Stop paying women to lie about rape
Stop paying women to lie about rape
According to a report in the Guardian last October, the number of rapes recorded by police has doubled in the past four years while the conviction rate had fallen.
In 2015-16, there were 23,851 reports of adults raped compared with 10,160 in 2011-12. The increase is attributed to victims being more willing to report sexual assaults in the wake of the contrived Savile scandal. Pressure groups claim the actual figure is much higher.
According to Rape Crisis UK: “approximately 85,000 women and 12,000 men are raped in England and Wales alone every year”.
Can this be true? The short answer is no. Rape is a crime of violence, one that leaves physical evidence. By its own admission, Rape Crisis claims that three quarters of all its adult users reported sexual violence that occurred “at least” 12 months earlier.
The reason for this purported delay is usually given as fear by the victim that she will not be believed. There is though another, far more plausible explanation. While doubtless some victims never report their rapes, and others delay for whatever reason, the majority of these delayed reports are not of rapes at all, they are either reports by women who have engaged in sordid sexual acts, often with complete strangers, and then rewritten these encounters in their minds as rape; or they are women who are mentally deranged, sometimes seriously so; or they are women who are seeking revenge, for whatever reason. Although there are far fewer such allegations, men also cry wolf after having consensual sex with other men, mostly out of shame.
If a woman were to walk into a police station and report a burglary that she claimed had happened a year ago, without a compelling reason she would be sent away with a flea in her ear, but if she reports rape or a simple sexual assault, the police are supposed to treat her not simply as a victim but as a survivor. Because in the vast majority of such cases there is no physical evidence, any case that goes to trial comes down to credibility, or perhaps likeability. If the accuser puts on a show, snivelling into her handkerchief while testifying from behind a screen, and the accused comes across as a jerk, or even if he looks the part – with tattoos, rough shaven, inarticulate, etc – he faces a heavy prison sentence and his life is potentially destroyed. Even if he is found not guilty he will quite likely be stigmatised for life. In short, he is on a hiding to nothing, while his false accuser may even be entitled to compensation, and will almost certainly face no criminal sanction.
Even women who are proven to have lied about being raped are rarely given any meaningful punishment. In 2002, Alison Welfare framed her victim Christopher Wheeler with contrived forensic evidence; he spent nearly two months on remand before the truth came out, yet incredibly she was given a mere 12 month sentence. The most outrageous false rape allegations seldom attract a sentence of more than two years, and most false accusers don’t spend a day in jail.
Incredibly, the sexual grievance industry considers any punishments false accusers do receive to be excessive, and in addition to lobbying for lesser or no sentences for them, organisations like Rape Crisis are forever pressing for the erosion of due process in order to boost the conviction rate. And they are not afraid to lie about any aspect of the criminal process.
After the suicide of a mentally deranged false accuser in 2014, a spokeswoman for Women Against Rape went on TV the following year and branded her victim a rapist yet again, even though CCTV evidence proved this woman had lied.
Feminist academics who infest not only our universities but our legal system have succeeded in eroding due process by promoting the fraudulent rape trauma syndrome and by lying about other aspects of rape.
The British Government and indeed other governments must stop the rot; this can be done by instituting several essential reforms, the first of which is to restore due process to the falsely accused. This means:
A statute of limitations for allegations made without compelling physical evidence.
The end of anonymity for accusers except in cases involving celebrities and the young; the former should be anonymised – accuser and accused – to discourage the bandwagon effect as in the Cliff Richard case in which the police and the media set out to deliberately provoke false accusations.
An end to so-called rape shield laws – an accused who “throws mud” at an accuser already does so at the risk of alienating the jury, as in non-sexual cases.
An end to screens in courtrooms and such gimmicks as pre-recorded cross-examination.
The requirement of some form of at least minimal corroboration.
Most importantly the following reforms are needed:
Prosecution and meaningful sanctions for gratuitously false allegations.
An end to the financing of the sexual grievance industry, in particular all so-called rape counselling services should:
a) lose their charitable status
b) not receive one penny of funding from either national or local government.
Genuine victims should be encouraged to report rape immediately to the police, and only to the police.