Women don't lie about rape, Pennsylvania edition

[Gospel]

IMHO, skepticism and curiosity works better than beliefs when it comes to investigations. Preconceived beliefs are incompatible with objective analysis.

 

[laughing dog]

The police ought to investigate all allegations of crime. They believe the allegation but act to verify it. That happened in this case - the wrong person was identified but eventually released before trial. That happens in all sorts of alleged crimes. Yes, people of all types may lie to grt someone in trouble or to grt themselves out of trouble or to make trouble. In this case, nit only did the justice system appear to work ( perhaps too slowly), but the alleged liar is nie faving charges.

Reading comprehension failure.

Only in your case. I accurately described the situation. v

But more than a month after the investigation, police say there were multiple inconsistencies with Urumova's account of the attack.


Officers say data pulled from Urumova's iPhone and surveillance video in the parking lot contradicted her story of events.

During a second meeting with police on May 17, authorities say Urumova admitted that she lied about the entire incident and that no assault occurred in the Redner's parking lot on April 16, according to the criminal complaint filed Monday.

No mistaken identity, she made the whole thing up.

Are you feeling the need to reiterate uncontroversial facts or is this an example of a reading comprehension failure since no claimed the identity was mistaken.

Are you here to engage in discussion or to engage in deceptive word games? Please note that the actual situation was an allegation which was wholly made up, not "the wrong person was identified". There is no reason to suggest the possibility in this case.

Reasoning failure. The wrong person was identified because there was no right person

So, the OP is a another example of a poorly reasoned hobby horse.

He's absolutely on target.

Reasoning failure - No one claims any and all rape allegations are true. The idea that any person who claimes they were raped shoud be believed means that their allegations should be taken seriously not that their word alone is proof.

You're treating his pointing out manufactured allegations to be a hobby horse….

So you noticed. Yet you argue.

As an aside, I suspect there are magnitudes mire instances of rapists lying about their innocence than there are rape victims lying about their rape. No mention of that from our resident social justice warrior. Hmmmm.

Whataboutism.

Just an interesting observation.

Whataboutism. And false, besides. An order of magnitude is typically 10x. Thus "magnitudes" must be at least 100x. That would require the false report rate to be under 1%.

Are you here to play word games or to engage in meaningful discussion?

A false report need not involve a lie, hence your math is based on a false (not a lying) equivalence. Add in that “magnitude” need not be 10x (as your “typically” indicates), and your attempt to white knight a disingenuous attack on “ feminist dogma” fails.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

As an aside, I suspect there are magnitudes mire instances of rapists lying about their innocence than there are rape victims lying about their rape. No mention of that from our resident social justice warrior. Hmmmm.

Whataboutism.

Just an interesting observation.

Whataboutism. And false, besides. An order of magnitude is typically 10x. Thus "magnitudes" must be at least 100x. That would require the false report rate to be under 1%.

Are you here to play word games or to engage in meaningful discussion?

Yeah, this is definitely a word game he has introduced.

I observe you had used the word "magnitudes" as opposed to the phrase "orders of magnitude." Statistics are showing single digit percents of women lying about sexual assault. Most perpetrators are going to outright lie about it in their defense, making the cases where rapist lies near 100%. Is it 90% or some other number? Maybe, but it's up there. In consideration of the vast numbers of sexual assaults or rapes, it does make lies by rapists magnitudes more than lies by alleged victims.

 

[Toni]

The misogynist misinterpretation of "believe women" means "women never lie" is a sexist and dangerous misinformation push.

Wrong. "Believe" means "hold something to be true", not "investigate impartially".

It is a plea for women to be believed just as much as men are believed.

It's not a plea to neutrality. Quite the contrary. It is also linked to claims that false rape claims should not be prosecuted, or that investigators challenging accusers about details of their claims is tantamount to "revictimizing" them.

Take this idiotic article by a radfem:
No matter what Jackie said, we should generally believe rape claims

Many people (not least U-Va. administrators) will be tempted to see this as a reminder that officials, reporters and the general public should hear both sides of the story and collect all the evidence before coming to a conclusion in rape cases. This is what we mean in America when we say someone is “innocent until proven guilty.” After all, look what happened to the Duke lacrosse players.
In important ways, this is wrong. We should believe, as a matter of default, what an accuser says.

