Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    
    	RE: .3  Mike Z.
    
    	Sorry, but I do not intend to "interact" with you in this topic,
    	so you might as well direct your notes to someone else.
    
    	As for taking a break from Womannotes, you did it yourself for
    	quite awhile, as I recall.
    
    	Another reason to be nostalgic tonight...
    

    I feel obliged to enter a note in this topic, since I once offered
    an explanation of why the possibility of false accusations of rape
    can bother a man. And I've seen how the discussion has degenerated
    from there.
    
    For the record...
    
    I have never stated nor implied (nor do I believe) that false
    accusations of rape are (a) more heinous than rape, (b) as common
    as rape, (c) are of greater concern, or even of equal concern as
    rape, or (d) that anti-rape laws and/or the court system should
    be weighted more in favor of protecting men from false accusations
    of rape than protecting women from rape.
    
    My previous note on the subject was merely attempting to illustrate
    how a false accusation can be damaging to the falsely accused, and
    why a man might fear such damage. And that's all it was meant to
    be.
    
    --- jerry

    There might be the question of why accusations of False Rape (or
    however we choose to phrase it) are really of *that* much concern
    to women.  After all, how many women are accused of raping people,
    right?
    
    I think false rape accusations, in particular, are a very serious
    matter.  No matter how few falsified rape accusation are made in
    proportion to justified rape chargers, this subject is of equal
    concern (and apparantly equal emotionalism) as "real" rape charges.
    
    Now for the why:
    
    As we all are quite well aware of, many women have been, for one
    reason or another, unable to prosecute their assailants.  Many times,
    it is extraordinarly _difficult_ to prove the charges ARE real,
    justified, and that the women "didn't really want it anyway".  Painful
    to say the least.
    
    And for every falsified charge of rape that occurs with a women
    accusing a man of committing something he did not do, the effort
    of proving rape in a justified case gets THAT MUCH HARDER.  It
    effectively hurts the collective efforts of women everywhere to
    get rape the attention, the serious attention and the punishment
    it deserves.
    
    Falsified charges of any criminal act is wrong, wrong, wrong.  But
    as far as an action that has a most serous effect on a woman's issue,
    false rape charges are among the worst I can think of.  (The stigma
    attached to the accused goes without saying).
    
    Note:  false rape charges, as defined in this note, are charges
    made intentionally, hurtfully, and wrongfully against someone else.
    This is in opposition to a person *mistakenly* accused of rape (ie
    mistaken idenity, etc.), as unfortunate as this is also.
    
    
    ---kim
                   

The "false accusation" question cannot be discussed in a simplistic manner:

-- on the one hand, there are women who have intentionally falsely
   accused someone of rape "to get back at him".  I suspect that this
   is a very rare occurrance.

-- on the other hand, there are men who have defended themselves against
   a rape charge by claiming the woman falsely accused them.  I suspect
   that this is a fairly common defense in date-rape cases.  (I'm ignoring
   "normal" criminal defense tactics such as claiming mistaken identity
    in a non-acquaintence rape case)

The latter, and the way the defense is made, may be, to some extent, an
artifact of the American legal system.  Here, we see "truth" as appearing
out of the clash of opposites (with more weight being given to the
accused criminal).  In other societies, the justice system is seen as
a search for truth, with the judge/jury taking on a greater role, and the
lawyers -- and their "vigorous defense" tactics -- a lesser.

Martin.

re: The woman I mentioned in 880.whatever, who has supposedly admitted she 
falsified a rape charge

The word on the street -- not entirely gossip -- in Nashua is that this 
is another instance of the Nashua police overreacting -- that she was 
badgered, browbeaten, humilated, and annoyed until she took back her 
charges.  Only then did they advise her she was suspected of a crime 
and could have a lawyer present, etc.

There isn't any way to confirm this, since obviously the police aren't
going to admit to any wrongdoing.  I guess we'll have to wait for the 
trial . . . 

The Nashua police, by the way, have been accused of this sort of thing
before, rather frequently.  They regularly push the limits of what's
allowable in questioning, etc.  I'm not saying that this makes them
generally wrong, or wrong in this case, only that it wouldn't be 
surprising if they did go too far.

