Wanetta Gibson Courageously Comes Forward; Admits Her Rape Accusation Was False (Not)

[Bambro]

That’s a sad story.

[mhendo]

@Bricker

Maybe.

Although you’re probably looking at a statute of limitations problem. But the prosecution can argue the clock is tolled until,they actually discover the crime. Not sure how California law works for this issue.

Here’s what an earlier LA Times article had to say:

The statute of limitations for making a false claim is four years, but experts say it could restart when a previously hidden crime is discovered. In this case, Gibson testified in 2003 during Banks’ preliminary hearing but recanted her accusation last year. “No, he did not rape me,” she told Banks and his private investigator in a recorded conversation.

“The prosecution can say that we only learned last year that the crime of perjury occurred and therefore we are still within the statute of limitations,” Loyola Law professor Stan Goldman said.

The fact that Gibson was a juvenile when she initially made her accusation poses a potential complication, as does the fact that she has since recanted her recantation, but Goldman said the large monetary settlement she received might make charging her a priority to prosecutors trying to ensure the integrity of the criminal justice system.

The same story says it’s also unlikely that she’ll have to repay any of the money she won in the settlement from the school.

[Inigo_Montoya]

I realized the post would be read by the humor impaired, hence the watermark should my intentions be questioned. Perhaps I should also have provided a link to the inspiring thread.

Of course, jokes are a lot like God: close examination & dissection kills them. I usually try not to explain them, therefore. Granted, because I favor hyperbole, Poe’s Law requires me to embed some evidence of my intent in particularly sensitive/explosive jibes. I’m not for everybody, but I’m here nonetheless. I’m readily dismissed as a troll, if you like. But I am no troll.
“The public gets what they deserve, not what they demand.
Unlesss we all decide to be a business not a band.” --Agent Orange

[LurkerInNJ]

@Revtim

Geeze, I reject Facebook friend requests from people just because I kinda dislike them. This guy accepted one from the person who sent him to jail for 5 years on a lie!

The televised version of this that I saw had him not friending her but agreeing to meet with her.

[billfish678]

@mhendo

Here’s what an earlier LA Times article had to say:The same story says it’s also unlikely that she’ll have to repay any of the money she won in the settlement from the school.

That seems even more fucked up than the rest of the story. Not so much its the biggest injustice here (far from it) but more of “how the hell does she get away with THAT?”

[clairobscur]

@Kimballkid

Surely (or Shirley if you prefer).

Psst, highlight the part below the first sentence.

How did you notice that there was something that could be highlighted?

[Measure_for_Measure]

@clairobscur

How did you notice that there was something that could be highlighted?

It was in yellow.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@Bricker

She said that he took her into a school stairwell and forced sex on her. She was such a compelling witness that despite the lack of DNA evidence, his lawyer advised him to plead guilty.

I am not familiar with the details in the case (read that part again) but have to say it seems fundamentally wrong to be able to get a rape conviction on nothing more than he said/she said testimony with no other corroborating evidence to support her accusation.

Something is seriously fucked up with our justice system if the only thing between you and jail for a serious crime is who can play to the jury better than the other person.

[clairobscur]

@Measure_for_Measure

It was in yellow.

Hmm…When I look very closely and very attentively, and knowing what to search for, I indeed notice something vaguely orangish. Serious question : is it nearly invisible, or is my sight to blame?

[Steophan]

@Farmer_Jane

But women who do make an accusation of rape and a jury finds the person not guilty? They should be protected. Like this woman.

So should the men who are found not guilty, and yet find that the publicity ruins their lives.

[Malacandra]

I suppose a cunt-punt would be considered brutal?

[Inigo_Montoya]

@clairobscur

Hmm…When I look very closely and very attentively, and knowing what to search for, I indeed notice something vaguely orangish. Serious question : is it nearly invisible, or is my sight to blame?

Nearly invisible.

[saoirse]

@clairobscur

How did you notice that there was something that could be highlighted?

When you read something that outrages you, often your first response is to hit the “Quote” button. At that point you discover that there was more text, in a color called “lemon chiffon.” Of course, if you don’t bother to read your post…

[Spice_Weasel]

@fumster

Couldn’t agree more. Not only was an innocent man sent to jail, but women who actually are raped will have their story doubted. There are almost no words to describe the damage she has done.

I hope she is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I really wish they would crack down on this more. I know it’s a delicate balance between protecting the alleged victim vs. the accused, but dammit, these bitches are making it harder for men to trust women and harder for victims of rape. I’m very glad he’s going to get his name cleared, at least. But I also hope he sues her ass for damages.

[Spice_Weasel]

@Steophan

So should the men who are found not guilty, and yet find that the publicity ruins their lives.

I’m genuinely curious - how do we propose to both protect the alleged victim and the accused at the same time? In what ways would the law change?

I for one would support a law that doesn’t allow a release of the alleged victim or the alleged assailant’s identities until a guilty verdict is found. I’d pretty much be in support of that for any crime. But especially rape.

[saoirse]

@olivesmarch4th

I’m genuinely curious - how do we propose to both protect the alleged victim and the accused at the same time? In what ways would the law change?

I for one would support a law that doesn’t allow a release of the alleged victim or the alleged assailant’s identities until a guilty verdict is found. I’d pretty much be in support of that for any crime. But especially rape.

There’s no law forbidding publishing the accuser’s name. It’s just a professional convention. I’m not sure news organizations would go along with having to report, “Somebody raped somebody else somewhere. Details at 11.”

[Sampiro]

[QUOTE=mhendo]
The same story says it’s also unlikely that she’ll have to repay any of the money she won in the settlement from the school.
[/QUOTE]

Evidently the money is long gone. She’s been on public assistance and can’t even pay $600 per month child support for her two children who don’t live with her; sounds like just a sterling sort all around.

[Spice_Weasel]

@saoirse

There’s no law forbidding publishing the accuser’s name. It’s just a professional convention. I’m not sure news organizations would go along with having to report, “Somebody raped somebody else somewhere. Details at 11.”

I wasn’t saying there was a law, I was saying there oughtta be. I have to confess between a rape victim publically humiliated or a man’s reputation ruined I don’t feel too concerned about whether the new organizations are getting their juicy details.

So, then what? Got any better ideas?

[Steophan]

@olivesmarch4th

I’m genuinely curious - how do we propose to both protect the alleged victim and the accused at the same time? In what ways would the law change?

I for one would support a law that doesn’t allow a release of the alleged victim or the alleged assailant’s identities until a guilty verdict is found. I’d pretty much be in support of that for any crime. But especially rape.

Precisely this, yes. A false accusation of a sexual crime is possibly more damaging than any other accusation. At minimum, I would say that the identities should not be revealed until the trial. I suspect keeping them secret during a trial would cause more problems than it would solve.

[Steophan]

@saoirse

There’s no law forbidding publishing the accuser’s name. It’s just a professional convention. I’m not sure news organizations would go along with having to report, “Somebody raped somebody else somewhere. Details at 11.”

Oh, and I really don’t care whether the news agencies like it or not. “Someone may or may not be a criminal” isn’t, or at least shouldn’t be news. Wait until a conviction.