The writer, Zerlina Maxwell, rejects the idea that we "should hear both sides of the story and collect all the evidence before coming to a conclusion in rape cases".
Radical feminists like her do not want rape claims to be investigated impartially. They want women to be believed a priori, no matter the negative consequences for the men who are wrongly accused.

The expression as explained by Judy Doyle writing for Elle explains that the expression means "don't assume women as a gender are especially deceptive or vindictive, and recognize that false allegations are less common than real ones."

No, it assumes that men as a gender should be placed under general suspicion of rape no matter the evidence or lack of it.

False allegations exist—but they’re quite rare and unusual, and they’re usually quite easy to expose.

Bullshit! They are much more frequent than radfems admit.

Sexual violence, meanwhile, is neither rare nor strange. It happens every day, mostly to women.

That does not men that women should automatically be believed when they make an accusation.

If accusations of sexual assault are not believed sufficiently to initiate an investigation then there IS no investigation, no weighing of evidence, no comparing different accounts. There is not even an attempt to collect evidence.

Believe women means believe women ( and all victims) enough to actually investigate the incident to see if charges can be supported or if further investigation is warranted. It means believing those who allege assault enough to ensure they get whatever medical and emotional support they need.

It means believing women as much as we believe those who claim their car or wallet was stolen or that they were assaulted at a bar or in a home invasion or a parking lot. It means believing women as much as believing someone who reports a domestic violence incident.

Yes, there are those who will allege wrongdoing for a variety of reasons. But the only way to know the veracity of a claim is to investigate it. Which means believing it enough to mount a serious investigation.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sigh.

The same old "see I told you". Of course this is going to happen, but rarely. Every incident needs to be investigated, and believed until proven.

Investigated, yes. Believed until proven otherwise--no, any more than any other crime should have presumed guilt.

What is it about this topic that causes people to ignore all possible meanings of the word "believe" and go with the stupidest interpretation?

"Believe" can mean having unwavering faith. It can also mean to provisionally accept something as true or accurate until evidence of its untruth or inaccuracy is found. It can mean to suppose something exists, or to think it is possible.

To believe someone reporting a crime is truthfully reporting what they genuinely think happened is not the same as ignoring the possibility that they might be mistaken, confused, or deliberately lying.

If Al goes to the police and says Bert raped him, the police should accept his report as possibly true and conduct a conscientious, thorough investigation, not just shit can the report and go back to looking for stolen cars and burglars. They should believe Al to the point they interview Bert and look for witnesses and corroborating evidence, but not to the point they shut down their brains and assume every detail Al gave them is 100% accurate, because that would be stupid.

Of course they investigate. The issue is what action is taken about the accused during the investigation. That's where the schools so often get it wrong--the student gets severely punished (expulsion is a serious punishment for financial reasons) without the case ever being proven.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I observe you had used the word "magnitudes" as opposed to the phrase "orders of magnitude." Statistics are showing single digit percents of women lying about sexual assault. Most perpetrators are going to outright lie about it in their defense, making the cases where rapist lies near 100%. Is it 90% or some other number? Maybe, but it's up there. In consideration of the vast numbers of sexual assaults or rapes, it does make lies by rapists magnitudes more than lies by alleged victims.

A single digit percentage are proven false. That doesn't mean the remaining 92% is proven true.

And, still, that's 8% vs 100%--I don't see two orders of magnitude.

 

[Arctish]

I observe you had used the word "magnitudes" as opposed to the phrase "orders of magnitude." Statistics are showing single digit percents of women lying about sexual assault. Most perpetrators are going to outright lie about it in their defense, making the cases where rapist lies near 100%. Is it 90% or some other number? Maybe, but it's up there. In consideration of the vast numbers of sexual assaults or rapes, it does make lies by rapists magnitudes more than lies by alleged victims.

A single digit percentage are proven false. That doesn't mean the remaining 92% is proven true.