Anyway, I certainly wouldn't prosecute a rape case unless I had severe
injury and three eyewitnesses . . . 

--bonnie

    	RE: .6  Kim
    
    	> And for every falsified charge of rape that occurs with a women
    	> accusing a man of committing something he did not do, the effort
    	> of proving rape in a justified case gets THAT MUCH HARDER.  It
    	> effectively hurts the collective efforts of women everywhere to
    	> get rape the attention, the serious attention and the punishment
    	> it deserves.
    
    	In other words, due to the serious prejudice that exists against
    	women in our society (especially in the legal system,) the actions
    	of one woman can create additional prejudice against ALL women
    	by means of stereotyping (eg, "If one woman lied about rape, then
    	they probably ALL lie about it.")
    
    	What do you suggest women do about this?  Should we start doubting
    	rape charges as much as our legal system does (as a show for our
    	"concern" about how false charges could damage all of us?)  Or should
    	we recognize that this dynamic (eg, how prejudice works) is wrong in
    	itself and should be stopped?
    
    	> Falsified charges of any criminal act is wrong, wrong, wrong.  But
    	> as far as an action that has a most serous effect on a woman's issue,
    	> false rape charges are among the worst I can think of.  (The stigma
    	> attached to the accused goes without saying).
    
    	Are all banks damaged by false accusations of bank robbery?  Have
    	all white men been damaged by the false accusation of murder lodged
    	by Chuck Stuart?  (Although I'm sure we'd agree that race relations
    	in Boston have been severely affected by this case, who took the
    	brunt of the bad effects - the white community or the black community?)
    	
    	Why do you suppose it is that the black community can be damaged
    	even when it is a *white male* who makes a false murder charge??
    
    	(By the way, I would really appreciate it if some folks in this
    	discussion would stop informing us that false rape charges are wrong.
    	No one in this conference has argued that it is anything OTHER than
    	wrong to make a false accusation of a crime against another person.)

    Kim -
    
    Thank you for a very clear, calm explanation of how the two topics
    connect.  It is a perspective which I had sensed, but been unable
    to bring forward into consciousness.
    
    Alison

    
    maybe we should have a topic on martians
    

    re .9  (Suzanne)
    
    No, not ALL women lie about rape charges.  That's pretty obvious.
    At least as obvious that the fact that it's hard enough to bring
    about a 100% genuine, really it did happen rape charge all on it's
    own.  Since we've seen instances where rape is downplayed aginst
    the woman, where she's accused of "making it up", blah blah blah
    ad naseum, false rape charges do *nothing* other than help implant
    that wonderful (heavy sarcasm) stereotype in the minds of those
    who already are too receptive to them.
    
    I was simply pointing out the connection between the two topics.
    I don't know WHAT to DO about them, Suzanne.  If I had the solution,
    it would be damned nifty.  I was acknowledging that the problem
    does exist and in my mind, it is a legitimate problem.  I wish it
    didn't happen.  It doesn't help the other problem of rape charges
    and why so many rapists go unprosecuted, why women aren't believed,
    why, why, why, at ALL.
                                                                
    If you don't think false rape charges affect women, or that We
    (capitalization intended) should give a hoot in hell what happens
    when they are made, okie, fine.  I think they simply are part of
    the problem.  Doesn't mean they will go away.  Doesn't mean I have
    the wand to make them go away.  Doesn't mean I think rape is LESS
    of a problem.  It just means that I think false rape charges aren't
    a minor issue, and worth addressing.
    
    Simple as that.                    
    
    
    Re. the next one.
    
    Thank you for understanding for what I was trying to say.  :)
    
    ---kim

Based upon what metric? Do you know what the penalties are presently? In order
for your scenario to be played out, the charge would be (at least) perjury. Do
you know what the penalties for perjury are?

Sorry if this wasn't clear - specifying that "stiffer penalties" are needed
implies that you know what the current penalties are. Do you?

OK, I'll go on record for the world, etc., etc. ...

I am the 'woman behind the quote' of Nancy Bittle's 880.175.

