New Il. Rape law

[margin]

Link to the Philadelphia Police Department scandal: http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/452/

The newspaper determined that almost from its inception in 1981, the sex crimes unit had rejected large numbers of rapes, attempted rapes and other reported sexual assaults as being “unfounded,” meaning that police believed that the women had fabricated the rape complaints. Investigators also used an even more oblique method, treating rape reports as though they were requests for information, not crimes.

Philadelphia, in its heyday of hiding rape complaints, reported that more than half of the women who came to police were liars. But last year, under intense scrutiny, the same department reported that only 7 percent of its cases were unfounded.

http://www.journalism.umd.edu/cns/wire/1999-editions/02-February-editions/990216-Tuesday/sexoffense_CNS-UMCP.ht

Article about how some rape victims are forced to take lie detector tests. After one victim failed such a test, the accused went out and raped two more women.

[margin]

Interesting thing about the Evans case, the case where the rapist went on to rape two more victims after the first one was disbelieved. The detective in the case, Tom Martin, who demanded that the victim take the polygraph test? He was convicted in December of 1995 of sexual assault himself.

[Whack-a-Mole]

*Originally posted by margin *
**I’m sorry, but I’m sort of disturbed that no one has commented on the size and duration of this study. 109, across ten years, in a city of 70, 000? That’s just not a real big study. **

And to think I gave annnaplurabelle grief for pointing out exactly this after I think it had already been pointed out. Several times above the limitations of this study were mentioned and indeed the study itself points out its own shortcomings. However, that does not make the study worthless. Most studies start out in a small and statistically insignificant fashion to see if there is something there that merits further study. Kanin’s study shows an alarming possibility that certainly should be followed by larger, more encompassing studies. When a study is begun there is usually a hypothesis that is stated that the people hope to prove or disprove. The study in this smallish town is enough to hypothesize that similar statistics will be found elsewhere. To assume otherwise you have to take the stance that the town studied is highly aberrant in some way or that the study itself was fundamentally flawed neither of which seems to be the case (at least no evidence of such as been presented and the paper is old enough to allow for critical analysis).

And no one here has brought up situations like Florida’s, where they used to demand polygraphs from rape victims, or the situation in Baltimore or Philadelphia’s police department, where it was found that thousands or rape complaints were routinely tossed out without investigation. Yes, Bricker, I’m looking for a cite.

No, no one has. Poor police work and/or uncaring police is hardly news to anyone. It is awful and measures should be taken to correct the problem when found as I would certainly hope was the case in the instances you cite. There are fundamental differences here however. The instances you cite are isolated instances of police corruption (or incompetence if you prefer). The numbers regarding false accusations are endemic to the entire US. Further, one would assume measures were taken to correct the problems found in these police departments but I am unaware that any serious reform is proposed to address the false accusation problem.

This is the other thing. The word ‘false’ tends to imply deception or venom. That is why people reject this argument. It’s the same argument one frequently makes against ‘unfounded’ , a term which doesn’t mean the case was maliciously brought—it means there wasn’t enough evidence to take the case to court. Nor does it take into account mistaken identification by whomever as an impetus to trial. Using the word ‘false’ implies nothing less than malice on the part of the victim. With these cases cited only by numbers, I cannot make any determination as to what actually happened. What I find disturbing is that there appears to no position in this discussion beyond, “She lied!” or “She did not!” It’s the fact that people instantly jump to truth or lie/ black or white that gets peoples’ backs up, my own included.

A false accusation is just that…false. If it implies malice in every case to you that is your problem. Certainly there can be cases of false accusations being made by mistake. However, one would assume it is somewhat harder in a rape case for a victim to make mistakes. I’ve seen various number bandied about for this but something like 80-90% of rape victims know their attacker (prior acquaintance). Certainly some women are attacked by strangers who also may hide thier face and some are raped when they are unconscious but I would still maintain that the majority of women should be able to positively identify their attacker when they see him. I’ll allow that there are instances where an honest misidentification of a rapist might be made but given the very personal, up close nature of rape I doubt that honest mistakes can be all that frequent. A woman who is ‘unsure’ but fingers someone for the rape is also malicious. This is a BIG deal for all involved. One would think the woman wants the actual rapist caught and not being sure of an ID doesn’t help that cause. It needs to be better than ‘I think’ it was him. If she gets the wrong guy all you have now is two victims instead of one and a rapist still at large.

