False Rape

[Closet Guy.]

No it isn't. It's no more of an amount than 'some', 'more', 'less', 'another'. It is used to determine an amount,

 

 

Yes, a tiny amount:rolleyes:

[Closet Guy.]

No it isn't. It's no more of an amount than 'some', 'more', 'less', 'another'. It is used to determine an amount, hence it is a determiner.

 

A 'few atoms' can number 1 or 1 billion. It isn't an amount at all.

 

All this is moot. You haven't got any statistics that to show that 50% of rapes are lies. The most you can ever show is that a percentage of rape cases fail to achieve prosecution in court, which doesn't show truth or falsity anyway.

Yes it is its a tiny amount of atoms when you consider how many atoms there are.

[Glamrocker]

Interesting thread in many ways.

Its very easy to cry rape but the women who do that for whatever reason are usually weeded out before it even gets to the CPS,I believe a lot of them may be attention seekers and may usually need help rather than be admonished .

Then again its very hard to prove rape so the onus is always on the woman,rather unfairly I may add ,obviously I have no idea what a female rape victim must be feeling but the trauma during the rape and the aftermath must be horrendous and I feel for any and every female who has to be put through the ordeal just so some male can satisfy his lust and control mania.

[Chris_Sleeps]

Yes, a tiny amount:rolleyes:

Roll your eyes all day and all night. I'm right, and you still haven't proven 50% of rapes are false. You've just distracted your argument with this petty offshoot, which I suppose is easier than proving wild statistics.

[Suffragette1]

Re my bold. Surely you have already stated why there is a "high rate of attrition with sex crimes against women", in your first sentence - objective evidence is difficult to obtain, and it therefore can often come down to one person's word against another's. In order to convict, it is necessary to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This is pretty much impossible without separate objective evidence. It is nothing to do with prevailing attitudes towards women. Women are not treated as if they are inferior, it is just that they are not treated as if they were superior. In terms of proof needed to convict, both men and women are treated the same.

 

If a man were to claim that a woman had committed a crime against him, say theft, but there was no other corroborating evidence, and it boiled down to him saying she did and her saying that she didn't, then do you think she would be convicted on his evidence alone?

It is indeed indicative of attitudes towards women if the woman is invariably not believed, which essentially is what it boils down to. Who do you believe, members of the jury? Him? Or her? A woman who liked the occasional drink and was known to go out not wearing knickers. Members of the jury, you may wish to consider the actions of the the witness for the prosecution when reaching your verdict and be mindful of the number of women who make false rape claims' etc.

 

It is all nonsense. If anything, the absolute and complete reverse is true. Virtually every woman I know has at the very least been coerced into sex, a number of them 'acquaintance raped' - not one has ever reported it. So don't anyone dare tell me about the majority of reported cases being bogus.

 

It is noticeable how it is invariably men who make this spurious claim. One wonders if they are guilty themselves of coercion at some point and whether this is their way of justifying it.

[Closet Guy.]

It is indeed indicative of attitudes towards women if the woman is invariably not believed, which essentially is what it boils down to. Who do you believe, members of the jury? Him? Or her? A woman who liked the occasional drink and was known to go out not wearing knickers. Members of the jury, you may wish to consider the actions of the the witness for the prosecution when reaching your verdict and be mindful of the number of women who make false rape claims' etc.

 

 

My bold.

Please stop being hysterical.

No it does not amount to the same thing at all. I get the idea you are one the types who would happily see any man locked up on the word of a women and only released when its proved that hes innocent (meaning she lied).

 

 

 

 

.

 

It is noticeable how it is invariably men who make this spurious claim. One wonders if they are guilty themselves of coercion at some point and whether this is their way of justifying it.

Yeah, that must be it:roll:

Get real love. You sound like a bit of a man hater.

[Suffragette1]

'Few' isn't a statistic though. It's a determiner. If I said "some women tell lies" then that is different than saying "3% of women tell lies". Even more so if one puts the premise in context.

 

All Suffragette has to do is post 1 article about false rape and she has proved her point. Your "50%" statistic is a little more difficult to prove.

 

From wiki:

 

The largest and most rigorous study was commissioned by the British Home Office and based on 2,643 sexual assault cases (Kelly, Lovett, and Regan, 2005). Of these, 8% were classified by the police department as false reports. Yet the researchers noted that some of these classifications were based simply on the personal judgments of the police investigators and were made in violation of official criteria for establishing a false allegation. Closer analysis of this category applying the Home Office counting rules for establishing a false allegation and excluding cases where the application of the cases where confirmation of the designation was uncertain reduced the percentage of false reports to 3%. The researchers concluded that "one cannot take all police designations at face value" and that "[t]here is an over-estimation of the scale of false allegations by both police officers and prosecutors." Moreover, they added:

The interviews with police officers and complainants’ responses show that despite the focus on victim care, a culture of suspicion remains within the police, even amongst some of those who are specialists in rape investigations. There is also a tendency to conflate false allegations with retractions and withdrawals, as if in all such cases no sexual assault occurred. This reproduces an investigative culture in which elements that might permit a designation of a false complaint are emphasised (later sections reveal how this also feeds into withdrawals and designation of ‘insufficient evidence’), at the expense of a careful investigation, in which the evidence collected is evaluated.[9][10]

Another large-scale study was conducted in Australia, with the 850 rapes reported to the Victoria police between 2000 and 2003 (Heenan & Murray, 2006). Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, the researchers examined 812 cases with sufficient information to make an appropriate determination, and found that 2.1% of these were classified by police as false reports. All of these complainants were then charged or threatened with charges for filing a false police report.[11]

 

Soruce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#False_reporting

 

It also seems that the 'false' reporting classification is a somewhat subjective judgement. Let's say to be on the over-generous side, 10% maximum of reported claims are 'judged' (rather than proven) to be false. A far cry from this mythical 50% that is being peddled by men I have no doubt, who are probably all wetting themselves that they have at some point raped a woman.

 

I seem to have inadvertently opened a can of worms whilst using it as an analogy on the racism thread.

[Suffragette1]

My bold.

Please stop being hysterical.

No it does not amount to the same thing at all. I get the idea you are one the types who would happily see any man locked up on the word of a women and only released when its proved that hes innocent (meaning she lied).

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that must be it:roll:

Get real love. You sound like a bit of a man hater.

 

Lame, pedestrian and predictable. You should get your ears tested.

[skinz]

You sound like a bit of a man hater.

 

Would that have anything to do with her being a feminist?

[Suffragette1]

Would that have anything to do with her being a feminist?

 

Perhaps if I had said something along the lines of 'all men are rapists' or 'all heterosexual sex is rape' then that oh so predictable claim could possibly be true.