When I said my charges were dismissed as 'frivolous' that is the term that
the police, the DA, etc used and the charge 'frivolous allegation of sexual 
assault' was leveled at me for wasting their time on something that was neither
rape not sexual assault and for possible damage to _my_ victim's reputation.

The lawyer retained by the man who roughed me up considerably in the course 
of using my unwilling person in his quest for sexual gratification and self-
validation had the charges quietly dropped.

The charge against my assailant was a felony.  It was 'frivolous' so it was
dismissed out of hand ... no bargain to lesser charges, bupkus.  The charge
against me was a misdemeanour and carried with conviction a fine of up to
$5,000 and up to 18 months in jail.

Granted, he and I were facing different levels of penalty should we be convicted
of our respective crimes.  As I understand it, this topic is aimed at the
injustice of this inequity.  Have I missed something?

Now my _real_ question [no hidden agenda here] is:

Do people really think that a woman wants to see a man convicted of a 
felony and possibly spend years in prison over 'catting around' and that ilk?

I have never met, nor hope to meet, these ladies ...

  Ann

    
    	How does the law define a "false rape charge" currently?
    
    	Is a "false rape charge" assumed when the jury finds an accused
    	rapist innocent?  Is "false rape" assumed when a woman changes
    	her mind about testifying (because of fears about going on the
    	stand to relive the nightmare and/or be put "on trial" herself
    	for events in her personal history?)
    
    	That's the impression I'm getting from the various replies here.
    
    	If we, as women concerned about rape, try to solve anything by
    	getting the law to come down even harder on women who charge
    	rape, we'd be making the situation drastically worse.
    
    	Considering what happens to the women who are willing to report
    	rape, it's a wonder anyone comes forward to report it at all.

    
    
    	re: 20
    
    	>How does the law define a "false rape charge" currently?
    
    	From my observation, it is purely a function of how expensive
    	and aggressive the attorneys involved are. And the judge, and
    	the "keepers of the chain of evidence" (the local law enforcement
    	officers involved as well as any medical staff involved).
    
    	Any of the above factors can turn a legitimate charge into a
    	"false" charge.  This is not a denial that false accusations
    	are made. I certainly believe they occur. My contention is that
    	our entire "justice" system does not serve as it should.
    
    								kim

    
    	What proof would be required to prosecute/convict for a "false rape
    	accusation"?
    

    
    	First off, I wouldn't agree to the idea of sentencing false rape
    	accusations to be the same penalty as rape unless ALL crimes of
    	false witness were treated in the same way.  (That would mean that
    	a person convicted of false testimony in a murder trial could be
    	put to death, in some states.)  
    
    	Second, I still haven't seen what evidence would be required to
    	prosecute/convict a charge of "false rape accusation."  Would
    	appreciate it if someone could fill me in on what the criteria
    	would be for proving a false rape accusation.
    
    	My interest in this is not meant to imply in any way that I think
    	false rape accusations happen with much frequency. 

    Suzanne, 
    
    Why do you constantly quote the words false accusation conviction and
    the like?
    
    Are you implying that it doesnt happen?  
    
    I think that YES, the amount of false charges is considerably lower
    thasn the actual rapes that occur, but that fact alone shouldn't make
    false accusations a moot point... should it?
    
    also, your last sentence also supports (at least it would appear that
    way to me) that you find this whole discussion worthless and without
    fact.  do you? 
    
    No slammin here Suzanne (see? I even used your name correctly), I am
    honestly asking a serious question here.
    

    I would guess, based on the data I've seen and the anecdotes I've
    heard, that the difference in frequency between unpunished rapes and
    false conviction for rape is not merely "considerably lower" Al but
    lower by a factor in the range of 100 to perhaps 10 000!
    
    Has anyone *ever* heard of the cops quickly acting on a rape charge
    that later turns out to be false?  The only "false" conviction for rape
    that I can recall hearing of in my life was that one a few years ago
    where the guy spent mumble years in jail before she recanted...and the
    general opinion at the time was that it was the recantation that was
    false not the charge!
    