And, still, that's 8% vs 100%--I don't see two orders of magnitude.

That 8% figure comes from an FBI summary report that said 8% of the reports of rape nationwide were designated unfounded. The footnote to that figure said that the 'unfounded' category included reports for which no corroborating evidence was found (Al said- Bert said) and those which were not investigated, for whatever reason (Crysta Abelseth report of rape that happened when she was 16 that the Sherriff's office never investigated and not for lack of evidence).

The false report rate was 2%.

 

[Arctish]

Slight correction to the above ^.

Deliberate, knowingly false reports of rape are approximately 2% of all reports of rape in some studies, and approximately 5% or higher in others. Studies that show higher rates are more disputed due to small sample sizes and how the data was collected and collated. There are significant dissimilarities in how police agencies record and classify reports of crimes, as well as how such reports are investigated (or not) so a simple comparison across multiple police agencies is not possible.

If anyone has evidence to suggest false rape allegations are more commonplace than false reports of other crimes, please post a link.

 

[Derec]

Deliberate, knowingly false reports of rape are approximately 2% of all reports of rape in some studies, and approximately 5% or higher in others

Perhaps those that were proven to be "deliberate, knowingly false reports", but there are false reports that have not been proven as such.

 

[Derec]

That 8% figure comes from an FBI summary report that said 8% of the reports of rape nationwide were designated unfounded.

A rape claim may not be dismissed as "unfounded" and still be false. Duke Lacrosse false rape claim was not dismissed as "unfounded". Neither was the claim against Brian Banks, who spent years in prison before being exonerated.
"Unfounded" is not exhaustive of all false claims.

The false report rate was 2%.

According to radical feminist claims.

 

[Arctish]

Deliberate, knowingly false reports of rape are approximately 2% of all reports of rape in some studies, and approximately 5% or higher in others

Perhaps those that were proven to be "deliberate, knowingly false reports", but there are false reports that have not been proven as such.

... the possibility of which was pointed out in the links I provided.

 

[Arctish]

That 8% figure comes from an FBI summary report that said 8% of the reports of rape nationwide were designated unfounded.

A rape claim may not be dismissed as "unfounded" and still be false.

Also pointed out in the links I provided.

Did you read the articles or just skim a few paragraphs?

Duke Lacrosse false rape claim was not dismissed as "unfounded". Neither was the claim against Brian Banks, who spent years in prison before being exonerated."Unfounded" is not exhaustive of all false claims.

The false report rate was 2%.

According to radical feminist claims.

Did you quote my posts out of order?

Which of the studies are you claiming are the radical feminist ones?

 

[laughing dog]

That 8% figure comes from an FBI summary report that said 8% of the reports of rape nationwide were designated unfounded.

A rape claim may not be dismissed as "unfounded" and still be false.

Also pointed out in the links I provided.

Did you read the articles or just skim a few paragraphs?

Duke Lacrosse false rape claim was not dismissed as "unfounded". Neither was the claim against Brian Banks, who spent years in prison before being exonerated."Unfounded" is not exhaustive of all false claims.

The false report rate was 2%.

According to radical feminist claims.

Did you quote my posts out of order?

Which of the studies are you claiming are the radical feminist ones?

“Radical feminist dogma” is short hand for “reasonable data that contradicts rape apologist excuses”.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I observe you had used the word "magnitudes" as opposed to the phrase "orders of magnitude." Statistics are showing single digit percents of women lying about sexual assault. Most perpetrators are going to outright lie about it in their defense, making the cases where rapist lies near 100%. Is it 90% or some other number? Maybe, but it's up there. In consideration of the vast numbers of sexual assaults or rapes, it does make lies by rapists magnitudes more than lies by alleged victims.

A single digit percentage are proven false. That doesn't mean the remaining 92% is proven true.

And, still, that's 8% vs 100%--I don't see two orders of magnitude.

