point which should be obvious to anyone with a moral conscience, is that she should not have been bullied. In your kneejerk zeal to defend the police, you are blaming an actual victim of rape for failing to stand up to police mistreatment and bullying. Your position is morally repugnant.

If she didn't lie about the rape then she lied when she said she lied about the rape.

She made two statements that can't possibly both be true. Ergo, she lied.

 

[laughing dog]

If she didn't lie about the rape then she lied when she said she lied about the rape.

She made two statements that can't possibly both be true. Ergo, she lied.

Two problems with your response. 1st, logically if one believes one is mistaken and retracts a claim, one is not lying. Second, it ignores the fact she was essentially coerced into retracting her claim. Whether or not she retracted her claim (lying or not) is irrelevant to the issue that she was RAPED and that the police MISHANDLED her case and BULLIED her into a retraction. You are conveniently ignoring the important issues while focusing on a trivial one in order in your typical and predictable kneejerk defense of the police. Really, what the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA. How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar? WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

The real problem here is that when faced with a problem in her story (my suspicion is that when faced with gaps in her memory she made things up rather than admit she couldn't recall--in other words, she lied) she resorted to lying--saying the original was a lie.

Your experience with helping victims of trauma really does help you here, doesn't it.

If there is DNA, that typically indicates a rape occurred,

Wrong. DNA only proves there was intercourse taken place.

If she said "I was raped" and he says "I never had sex with her" then DNA pretty much proves rape.

On the other hand, if she says "I was raped" and he says "It was consensual" then DNA is worthless.

The DNA doesn't match! It is why someone was released. The Venn Diagram of DNA not matching and woman lying about rape is very hard to overlap.

You're so determined the woman is right you missed the point. Either she's lying about the rape or she's lying when she said she's lying about the rape.

This is not about the woman being "right". She was raped. She did not lie about the rape. She was bullied (the verdict of the outside investigation by a police officer) into retracting her accusation. If they had followed well-established procedure, there would have been no reason for her to retract anything, and this incredibly traumatic experience for her (on top of the actual rape) and damning incident for the police would have been avoided.

Someone who has been traumatized might easily be intimidated by the police to withdraw an accusation if he or she is threatened with jail time. The point which should be obvious to anyone with a moral conscience, is that she should not have been bullied. In your kneejerk zeal to defend the police, you are blaming an actual victim of rape for failing to stand up to police mistreatment and bullying. Your position is morally repugnant.

If she didn't lie about the rape then she lied when she said she lied about the rape.

What do you mean "if"? She didn't lie about being raped. It was only after being harassed by the Police that she recanted.

 

[coloradoatheist]

another issue that's easy to say what shouldn't happened, but difficult to prove like rape is what defines bullying. It's why some crimes are really hard to prosecute.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The woman was raped. WTF is wrong with you?

There is a lot of men who have served REAL time in jail for a false rape charge proven by DNA. How does the police separate a small liar with a big liar? WTF is wrong with you laughing dog?

States with large backlogs of rape kits not tested will keep some innocently charged men in prison. WTF is wrong with this picture?

 

[Rhea]

Some people read this article and thought, "this is a story about a victim of a violent rape who was again victimized by negligent and harmful police procedures. That's awful."

Some people read this article and thought, "this is a story about a woman who did things wrong. She should have known better." (things like failing to "act like a 'real' rape victim," despite, you know, _being_ a real rape victim)

The first group reads the replies of the second group and thinks, "that's what you got out of this?" and the second group replies, "you didn't?"

Fascinating. It's a Poe.
I bet no one in the first group really expected the second group to act like themselves in _this_ case.
But they did.

 

[KeepTalking]

Besides losing ones freedom, the mere act of being in jail means that you are going to get raped anyway while in jail.

Spoken like someone who has never been in jail. FWIW, don't believe everything you see on TV.

 

[KeepTalking]

The real problem here is that when faced with a problem in her story (my suspicion is that when faced with gaps in her memory she made things up rather than admit she couldn't recall--in other words, she lied) she resorted to lying--saying the original was a lie.

You either did not read the linked article, or you immediately forgot what you read. Also, your suspicions are worthless here. She did not resort to lying. After being bullied by the police who interrogated her (yes, 'bullied' and 'interrogated' both seem to be words that apply here), she said it might have been a nightmare. She probably hoped it had been a nightmare. She wrote a statement that said as much, and signed it for her interrogators, but that was not enough for them. They coerced her into writing out a second statement saying that she had lied about the whole thing.