I find it mildly amusing that no one is demanding cites from people they agree with, myself included. I think we should rectify that.

I’ve provided cites and plenty of them. I provided you with links to numerous stories of false rape accusations and their consequences and I have provided two studies showing the issue. The people who agree with me aren’t demanding cites because I already provided them. This is GD…no one here is on my side such that they will let extraordianry claims go unsupported.

[KellyM]

Whack-a-mole, you cannot have it both ways. You’re trying to say that your one study can be generalized to a national trend, but other people’s “isolated incidents”, no matter how broadly repeated, cannot even be hypothesized to be endemic.

Sorry, that’s dishonest. Please play by the same rules you impose on others.

[Whack-a-Mole]

*Originally posted by KellyM *
**Whack-a-mole, you cannot have it both ways. You’re trying to say that your one study can be generalized to a national trend, but other people’s “isolated incidents”, no matter how broadly repeated, cannot even be hypothesized to be endemic.

Sorry, that’s dishonest. Please play by the same rules you impose on others. **

Nonsense. The FBI numbers regard the entire country. Their numbers have stayed rock steady for seven years and they have almost the exact same reporting percentages coming from private laboratories over the same period. The DNA testing shows a solid 25% false accusation rate for ALL rape cases for which DNA testing is done. Maybe it’s just me but I call that a national figure with a solid trend.

[KellyM]

Whack-a-Mole, changing your argument now? You said that the Kanin study alone justified an extrapolation to a national trend. Now you’re relying on the FBI statistics to justify that extrapolation. What other, possibly previously unmentioned “facts” are you also relying on?

[Whack-a-Mole]

*Originally posted by KellyM *
**Whack-a-Mole, changing your argument now? You said that the Kanin study alone justified an extrapolation to a national trend. Now you’re relying on the FBI statistics to justify that extrapolation. What other, possibly previously unmentioned “facts” are you also relying on? **

Where did I say any such thing? The closest I came to that is saying that the Kanin study should be expanded as what it shows will likely be found in other places. I base that supposition on the idea that I doubt that the midwestern town is somehow a thoroughly warped little town compared to other towns and that other data shows false reporting trends already on a national scale but till the study is done (if ever) no one can say with certainty. That is NOT the same thing as my saying “the Kanin study shows a national trend.” You will, in fact, find me saying several times in this thread that the Kanin study CANNOT be extrapolated to a national basis by itself.

And how do the FBI statistics equal extrapolation? They are what they are. Data gathered over seven years on a national basis.

I do not understand your wanting to wiggle and squirm to avoid some shocking statistics. As a woman who was raped you should be furious at those who make false accusations. Possibly the horrible police you encountered were in some amount a result of them seeing false accusations (that doesn’t excuse it of course). Certainly the false accusations demean legitimate accusations making it somewhat harder for the real victims to get justice.

[KellyM]

You said it right here, Whack-a-Mole.

*Originally posted by Whack-a-Mole *
**The study in this smallish town is enough to hypothesize that similar statistics will be found elsewhere. **

[KellyM]

You said it right here, Whack-a-Mole.

*Originally posted by Whack-a-Mole *
**The study in this smallish town is enough to hypothesize that similar statistics will be found elsewhere. **

You went on to say that to expect that this does not represent a national trend would require making the assumption that the study was anomalous – and that you clearly believe such an assumption is unreasonable. In other words, you offered the hypothesis, and then belittled anyone who objected to it.

[Whack-a-Mole]

*Originally posted by KellyM *
**You went on to say that to expect that this does not represent a national trend would require making the assumption that the study was anomalous – and that you clearly believe such an assumption is unreasonable. In other words, you offered the hypothesis, and then belittled anyone who objected to it. **

Where is the belittling? If you have a different hypothesis you a more than free to share it. If you think my assumptions and logic is in error your are free to point it out and offer your reasoning in its place. For some reason you seem to prefer picking me apart rather than the argument I made.

[annaplurabelle]

To be fair, here is another view on the false charges issue (emphasis mine):

Consider the case of Oakland Police Department, which came under fire in 1990 for the practice of routinely unfounding sexual assault cases as a means of avoiding serious investigative effort.

As excerpted from Law Enforcement News:

An internal audit of 203 “unfounded” rape complaints from the last 18 months revealed that 108 had been improperly classified, said Capt. James Hahn, the head of the Criminal Investigation Division, who conducted the audit.