That 8% figure comes from an FBI summary report that said 8% of the reports of rape nationwide were designated unfounded. The footnote to that figure said that the 'unfounded' category included reports for which no corroborating evidence was found (Al said- Bert said) and those which were not investigated, for whatever reason (Crysta Abelseth report of rape that happened when she was 16 that the Sherriff's office never investigated and not for lack of evidence).

The false report rate was 2%.

Sure of that? Because my memory was the 8% was determine false, not merely undetermined. 2% is typical determined false rate for crime.

 

[Arctish]

I observe you had used the word "magnitudes" as opposed to the phrase "orders of magnitude." Statistics are showing single digit percents of women lying about sexual assault. Most perpetrators are going to outright lie about it in their defense, making the cases where rapist lies near 100%. Is it 90% or some other number? Maybe, but it's up there. In consideration of the vast numbers of sexual assaults or rapes, it does make lies by rapists magnitudes more than lies by alleged victims.

A single digit percentage are proven false. That doesn't mean the remaining 92% is proven true.

And, still, that's 8% vs 100%--I don't see two orders of magnitude.

That 8% figure comes from an FBI summary report that said 8% of the reports of rape nationwide were designated unfounded. The footnote to that figure said that the 'unfounded' category included reports for which no corroborating evidence was found (Al said- Bert said) and those which were not investigated, for whatever reason (Crysta Abelseth report of rape that happened when she was 16 that the Sherriff's office never investigated and not for lack of evidence).

The false report rate was 2%.

Sure of that? Because my memory was the 8% was determine false, not merely undetermined. 2% is typical determined false rate for crime.

I know that's what you remember.

I remember you citing that 8% figure with the little asterisk beside in the FBI report for years. I remember myself and others pointing out the footnote you were overlooking, that clearly stated the term "unfounded" was used to describe reports for which no corroborating evidence was found, not reports that were known or suspected of being false.

You've been misunderstanding that FBI report for years. And anyway, my follow up post included links to updated information.

 

[Swammerdami]

Benjamin Franklin wrote ""it is better a hundred guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer." William Gladstone said something similar, but changed the ratio from 100 to 10. A poll of average American opinions suggests a ratio closer to 1. I do not know the "proper" figure, although I think Franklin's 100 to be much too high.

Obviously accusations of rape can be very hard to prove, and very hard to disprove. MANY rapes go unreported simply because victims are aware that THEY, rather than the rapist, may become targets of police and journalists. I can offer no panacea for those problems either.

BUT I am disappointed -- though not surprised -- to see some Infidels here implicitly ally with rapists. I ask them to watch the documentary Victim/Suspect and the miniseries Unbelievable (an excellent documentary of police detective work), both on Netflix. Women get coerced into falsely retracting their accusations, and then sometimes are jailed for false accusation.

The heroine of Unbelievable knows she is lying when she RETRACTS her accusation, so feels her punishment may be deserved: She DID lie to police, only in the retraction not the accusation. She's afraid to retract the retraction! -- Will that lead to another prosecution of her?

Jon Krakauer's Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town is a book to read in the (unlikely) event that the misogynists want to educate themselves.

 

[southernhybrid]

Why didn't they do a rape test kit on the woman who made the claim? Am I missing something? Wouldn't that have proven that the man she claimed had raped her was innocent? The problem is that these test kits are rarely used. Maybe if they were used all the time, it would help, but it appears to me as if law enforcement doesn't take women's claims of rape seriously. Statistically it's more likely that a victim of rape doesn't even report the rape due to the bias against women.

When it comes to children, it's probably even worse. When I worked in public health caring for poor pregnant women, one of my patients had been raped by a so called friend of the family, but she was so terrified that she never bothered to tell anyone and she was about 8 months pregnant before she received any care. She was barely 14 years old when this happened and I will never forget her. I imagine this happens a lot more often then we like to think.

https://usafacts.org/articles/how-m...ting-testing-in-the-us-see-the-data-by-state/

In 2022, at least 25,000 untested rape kits sat in law enforcement agencies and crime labs across the country. This figure only accounts for data reported by 30 states and Washington, DC; the total backlog number is unknown.
Untested rape kits can have significant consequences for both the criminal justice system and sexual assault survivors. Not only can rape kit testing provide crucial evidence that helps identify perpetrators and bring them to justice, it also can connect perpetrators to other assaults. Failing to test kits in a timely manner can mean missed opportunities to identify serial offenders and prevent further victimization.
The failure to submit rape kits for lab testing in numerous jurisdictions has decreased community trust in law enforcement. Survivors from Houston in 2020 to Memphis in 2023 have filed class action lawsuits against city officials for their rape kit backlogs, asserting that timely testing of rape kits could have prevented their own or others’ sexual assaults.