                                         	=maggie

    Re .25:
    
    > 	First off, I wouldn't agree to the idea of sentencing false rape
    >	accusations to be the same penalty as rape unless ALL crimes of
    >	false witness were treated in the same way.  (That would mean that
    >	a person convicted of false testimony in a murder trial could be
    >	put to death, in some states.)  

    In a sense, accusing somebody falsely is an attempt to subject them to
    the sentence of that crime, so shouldn't it be treated similarly?  If
    you attempt to have somebody put in jail for 10 years, shouldn't it be
    treated similarly to at least an assault if not as much as false
    imprisonment for 10 years?  If you attempt to have somebody put to
    death, shouldn't it be treated as attempted homicide?
    
    
    				-- edp

I thought a little bit about what Kim A had to say yesterday about why this is
a topic of interest to women. She seemed to be pointing out that there is a lot
of bad social conditioning working against women who bring rape charges, and
that any little thing (or big thing) that re-enforces them is bad. I am of the
opinion (as I think the majority of folks discussing this here are) that the
majority of rape charges that are made do not result in the conviction they
deserve. And I think _those_ do the same sort of harm to women who would bring
future charges (they reenforce the stereotype that women lightly make rape
charges). So, I think breaking down the barriers, social and jurisprudential,
that keep all rapiest from being properly convicted would do the most good in
the particular area I am referring to.
	Mez

    I believe that, in setting the penalties for perjury and related
    crimes, our state and federal governments have selected the level
    of punishment which they feel reflects the level of the crime.
    
    Notice that a criminal case, whether the defentant was found guilty
    or not guilty, does not preclude a civil trial for damages in re
    the same set of actions.  (Translation:  The injured party can
    savage the guilty one in the wallet, where (in our society) it
    hurts the most.)
    
    						Ann B.

     This whole subject has been bothering me since I brought it up.
    
     I am blown away by the number of people who stopped reading the
    original proposal halfway through, and directly contradicted the entire
    premise of the proposal. This isn't a case of mere misinterpretation.
    It was all there.
    
     I have never, ever felt that false rape charges occur with anything
    near the frequency of sexual assaults. Because that wasn't the issue.
    The "badness" of a crime is not determined by it's frequency; it is
    determined by the magnitude of the act. Certainly, there is a
    cumulative effect of repeated crimes that increases the effect and
    total "badness," but the inherent badness of a crime is due mostly to
    the crime itself. And that's what I was talking about.
    
     I don't know a single person who would actually advocate a system that
    would make it more difficult for women who have been raped to
    prosecute. That would be outrageous; the cards are already stacked in
    the defendant's favor as it is. I'd vastly prefer a system that was
    more fair, more just, and less of an ordeal to victims. I firmly
    believe that a rape victim's worst assault can occur in a court of law-
    this is a shameful aspect of our legal system.
    
     Since somebody had brought up the issue of false accusations, an issue
    which I wished would have died notes ago, I'd thought I'd take 30 seconds
    to address the issue in a manner that hopefully would end discussion on
    that issue and return from the rathole. Instead, in a bizarre turn of
    events, the issue exploded into flamboyant and heated rhetoric. And,
    frankly, I didn't anticipate this outcome or I would have kept quiet.
    
     The very focused issue which I was addressing was the crime of
    intentionally filing a false rape charge with the intention of going
    through with the whole charade and putting an innocent person is jail.
    I felt that intentionally filing a false report and deciding not to go
    through with it was already successfully deterred by the current law. 
    So I made the suggestion that in order to deter those who would put an
    innocent person in jail and obliterate their reputation, we ought to
    punish those who do attempt to do such things by giving them the very
    punishment that they attempted to falsely impose on an innocent person
    by hoodwinking the criminal justice system. And to be consistent about
    it, I felt that anyone who attempted to falsely imprison someone else
    ought to get the punishment their victim would have (or has) gotten.
    This concept would NOT extend to all false testimony. It would apply
    only to those cases where an attempt to fraudulently convict an
    innocent person occurred. IE a person protecting their sibling by lying
    about their sibling's whereabouts during the commission of a crime
    would only be subject to the current laws against perjury (which may,
    in fact, be a harsher penalty, depending on the crim in question).
    