For the most part, these cases involved prostitutes, drug abusers, or victims who refused to cooperate, Hahn said. Those are not sufficient reasons for classifying a case as unfounded under the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report guidelines, Captain Hahn said. Last year, one-fourth of all rape complaints in Oakland were categorized as unfounded." Candidly, we blew it," said Police Chief George Hart.

Hahn attributed the lapse in handling cases to understaffing and the “cynicism that begins to creep in” when an officer handles hundreds of cases each year.

Perhaps the most tragic consequence of routinely unfounding sexual assault cases, however, is that it fuels the myth that a high percentage of cases are determined to be false.

This issue is perhaps most eloquently articulated by retired NYPD sex crimes investigator Harry O’Reilly (1984):

In a six-month period in New York City there were around 2000 reported rapes, of which about 250 were unfounded reports. But ‘unfounded’ does not mean lying.

Let’s see what it means: 200 of the 250 were simple administrative errors. They should never have been called rapes in the first place; for example, a woman phones the station and yells rape. The police car goes out and there’s no one home. The next day a detective goes to follow the incident up and the woman says "Oh yes, my boyfriend and I had a fight last night and I yelled “rape”’. ‘Why did you yell rape?’ ‘Because if I had yelled disorderly conduct, nobody is going to come, but if I yell rape I know damn sure that a cop is going to come in a hurry.’ That kind of thing is not a false rape charge, but a mild inconvenience to the police.

We are therefore left with potentially 50 liars out of a total of 2000 complainants. Of that 50, perhaps 20 cases of false report were made as some kind of attempt by the woman to protect herself against a tyrannical father or husband because she had violated some family rule, usually a time curfew, and she has to account for why she is late. Rarely in these cases, however, does she accuse a specific person; rather, she claims that some mysterious figure in the night pulled her into a car and did this awful thing to her and caused her to be two hours late in coming home.

Other times we have women who have psychological problems, loneliness being the main one, and they know if they say ‘rape’ the officer will come and talk with them awhile. These women have lied, of course, but no more maliciously than has the woman with the tyrannical husband/father.

After analyzing all the ‘unfounded’ reports, we found that there were actually only five cases of women maliciously telling lies and deliberately falsely accusing men of rapes that had never been committed. In these cases the women are arrested for making false accusations – false charges are crimes which must be punished.

The bottom line, then is that out of 2000 charges of rape, there were five proven liars.

Is this a biased view? Probably. But consider the truth that there are many factors involved in collecting the data for these numbers, and that many of the cites are abstracts of studies that leave out information deemed “damaging” to a particular political agenda. Personally, I hate “spin” from any special interest group - I’d like the truth so I can form my own opinion. If you feel the same way, I suggest you look beyond the sound bites. I’d guess the truth lies somewhere between “it’s a myth” and “it’s an epidemic”. It can’t be assessed w/o knowing more (which might just be the objective of both extremist views).

If anyone has a site for Kanin that includes the actual study, I’d appreciate reading it. Has anyone read it?

[Whack-a-Mole]

annaplurabelle:
On the face of it that study doesn’t seem to necessarily contradict the Kanin study. As far as I can tell the Kanin study didn’t distinguish what ‘types’ of false rape accusations were made (e.g. to cover being home late, etc.) but only watched where the charges were withdrawn by the woman. Of course the percentages are far different at 10% to 40%. I think this is partly what would be interesting about another Kanin-like study but done on a much larger scale and see where distinct variations pop-up (big/small city, college/no college present, geographic regions, etc.).

What this study and the Kanin study miss (I think given our limited reading of these studies) is the amount of false accusations where the woman sticks to her story. In the study you cite and the Kanin study they are only looking at rape accusations that were proven to be unfounded (or at least retracted for some reason by the woman) before the whole deal went to court. I may be wrong in that assessment but that’s how I read it. As a result I once again fall back on the DNA statistics that the FBI pulled together. I assume (ass/u/me…I know) that to go so far as DNA testing the police must think there is a fair chance of a case going forward. I dunno though…maybe these days DNA testing is cheap and fast and easy and as such is routine right up front. Maybe someone who knows better can say.

