Inspired by this thread, what would happen to someone who falsely accused someone of a crime?
It seems possible* that the accuser in the Duke rape case made it up, like Tawana Brawley. What could happen to her if it was determined she lied and falsely accused the lacrosse players? Would she be convicted of any crime? Would it be perjury? Would jail time be an option?
I’m referring to cases where they are knowingly falsely accused, not found not guilty due to evidence, etc. According to Wikipedia, Tawana Brawley wasn’t punished. “Following the grand jury decision, Brawley and her family moved hastily to Virginia, taking with them a “defense fund” of $300,000, which had been contributed by well-wishers.”
In general, what would happen if someone were found out to perpetuate a hoax and knowingly falsely accuse another? Rape is a particularly heinous crime and has a severe punishment for the accused if guilty. What happens to a false accuser?
A false accusation can be a crime, usually some sort of falsification or obstruction of justice charge. Here, you would at least be on the hook for filing a false report with law enforcement or if you’re under oath, perjury or aggravated perjury. As an extreme example, if your lie led to the impsoition of the death penalty, you could even be on the hook for murder.
For whatever this is worth, IIRC that woman from Florida who left her husband at the altar and said she was kidnapped or something ended up having to pay for the investigation into her accusations, and I believe community servceice. So there is some punishment.
It’s generally a crime to file a false police report.
The tort of malicious prosecution is generally available as a cause of civil action against the accuser. To prevail, in general, the plaintiffs - the falsely accused - would have to show that the accuser (1) intentionally pursued (2) a legal action that was (3) brought without probable cause and (4) dismissed in their favor.
Defamation has elements that malicious prosecution doesn’t and vice versa, so I think it could be separate. In some jurisdictions you can imagine an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim.
As to the OP – one problem, as Tawana amply demonstrates, is that finding definitive proof that the accused was “knowingly falsely accused” can be tough when the false accuser doesn’t recant. “Everyone knows” that Tawana lied, but Tawana herself (and her rabid supporters and co-conspirators) do not appear to have admitted this.
She and her supporters were (at least as of a few years ago) perpetrating the notion (which I’ve debunked elsewhere) that there is a plague of unpunished rape of black women by an uncaring white establishment. See also:
I don’t know; I will yield the floor to someone that has a better handle on the civil side of the legal world than I do. I seem to recall that for defamation purposes, statements made in the context of legal proceedings are privileged and can’t serve as the basis of a defamation action… but maybe that’s only testimony. Or maybe I’m completely off base. So I’m going to look puzzled and punt.
What would be the point of suing in the Duke case (assuming it’s false accusations)? She’s a broke stripper, with no assets. The accused could use an expensive civil trial to clear their names, but they won’t win anything more than a symbolic victory. The only ones with deep pockets (i.e., the state, via the DA, who might be guilty of malicious prosecutions) is immune from suit, unless maybe it can be proved that there was actual malice involved (how does sovereign immunity work in NC?).
I actually worked on a case that involved separate claims of malicious prosecution, defamation, and emotional distress.
As **Bricker ** pointed out, in many jurisdictions, most of the conduct that could give rise to a defamation claim is subject to a privilege. But some privileges are absolute, and others are qualified (if you abuse them, you lose them) . See, e.g.,DeLong v. Yu Enters. (Oregon 2002) (defendant had qualified privilege to report information to police, but jury found he had abused it).
As for the two claims, they are very different. In fact, they are so different that in the case that I was handling we tried (unsuccessfully) to get the judge to order separate trials.
The elements of a malicious prosecution are spelled out in the previous thread. The elements of defamation are:
And of course, if the person defamed is a public figure, the plaintiff will have to show actual malice. Actual malice has nothing to do with malicious intent, btw, it has to do with knowledge or reckless disregard of the falsity of the statements made. http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m006.htm
In the infamous Baby M Surrogacy Trial, “fit (surrogate) mother” Mary Beth Whitehead threatened to falsely accuse natural father William Stern of sexually molesting her 10 year old daughter Tuesday Whitehead! Mr. Stern had the foresite to tape the conversation.
When Mrs. Whitehead was served with court depositions, she denied making the threat, and stated that Mr. & Mrs. Stern were “lying.” It wasn’t until she heard the actual tape that she “remembered” making the threat.
It’s my opinion that falsely accusing anyone of child molestation should be construed as being an unfit parent and a cause for denial of custody or visitation.