     I do not now, nor have I ever believed that the problem of flase
    accusations in rape cases is anywhere near the problem that rape is. It
    just isn't so, and anyone who would try to say so could only be met
    with the utmost of skepticism, perhaps even contempt (for being so
    brutally stupid.) This doesn't mean that EVERY proposal to reduce the
    burden on rape victims must be adopted simply because the burden is so
    great (which it definitely is). This means that those proposals which
    will benefit the victims without reducing the rights of the accused
    below consitutionally mandated levels and without substantially raising
    the probability that innocent people would be jailed ought to be given
    due consideration and implemented immediately whenever a recognizable
    benefit will result.
    
     I would like to see 100% of rapists convicted, sentenced, and seving
    their time. I do not think that this ought to be done at the expense of
    abandoning our constitutional principles. 
    
     Like many have said, the biggest single problem facing rape victims is
    the attitude they face by police, prosecutors, judges, juries, and the
    public at large. This is where the battle for victims rights must be
    won. Until we no longer have the issue of "asking for it," until past
    sexual history is no longer an issue, until rape victims no longer have
    a stigma associated with them, we will not see justice.
    
     I am really bummed out by the fact that the rape issue was so
    thoroughly and completely ratholed by this issue of lesser priority.
    And the resulting polarization has been similarly distressing, perhaps
    even more so.
    
     Let's lay this issue to rest, and return to more compelling issues,
    like the reason a false charge of rape can exist in the first place.
    
     The Doctah  

>    Has anyone *ever* heard of the cops quickly acting on a rape charge
>    that later turns out to be false?  The only "false" conviction for rape
>    that I can recall hearing of in my life was that one a few years ago
>    where the guy spent mumble years in jail before she recanted...and the
>    general opinion at the time was that it was the recantation that was
>    false not the charge!

Wasn't there a case quite recently (in Florida?) where a 12 year old girl
had accused a man of rape.  He was convicted (apparently without anything
other than the girl's story), spent a few years in jail, and was released
when the girl said she made up the story to get the guy out of the way.

    None of the people talking about the "big problem" of false accusations
    have showed that it is a LEGAL problem.  A malicious false accusation
    without any proof is likely to be stopped right at the police station.
    
    There has been a LOT of convincing argument that, in fact, rapists who
    are convicted are convicted only after it has been proved beyond any
    reasonable doubt that they were guilty.  Furthermore, even the action
    of arresting and bringing a rapist to trial is only taken when the
    police have already been convinced that the rapist is probably guilty.
    
    Legal action is NOT lightly taken in a rape case, partly because it is
    assumed from the start that the woman may be falsely accusing.
    
    
    So it seems to me that the REAL worry to men regarding false
    accusations is not that legal action will be taken wrongfully.  It's
    that the accusation is made at all, to anyone.  Social action, not
    legal action.  That -- without having to go through the courts -- it is
    *possible* for a woman to lie and say "X raped me".
    
    (I DON'T think this happens much, if at all, and I personally would
    wonder what would make a woman so angry at a man that she would do
    that.  But I accept that some women are as malicious as some men.)
    
    For me, the biggest problem in the sort of "solution" offered by the
    Doctah's proposal is that convicting someone of false accusation is
    completely SUBJECTIVE.  It all comes down to:  WHY did she accuse him. 
    Did she make a mistake or did she do it on purpose?  Did the two of
    them honestly get confused as to whether he was raping her or not?  The
    conviction is based on the judge and jury deciding on what her MOTIVE
    was.  Not whether she made a false accusation or not, but whether she
    did it DELIBERATELY.  
    
    And who is to say that some man will not maliciously falsely accuse a
    woman who has lost a rape case of malicious false accusation?  Won't
    people USUALLY assume that the man who brings forward a suit for
    malicious false accusation is in the right?   Wouldn't a woman be
    socially stigmatized for being accused of making a false accusation?
    
    I think the permutations of maliciously accusing a woman of malicious
    false accusation of ... are endless.  I think the "solution" is the
    wrong answer because it doesn't attack the real problems and causes the
    same problem in reverse.
    