Finally, I would not be so forgiving of any false cry of rape as the article above suggests. Certainly a malicious accusation is bad but crying rape at any time when there isn’t one is like pulling a fire alarm at school when there is no fire. You are using public resources to respond to a greivous crime when there wasn’t one. I think there should be criminal punishment for ALL genuine false cries of rape even if the charge wasn’t levelled at a particular individual.

[I_Eris_I]

RazorSharp,

I just read your post about the Shane Seyer case. I am truly disgusted at that.

I understand that the court was trying to avoid punishing the child for its mother’s actions, but it ends up punishing the victim all over again. Truly horrible…
~Eris~

[annaplurabelle]

Of course the percentages are far different at 10% to 40%. I think this is partly what would be interesting about another Kanin-like study but done on a much larger scale and see where distinct variations pop-up (big/small city, college/no college present, geographic regions, etc.).

I’m assuming that there would be distinct variations, and this is an important factor if we’re going to address this problem. The Kanin abstract I read claims that no trends were suggested, but I don’t see it that way. The uni/college campus studies are consistently higher, which suggests a generational trend that should be alarming.

Personally, I feel the Kanin study doesn’t begin to reflect the reality of major cities. 109 total rape reports in 9 years? I’m from NYC - to me that sounds as real as Pleasantville. Again, I’d like to know more about the demographics of that population that aren’t mentioned in the abstract.

What this study and the Kanin study miss (I think given our limited reading of these studies) is the amount of false accusations where the woman sticks to her story. In the study you cite and the Kanin study they are only looking at rape accusations that were proven to be unfounded (or at least retracted for some reason by the woman) before the whole deal went to court.

Absolutely. But unfortunately, the only remedy in those cases lies within the justice system. And there’s really no way to assess a true number either - unless you want to postulate that all cases where the DA doesn’t indict, or trials resulting in aquittals are the equivalent of false charges.

As a result I once again fall back on the DNA statistics that the FBI pulled together. I assume (ass/u/me…I know) that to go so far as DNA testing the police must think there is a fair chance of a case going forward. I dunno though…maybe these days DNA testing is cheap and fast and easy and as such is routine right up front. Maybe someone who knows better can say.

From your FBI quote (my emphasis):

The fact that these percentages have remained constant for 7 years, and that the National Institute of Justice’s informal survey of private laboratories reveals a strikingly similar 26-percent exclusion rate, strongly suggests that postarrest and postconviction DNA exonerations are tied to some strong, underlying systemic problems that generate erroneous accusations and convictions.

Again, systemic. If you’re referring to the older cases now being overturned - there are other factors there as well - racial bias, for one thing. As for current cases, I’d say DNA is routine when consent isn’t the defense.

But it has no bearing on the OP issues of withdrawn consent, or what constitutes force, or even what constitutes consensual sex. The perspectives of some posts here suggests that there isn’t a consensus about that, and that should be alarming as well.

BTW, I wouldn’t give too much weight to the FBI reports. The UCR has been criticised for many reasons before. One of them pertains to another issue that hardly ever comes up on these rape threads - male rape victims:

Lara Stemple, executive director of the Los Angeles-based group[the nonprofit human rights group Stop Prisoner Rape] stated that the FBI’s approach to rape statistics in its newly released report trivializes the suffering of male rape victims. The group is calling on the FBI to revise its categories to include the rape of men as a violent crime.

“The FBI’s conscious disregard of male rape short-circuits attempts to address this issue on a policy level. If any other group in society was so blatantly excluded from crime statistics, we would hear an enormous outcry,” Stemple charged.

Unlike many state penal codes that use a gender-neutral approach to rape, the national crime report defines forcible rape as, “(t)he carnal knowledge of a female forcibly against her will.” The categories of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report were created in 1929, according to the report. The forcible rape of men is explicitly excluded from the annual analysis of the “violent crime” in the U.S., which draws from the reports of 17,000 law enforcement agencies throughout the country. The FBI’s report states that it “has traditionally defined rape victims as female.”

[annaplurabelle]

Finally, I would not be so forgiving of any false cry of rape as the article above suggests. Certainly a malicious accusation is bad but crying rape at any time when there isn’t one is like pulling a fire alarm at school when there is no fire. You are using public resources to respond to a greivous crime when there wasn’t one. I think there should be criminal punishment for ALL genuine false cries of rape even if the charge wasn’t levelled at a particular individual.

Not to minimize this, but I think it would fall into the more consistently assessed category of false charges for any crime. In many cases it points to either a mental health issue or a domestic problem - problems that can be farmed out to the appropriate agency.

