False Rape Accusations Revisited

Great Debates
1

Tamara Anne Moonier drove to the Fullerton, California police station on June 6, 2004, and reported a chilling tale – she had been kidnapped at gunpoint from the parking lot of a local bar, taken to a nearby home, and gang-raped by six men. She was able to provide police with detailed descriptions of the men, including their names. She was also able to describe the sex acts she was forced to complete with each one of them.

She even told police that one of the men had filmed the assault with a video camera.

Fortunately for the accused rapists, the amateur porn cameraman had kept the tape – because it not only showed the sex acts, but it showed her consenting ahead of time to the entire gang-bang, saying at one point: “If this is on the Internet, I want a piece of the action!” It was unclear if she knew the camera was on at that point.

When the men were questioned and able to produce the tape, no charges against them were filed. After the police reviewed the tape, they questioned Ms. Moonier again, telling her they had seen the tape and asking her if she was certain she had been forced at gunpoint into the situation, as she said. She stuck by her story, demanding that charges be pressed. She had also received a bit less than $2,000 from a crime victims compensation fund.

Faced with the full tape contents, Ms. Moonier pled guilty to both the false report and the accepting of victim compensation funds under false pretenses. She’ll get no more than a year in prison.

My question to the Board: what would have happened in this case without the tape?

I contend we need look no further than Durham, NC, for the answer to that question. If that tape hadn’t been saved, or if (as I gather Moonier thought) it showed only the sex acts and didn’t have her up-front planning of them and agreement to them) those six guys would be mortgaging their houses to pay for legal counsel and praying that a jury believed them.

It’s often asked, “Why would a woman lie about such a thing?” Here, there seems to be no reason Moonier lied. But she did.

2

What exactly is this “debate” about? :confused:

3

Link to story.

Not that anyone is asking for a moral to this story, but I’d say the moral is this: Guys should realize that any girl (professionals excluded) crazy enough to engage in a gang-bang with people she doesn’t know or like, is crazy enough to do anything.

4

I don’t remotely comprehend this. Why lie? Just to get the money? What a shitty thing to do.

Although I also don’t know what the debate is about. I agree, without the tape, they’d be in big trouble. I’m not sure exactly how we could rectify that, though. Start asking for two male witnesses and a confession for every rape? That way lies madness.

5

To avoid confusion, I suggest that Bricker frame a distinct proposition for debate.

So far there isn’t one.

6

Sorry - thought there was enough to be clear in the OP. Two propositions are offered for debate. The first:

Rephrased: but for the lucky happenstance of saving the tape, the six men here would have been effectively punished by the judicial system regardless of how their criminal trials eventually turned out.

The second:

It’s been said in threads here that touched on evaluating the veracity of rape accusations, “Why would she lie?” I offer this case an an example of a woman who has, so far as can be discerned, no real reason to lie, and yet obviously did. I thus contend that “Why would she lie?” is not a particularly valid rejoinder when discussing the veracity of rape allegations.

I hope those two topics for debate are now clear.

7

As Malthus already asked, what exactly is the debate here? Is anyone claiming that some women don’t make false accusations of rape? Is anyone claiming that some people don’t make false accusations of other crimes? If so, they’re obviously wrong but I think most people already know this.

So what’s the plan? False rape accusations were made in Fullerton and Durham. They were investigated and nobody was prosecuted much less convicted. Are you suggesting we shouldn’t even bother investigating rape accusations because they might be false? I doubt that’s your opinion.

We have a legal system. Some people abuse the system. The system recognizes this possibility and has safeguards built into it.

8

And I contend that the police would have done their job and investigated the claim. I also contend that the investigation would have led them to the numerous witness that damaged her credibility. I also contend that they would have looked for corroboration to her story and found little to none. I contend then that they would send their reports onto the district attorney, who would have reviewed the material, possibly interviewed her again, and would have refused to bring charges.

Your conclusion is idiotic, without any facts to support it beyond your gut feeling. But that seems par for your course nowadays.

9

And perhaps, she she have to take the consequences the guys would have received had they been found guilty.

10

Um… that will be a shock to Duke lacrosee players Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann, who are all out the costs of posting $100,000 bail and awaiting trial in Durham.

11

The second is now clear, the first remains murky. Are you suggesting that “One should videotape all sexual encounters and the lead-up to said encounters, to avoid accusations of rape” is a topic for debate?

As for #2: in the narrow context in which you present it, I agree. Accusations of rape should be taken seriously, and with action in proportion to the evidence that a crime has been committed.

12

Do you contend that the process you describe above was followed in Durham?

13

No. Once again, what is your point?

14

Actually, that’s my point. The Durham discussions here left me with the impression that some posters (a) believed a valid data point was “why would someone lie about such a thing,” and (b) the Durham investigation was handled appropriately.

I offered this story to rebut (a) and show a parallel to (b).

I don’t think you and I have any disagreement here.

15

Does that case represent the exception or the norm?

Do you realize that you’re doing again the same thing you did in the recent pit thread re: the “Why would she lie” debate? Is there anyone here who argues that women never lie about being raped?

16

Not in so many words. But Diogenes, to take one example, certainly argued as though the possibility were tremendously unlikely and not worthy of serious consideration as a possibility.

17

The safeguards may protect the innocent from convictions. It certainly would not have protected them from financial ruin had this went to trial. Nor would it have protected them as their names and families are dragged through the muck due to the lurid allegations. How “safe” are those safeguards, really?

18

I’m not sure I get you, could you please clarify?

19

Well you pretty well just shot down your own argument. Assuming that the police will thoroughly investigate both sides of the case, instead of just trying to get enough evidence to convict, is a bad assumption.

20

And I don’t agree I’m doing QUITE the same thing – I’m offering a thesis for debate. If, as you suggest, no one believes otherwise, then it should be a short debate.

Is it offensive for some reason to state a proposition that no one disagrees with?