    Pam

>	Do you think that some men want to physically hurt women, have
>    them spend weeks in a hospital, then years in psychotherapy, over a
>    little "catting around"?
>
>	Some men most definitely do.
>
>	On the whole, men and women are equally vindictive, all that
>    differs is their choice of weapons.

    	Are you saying that men rape out of vindictiveness or in order
    to punish a woman for "catting around"?
    	Linda

    Mark, apropos the point of your original proposal:  yes, definitely. 
    Anyone who is proven to have maliciously set out to have someone
    falsely convicted should take the same hit the victim would have taken.
    
    Given that, as Pam(?) said, we could know the person's motive without a
    doubt.  Otherwise it's just another layer of insulation for the
    powerful to use against the powerless.
    
    						=maggie

    The following response is from a member of our community who wishes
    to remain anonymous at this time.

    							=maggie
    ====================================================================


    This is hard for me to talk about. Here goes.....
                            
    This does happen. My boyfriend and a few of his friends have been
    charged with rape. I can honestly say they are all innocent. It is very
    depressing. Already they are being treated like scum and  they haven't
    been to court yet. Their family names are tarnished, and are soon to be
    financially ruined as well because of attorney's fees. It is a mess. My
    boyfriend is scared to death. He can't sleep, can't  concentrate, and
    can't believe that he could possibly be put away for 20 years (that is
    what his lawyer is saying) for something he didn't do. He said to me,
    "When I was sitting in that jail cell, I said to (friend) "Just tell
    the cops what happened and we'll be out of here." No way were the
    police letting them out. This is going to the probable cause hearing
    next week, and then most likely onto trial.
                            
    Nothing happened. NO ONE was raped, there was no  intercourse. She is
    lying. She is saying there was penetration, she is saying she was
    beaten, also. I know for a FACT that they wouldn't hurt anyone, let
    alone RAPE a girl. They are not desperate for sex, they are all VERY
    attractive men. What she is doing is senseless, and we don't know why
    she is crying rape.
                            
    I, and the men who have been charged, are very depressed. If they are
    found guilty because her of her lies, I will never have faith in the
    judicial system for as long as I live.
                            
    In regards to .27 who wanted to know if the police acted quickly to
    this type of thing.....YES they did. In a heartbeat. Please understand
    the severity of this. Their lives are ruined whether found  guilty or
    innocent. People that don't know them as well as I do are always going
    to wonder and point whenever they see them.
                            
    I truly wish that I could tell everybody the details of this case, but
    I am not allowed. When this is all over, I will. I am certain that the
    majority of you will be absolutely shocked at the case that has been
    made of her lies.
                            
    Thank you for listening.


    Pray for them.

    	:-( 

>    Given that, as Pam(?) said, we could know the person's motive without a
>    doubt.  Otherwise it's just another layer of insulation for the
>    powerful to use against the powerless.
    
     I would have thought that it would have been an obvious point, but I
    guess it bears being explicitly stated. Since what I proposed
    consitutes a crime, all of the usual criminal law strictures and
    procedures would have to be adhered to. A trial would take place, the
    burden of the prosecution would be to prove that the rape charge was
    falsified with the intent to hurt the victim. The defense would only
    need to provide reasonable doubt that the false filing was intentional
    and intended to cause harm to the victim.
    
     But thank you for agreeing that making the punishment fit the crime is
    a reasonable idea. I feel almost vindicated.
    
     I wouldn't want to give the powerful yet another rack of ammunition
    with which to pummel the powerless.
    
     The Doctah

    re: .36
    I'm so sorry this has happened to you and the people you care about...  
    
    
    re: .37
    Whether what you proposed is a crime or not is irrelevant, in terms of
    the point I was trying to make.
    
    o Raping someone is a terrible thing to do.  Rape trials are terrible.
      Few (sane) people choose to go through one for fun or spite.
    o Maliciously falsely accusing a man of rape is terrible.  He is
      stigmatized, whether he wins the case or not.
    o Maliciously falsely accusing a woman of falsely accusing a man of rape
      is terrible.  She is stigmatized, whether she wins the case or not.
    o et cetera.  
    
