I don’t in principle have a problem with this woman convicted of filing a false rape report being held accountable for repaying the county the expense of investigating her unfounded allegations.
However, from the tone of the reportage, it appears that no other plaintiffs who have later been found to have filed false charges (say of car theft, or burglary, or trespass) are required to repay the cost of investigations. Perhaps the journalist got it wrong, and the county does actually require all individuals who file false charges to repay investigation costs when the charges are revealed to be unfounded, and the journalist was just beating up a story about the reputation-destroying women who’d better watch out if they lay a false rape allegation. But if the county does not generally require investigation costs to be repaid by all individuals who file false reports, then why single out only women who make false rape allegations?
Study after study has shown that the rate of false rape allegations does not present as any higher than false allegations of any other crime (despite those few pet studies beloved of certain masculinist extremists, studies whose methodology has been comprehensively shown as incompetent for many years). The emphasis on punishing women who make false rape allegations above and beyond other complainants who waste police time and besmirch reputations seems disproportionate, doesn’t it?
Similar Posts:
- Self-titled expert on false abuse allegations charged with domestic battery by tigtog
- Foregrounding the object redux: rape research from the UK by Lauredhel
- Palin’s priorities as mayor of Wasilla: raising taxes essential for a hockey rink, but funding rape evidence kits is too high a burden for the taxpayer by tigtog
- Quick hit: Rape sorcery in far north Queensland by Lauredhel
- It’s not “sex”, it’s rape: teen girls and “unwanted sex” by Lauredhel
Comments on this entry are closed. If you wish to re-open this discussion, please leave a comment on the latest Open Thread.