Monday, February 9, 2009

"Guilty until proven inno"....hold up its "Innocent until proven guilty". Right?

You know people like to brush off false rape allegations as if they are some one-in-a-godzillion occurrence that's less likely than getting struck by lighting 67 times (kudos to whoever knows where that number of lighting strikes is from). That may be the case but damn if those things don't wreck havoc on the lives of the poor souls that fall victim to them.

I was reading this today (shout out to Glenn Sacks) and I have to say that this guy has every right to be mad, upset, or whatever he's feeling.

The false accuser in this story said that her "rapist" raped her several times and was blackmailing with homemade DVDs and even threatening to kill her. Like any police force should an investigation was carried out. Well apparently:
perhaps knowing her account contained, as police put it, a 'number of inconsistencies', she withdrew the allegation. The police officer recorded the incident as 'no crime'.

But if there was 'no crime' can someone please explain to me why, 'the matter remains recorded as rape'.? So he was accused, arrested, and let go but the records will reflect rape? Yeah that's fair. And to make it even better it seems that despite the fact that the allegation was withdrawn and police let him go the incident is being kept in the Police National Computer where an officer added the following to the record, 'There is insufficient additional verifiable information to determine that no notifiable offence has been committed.' Translation: "He might not have raped her but more than likely he's does something wrong so we'll just use this false allegation as an excuse to keep him in our records."

Now this record isn't just some reference that is locked away and only the police have acces to it mind you. This record is referenced as a part of background criminal checks and for US Visa applications. And how long does this hammer hang overhead: TEN YEARS! That's right for ten gentlemen you get to be treated like a criminal for ten years because some vindictive woman took out her frustrations against you all because you might have done it. Apparently its best to assume that you did instead of finding out if you did.

Now you'll notice that I didn't use his name. That's because thankfully a falsely accused man's name is actually being protected instead of being tossed to the media like steak to pack of hungry wolves. But I'm sure your sigh of relief will fade when you see this:
The boyfriend cannot be identified to protect his accuser's anonymity, but wants to make his case public. (emphasis mine)

Yeah protecting his identity has absolutely nothing to do with protecting him until at least a damn conviction or giving him the benefit of the doubt. Oh hell no the only reason his identity is getting protection is because said protection is necessary in order to protect her identity.

So there you have it folks. I'm sure despite the fact that the damage is as plain as day someone out there really believes that falsely accused men don't suffer any damage and I'll bet there are even a few jerks that think being falsely accused teaches him some sort of lesson. And let's not forget the ones that "know" he probably did something wrong even if it wasn't that specific rape therefore he deserves to get drug through the mud.

(P.S.) - Did you notice that there is nothing about an investigation into if her claim was false or any charges brought against her?