    The farther the case gets from the original case, the harder it becomes
    to determine what happened.  And everyone's reputation is still
    smeared.  What has been gained?  I, too, feel that the punishment
    should fit the crime, but I am worried about WHO decides whether a
    crime has been committed, and WHO decides what punishment fits it.
    
    Pam

    Whimper.  I've tried to point out -- no, I just thought I had --
    that our society has already chosen to set levels of punishment
    to be suitable for the crime committed, but not necessarily equal
    to the crime committed.  Thus, even if a preplanned murder has
    occured, many states have chosen not to execute the murderer.  Even
    though a bank robber has only taken money, all states have found
    restitution to be insufficient; the robber must also serve time in
    prison.  Suitability is clearly not even proportional.  I don't
    see why it has be exactly equal in this set of cases either.
    
    As an unrelated issue, I'd like to point out that in the suggested
    system, the innocent person would have to be at least found guilty
    and sentenced before the perjury claim could be triggered, because
    otherwise you cannot tell what to set the possible penalty to. 
    (Criminal charges automatically include all lesser related charges,
    so a person could be found not guilty of the first degree murder of
    <x>, but be found guilty of attempted assault against <x>.)
    
    							Ann B.

    <--(.37)
    
    Mark, my provisional agreement wasn't meant to be contingent merely on
    "all the usual...strictures...[being] adhered to".  I really meant it
    just as I said it:  we would have to have *perfect* certainty.  There
    are just too many extraneous factors that come into play otherwise,
    such as ingrained beliefs about motives, characteristics, and values.
    You know, the kind of thing where some rich white man who embezzles
    millions gets 1 year in Sandstone (the country-club prison in southern
    Minnesota) rather than Levenworth because "he's suffered enough with
    the loss of his reputation" whereas some poor black kid who sticks up
    the 7-11 for $50 gets 5 years hard time because "we've got to teach
    people that crime does not pay".  Feh!
    
    						=maggie

	I know of several cases of false rape accusations. In these
	cases, either I knew someone of the Jury or the defense attorney,
	which doesn't change the fact that I think most defense attornies
	are scumbags.

	I get the impression that some people can't imagin why a women would 
	falsely accuse someone of rape. Here is one case:

	I think all of the below was printed in the paper at one time or 
	another so I don't think I'm violating laws. In fact, if anyone
	else remembers the case differently than I do, please correct me.

	A department store employee claims an area manager took her in the
	back room before the store opened, raped her, then took off.

	There were no witnesses. The man was found not-guilty because the
	woman lied too many times during her testimony.

	For example, the woman claimed she had NO relationship outside of
	work with the man. Yet, there was testimony that she had spent the
	night with him during weekend "business trips", had dinner with him
	at several area resturants, and the phone company provided reports
	that she used to call the man several times a week and talk for
	hours with him.

	Also, the day of the rape, she said she was devistated, upset,
	unable to function, yet she opened the store as usual, told noone,
	and employees testified that she acted the same as she does every other
	day. There was other evidence that she lied.

	Both of these people were married. My guess is that they were having
	an affair, and the women thought the man would leave  his wife for her.
	Maybe that morning, he either ended the relationship, or told this
	woman he had no intention of leaving his wife. I can't enter in all
	the testimony, but, this man may have been guilty of being a scumbag, 
	but not of rape.

    Mike (in re .40),
    
    I am sorry that you cannot distinguish between indicative and
    subjunctive mood.
    
    I write that while keeping in mind (among other things) the case of
    a woman who sued the man who was acquitted of raping her.  She was
    awarded some reasonable amount, I think on the order of some
    hundreds of thousands of dollars, and certainly less than two million
    dollars.  But from the cries of indignation, you'd have thought that
    she had castrated him with a dull, rusty jackknife.
    
    						Ann B.
    
    P.S.  Have you ever read _Podkayne_of_Mars_?  In it is described the
    financial penalty imposed for murder on Venus.  Poddie was impressed.

    Mike,
    
    you're a master.
    
    Ad

    I would support a "false accusation gets you the time the
    accused would have gotten" law if it applied to *all*
    such cases, regardless of the crime involved . I don't see 
    any sense in singling out the rather rare instances of false 
    charges of rape.