Man accused of rape, spends 6 years in jail...

Why exactly did she get 1.5 mill from the school , the school didn't supposedly rape her.

degoose wrote:Why exactly did she get 1.5 mill from the school , the school didn't supposedly rape her.

Because, in the eyes of the American court system, they were negligent in allowing it to happen.


This poor guy is now going to find it difficult, if not impossible, to get a decent job, he'll be lucky to get a job bagging up someone's shopping for them with this hanging over him. His college education and pretty much his future career was stolen from him by a vindictive woman who decided to cry rape, and was then made into a millionaire for it.

Hulohot wrote:In a movie-worthy twist, his former accuser got in touch with him via Facebook after he left prison. The two eventually met in person.

You would think the fact that she would contact him via Facebook and ask to meet was enough to cast suspiscion on her story. What kind of genuine rape victim contacts their attacker and asks to meet up after he's released from prison?

I hope that the school sees this and launches court proceedings to get the money back. This womans name needs to be exposed and dragged through the dirt in the same way she has done to this man.

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:The men a woman accuses should be afforded the same anonymity as women in these cases until it is proven that they are guilty. Crying "Rape" is a weapon in the hands of vindictive women and courts both in the US and the UK take a "guilty until proven innocent" stance in rape cases the majority of the time. A woman proven to be lieing should also be punished with imprisonment, perhaps the same imprisonment the male rapist would have received.

I absolutely agree.

Is it not already illegal to lie? Wasting police time and perverting the course of justice. However, understandably we don't want to accidentally send real rape victims to jail for daring to take the case to court.

Granting the accused anonymity is an idea, but then doesn't it fly in the face of the history of open justice we have in this country?

Madness wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:The men a woman accuses should be afforded the same anonymity as women in these cases until it is proven that they are guilty. Crying "Rape" is a weapon in the hands of vindictive women and courts both in the US and the UK take a "guilty until proven innocent" stance in rape cases the majority of the time. A woman proven to be lieing should also be punished with imprisonment, perhaps the same imprisonment the male rapist would have received.

I absolutely agree.

Is it not already illegal to lie? Wasting police time and perverting the course of justice. However, understandably we don't want to accidentally send real rape victims to jail for daring to take the case to court.

Granting the accused anonymity is an idea, but then doesn't it fly in the face of the history of open justice we have in this country?

The woman has anonymity so why shouldn't the man? If he's proven guilty then fair enough, name him. But at the moment whilst the case is ongoing his name is usually dragged through the dirt by the papers, then when he's proven innocent they just go quiet about the whole thing and there's no apology. The damage to his name and reputation is already done though. And even if he is proven innocent and the woman was proven to be lieing, she's never named regardless.

And whilst it's illegal to waste police time or pervert the course of justice, women who falsely accuse men of rape are rarely, if ever, brought up on it. The excuse being "it would discourage real rape victims from coming forward". Absolute bullshit really.

It's another example of "Equal rights for women, but only when it benefits us"

Men are named so other potential victims are encouraged to come forward, otherwise the prosecution has to mostly rely on one person's word against another's.

If someone is found not guilty of rape, would you want to see the accuser to face trial for purjury?

Lagamorph wrote:

Madness wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:The men a woman accuses should be afforded the same anonymity as women in these cases until it is proven that they are guilty. Crying "Rape" is a weapon in the hands of vindictive women and courts both in the US and the UK take a "guilty until proven innocent" stance in rape cases the majority of the time. A woman proven to be lieing should also be punished with imprisonment, perhaps the same imprisonment the male rapist would have received.

I absolutely agree.

Is it not already illegal to lie? Wasting police time and perverting the course of justice. However, understandably we don't want to accidentally send real rape victims to jail for daring to take the case to court.

Granting the accused anonymity is an idea, but then doesn't it fly in the face of the history of open justice we have in this country?

The woman has anonymity so why shouldn't the man? If he's proven guilty then fair enough, name him. But at the moment whilst the case is ongoing his name is usually dragged through the dirt by the papers, then when he's proven innocent they just go quiet about the whole thing and there's no apology. The damage to his name and reputation is already done though. And even if he is proven innocent and the woman was proven to be lieing, she's never named regardless.

And whilst it's illegal to waste police time or pervert the course of justice, women who falsely accuse men of rape are rarely, if ever, brought up on it. The excuse being "it would discourage real rape victims from coming forward". Absolute bullshit really.

It's another example of "Equal rights for women, but only when it benefits us"

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that in rape cases the accused should have anonymity - but this stuff about women lying getting sent to jail - well it would stop real victims coming forward. Given that a ridiculous amount of victims don't come forward because they don't think they'll be believed, or that the rapist will get away with it regardless, why would you want to institute a system that would scare those people more? Seems a bit of an odd thing to do.