What is a rape kit? And what is the government doing about the backlog?​

In the aftermath of a sexual assault, victims can choose to undergo a forensic examination using a sexual assault evidence collection kit, commonly known as a “rape kit.” This kit contains supplies like swabs and test tubes, which are later sent to a crime lab for testing.
The purpose of a rape kit is to enhance the likelihood of viable DNA samples to test. It involves an invasive, hours-long examination, during which the victim is swabbed for potential biological evidence of the perpetrator’s DNA. The rape kit is typically then transferred to a law enforcement agency responsible for logging the evidence and forwarding it to a crime lab for testing.

A white paper by the Justice Department’s Office on Violence Against Women described some possible factors leading to sexual assault kit backlogs, including victim-blaming attitudes and actions, budget cuts and reduced crime lab staff, and bias against women and victims of sex crimes.

 

[Toni]

Also, the Police just taking an alleged victims word for it doesn't help the victim at all, as there isn't much of a case. They need to actually investigate the claims to demonstrate her accusation is accurate. You know, courts and all.

The police should be investigating, but both to prove or disprove.

No. To ascertain whether a crime was committed and the facts of the case.

 

[Toni]

Benjamin Franklin wrote ""it is better a hundred guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer." William Gladstone said something similar, but changed the ratio from 100 to 10. A poll of average American opinions suggests a ratio closer to 1. I do not know the "proper" figure, although I think Franklin's 100 to be much too high.

Obviously accusations of rape can be very hard to prove, and very hard to disprove. MANY rapes go unreported simply because victims are aware that THEY, rather than the rapist, may become targets of police and journalists. I can offer no panacea for those problems either.

BUT I am disappointed -- though not surprised -- to see some Infidels here implicitly ally with rapists. I ask them to watch the documentary Victim/Suspect and the miniseries Unbelievable (an excellent documentary of police detective work), both on Netflix. Women get coerced into falsely retracting their accusations, and then sometimes are jailed for false accusation.

The heroine of Unbelievable knows she is lying when she RETRACTS her accusation, so feels her punishment may be deserved: She DID lie to police, only in the retraction not the accusation. She's afraid to retract the retraction! -- Will that lead to another prosecution of her?

Jon Krakauer's Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town is a book to read in the (unlikely) event that the misogynists want to educate themselves.

I did t make it through the first 10 minutes. Too traumatizing.

 

[thebeave]

Benjamin Franklin wrote ""it is better a hundred guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer." William Gladstone said something similar, but changed the ratio from 100 to 10. A poll of average American opinions suggests a ratio closer to 1. I do not know the "proper" figure, although I think Franklin's 100 to be much too high.

Obviously accusations of rape can be very hard to prove, and very hard to disprove. MANY rapes go unreported simply because victims are aware that THEY, rather than the rapist, may become targets of police and journalists. I can offer no panacea for those problems either.

BUT I am disappointed -- though not surprised -- to see some Infidels here implicitly ally with rapists. I ask them to watch the documentary Victim/Suspect and the miniseries Unbelievable (an excellent documentary of police detective work), both on Netflix. Women get coerced into falsely retracting their accusations, and then sometimes are jailed for false accusation.

The heroine of Unbelievable knows she is lying when she RETRACTS her accusation, so feels her punishment may be deserved: She DID lie to police, only in the retraction not the accusation. She's afraid to retract the retraction! -- Will that lead to another prosecution of her?

Jon Krakauer's Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town is a book to read in the (unlikely) event that the misogynists want to educate themselves.

Who here is "implicitly allying with rapists"?