My main concern, whatever the true figures might be, is with 2 categories of false charges:

1. Revenge, or malicious intent.

2. Disagreement about the meaning of consent between the parties. Only one may be legally correct, but neither has malicious intent.

A person who has no qualms about sending someone to prison out of spite is dangerous. In the second instance, we see a societal problem that needs to be addressed - the college studies suggests to me that it might be a trend.

Ultimately, “false charges” is not a simple problem, so don’t expect a single cause or blanket solution.

[melody]

*Originally posted by Razorsharp *
**I believe that we all can agree that one does not have the right to cause another to endure physical pain, right?

Okay, how about the excruciating pain (Yes, it is painful, ladies.)that a man must endure when forced to stop an act that he previously had permission to perform? **

“excruciating pain” Oh right. Give that man a hand…{or how about if we just tell Mr. Studmuffin to use his own and finish the job himself?}

[melody]

*Originally posted by Razorsharp *
**
No, it dealt with a man wanting to stop, but was restrained by the woman. And, no, the man would not be legally free from the obligation of supporting the “choice” that the woman makes. The Kansas Supreme Court has ruled:The typical feminist response is, “You play, you pay” or " When you agree to have sex, you agree to the consequences", of course, those are just the rules that men have to abide by. **

“She wrapped her legs around me and I just couldn’t stop…” I’d tell him to stop whining and grow up. You aren’t talking about rape here, but since you asked…Absolutely now way should the man be free of his finiancial and moral responsibilities if there is a child produced. He knew that was a possibility when he jumped in her bed, and waiting until the last ten seconds isn’t going to make it “safe” for him. Don’t you know sperm can be found in pre-coital seminal fluid? You should, if you’re a grown up man having sex. If you don’t want the responsibility, don’t take chances.

And FYI, the physical risks of being pregnant, and giving birth along with the psychological dilema of having to make decisions about single parenthood/adoption is “paying”. All the man is legally required to do is contribute a little cash once a month. Morally, he should be prepared to parent the child even if he didn’t plan on having a long term relationship with the mother, because by having sex and creating a human with her guarantees that he does now. Same thing is true for the woman; she shouldn’t bed him if he’s not someone you’d like to have in your life for 18 to 20 years. Certainly does toss a wet blanket on casual sex, huh?

[Razorsharp]

Originally posted by melody
"She wrapped her legs around me and I just couldn’t stop…" I’d tell him to stop whining and grow up. You aren’t talking about rape here, but since you asked…Absolutely now way should the man be free of his finiancial and moral responsibilities if there is a child produced.

Now, hold on a minute here. The subject at hand is “No means no” and “Stop means stop”, otherwise, if one doesn’t stop, a charge of rape can be levied against the offender, or are these rules constructed just for the benefit of the “sisterhood”?

“Absolutely no way”??? Now hold on again. Isn’t rape one of the primary reasons (the other being “the health of the mother”) given for having “the right to choose”? Hell, even the majority of those who claim to be “Pro-life” give exception to the instance of rape.

Same thing is true for the woman; she shouldn’t bed him if he’s not someone you’d like to have in your life for 18 to 20 years. Certainly does toss a wet blanket on casual sex, huh?

Well, at least you are consistant, therefore, I have no contention with you on this issue. What chaps my ass are those who wear their “Pro-choice” ideology on their sleeve as a badge of honor, while absolutely refusing to entertain the thought that there just possibly could be some instances where men should also be privileged to the concept of “freedom of choice”.

[KellyM]

Razorsharp, when men can get pregnant they will have the freedom to choose to end that pregnancy. Until then, you’re hijacking.

[Shodan]

From annaplurabelle’s cite:

Let’s see what it means: 200 of the 250 were simple administrative errors. They should never have been called rapes in the first place; for example, a woman phones the station and yells rape. The police car goes out and there’s no one home. The next day a detective goes to follow the incident up and the woman says "Oh yes, my boyfriend and I had a fight last night and I yelled “rape”’. ‘Why did you yell rape?’ ‘Because if I had yelled disorderly conduct, nobody is going to come, but if I yell rape I know damn sure that a cop is going to come in a hurry.’ That kind of thing is not a false rape charge, but a mild inconvenience to the police.

I don’t understand. How is this not a false accusation of rape?

Regards,
Shodan