Madness wrote:Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that in rape cases the accused should have anonymity - but this stuff about women lying getting sent to jail - well it would stop real victims coming forward. Given that a ridiculous amount of victims don't come forward because they don't think they'll be believed, or that the rapist will get away with it regardless, why would you want to institute a system that would scare those people more? Seems a bit of an odd thing to do.

As of a few years ago, that statistic stood at an estimated 1 in every 100 rapes in the UK actually leading to a successful prosecution.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters ... crime.html

It is an exercise that has been conducted three times now and is backed up by other academic studies. The results are consistent. One in 20 women said they had been raped since they were 16. One in 200 said they had been raped in the previous 12 months. In terms of the population of England and Wales, that suggests 85,000 women are raped each year - 230 a day. And yet the number of men convicted of rape is fewer than 800 a year. So the chance of a victim seeing her attacker jailed is less than one in 100.

We need a system that instils victims (both those raped and those falsely accused) with a genuine sense of confidence that their case will be treated appropriately. Knee-jerk reactions to awful cases like this won't bring that about.

Also, Deluge, how do you plan on proving women are lying? Is the man being found innocent enough to open up a case against the woman? How can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that she lied?

As Melly just pointed out, 99% of rape cases are unsuccessful. That's a lot of women to investigate.

melatonin wrote:We need a system that instils victims (both those raped and those falsely accused) with a genuine sense of confidence that their case will be treated appropriately. Knee-jerk reactions to awful cases like this won't bring that about.

Melly nails it. This is awful, obv, but there are many, many more cases where women are raped and either don't come forward, or their rapist isn't convicted owing to lack of evidence. One isolated incident like this doesn't warrant some of the changes suggested here, as bad as it is.

There's no excuse for not granting the accused the same anonymity though. Until he is proven guilty he must be assumed innocent. That means not announcing his name to the world for a trial by press.
The only way to make rape trials fair for all parties is that both accuser and accused are kept anonymous until a verdict has been reached.

And should women proven to be lieing be allowed to get away with it without consequence? Even ones who admit to lieing about the whole thing seem to never suffer any consequnces to those actions.

If a woman lies about being raped, it should be arranged that she ends up not lying about being raped.

If you follow me.

Lagamorph wrote:And should women proven to be lieing be allowed to get away with it without consequence? Even ones who admit to lieing about the whole thing seem to never suffer any consequnces to those actions.

As much as it angers me that vile, vindictive women can get away with destroying a man's life and career with a simple lie, I'd consider the fact that if admitting to lying results in the women ending up in prison, then, well, far fewer women will admit to lying.

One upside to the current situation is that the women who do lie don't have the threat of prison preventing them from admitting the truth and freeing the accused of the conviction.

aaronayl1 wrote:If a woman lies about being raped, it should be arranged that she ends up not lying about being raped.

If you follow me.

By getting her to recuse her testimony.

http://mirrors.rit.edu/instantCSI/

Igor wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:And should women proven to be lieing be allowed to get away with it without consequence? Even ones who admit to lieing about the whole thing seem to never suffer any consequnces to those actions.

As much as it angers me that vile, vindictive women can get away with destroying a man's life and career with a simple lie, I'd consider the fact that if admitting to lying results in the women ending up in prison, then, well, far fewer women will admit to lying.

One upside to the current situation is that the women who do lie don't have the threat of prison preventing them from admitting the truth and freeing the accused of the conviction.

But the woman still suffers no consequences. The mans entire life is destroyed beyond repair.

Lagamorph wrote:Even ones who admit to lieing about the whole thing seem to never suffer any consequnces to those actions.

Well now you're just making things up.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/1 ... man-jailed

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... rison.html

http://www.dailyfail.co.uk/news/article ... esome.html

Lagamorph wrote:

Igor wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:And should women proven to be lieing be allowed to get away with it without consequence? Even ones who admit to lieing about the whole thing seem to never suffer any consequnces to those actions.

As much as it angers me that vile, vindictive women can get away with destroying a man's life and career with a simple lie, I'd consider the fact that if admitting to lying results in the women ending up in prison, then, well, far fewer women will admit to lying.

One upside to the current situation is that the women who do lie don't have the threat of prison preventing them from admitting the truth and freeing the accused of the conviction.

But the woman still suffers no consequences. The mans entire life is destroyed beyond repair.

Yep, but I'd rather a woman admit to lying, 'get away with it' and the man be free than her not admit to lying because she faces six years in prison for doing so.

It's quite clear that Facebook is the root of all evil.

Small bit of good news for him. Hope he makes it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/footb ... -1.1087382

Brian Banks to get tryout with Seahawks, Redskins, Chiefs, Dolphins



This woman should be tried as an adult (just like Banks was) for perjury, fraud and whatever other laws she has broken. The bare faced cheek to say "let bygones be bygones" after ruining a teenager's life AND to say 'I still want to keep the money'. Outrageous.