Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Lying about rape

People who bang on about women's rights always complain about how many cases of rape go either unreported or unconvicted. Of course, one of the big problems with a rape case is that, often, you are dealing with one person's word against another's; thus women who make false accusations conspicuously damage the trust that many people have in any female witness. Not to mention, of course, that lying bitches like this can also ruin someone's life through their lies.
A married man who was jailed for five years for a violent sex attack has been cleared on appeal after it emerged that his alleged victim made it up.

Warren Blackwell, 36, of Woodford Halse, Northamptonshire, was convicted of indecently assaulting the woman after a New Year's Eve Party in 1998.

The Appeal Court said the conviction was unsafe after hearing that the complainant had an "ability to lie".

Of course, what is meant when a court decides that someone has an "ability to lie" is that, in fact, they did lie and the whole accusation was a total fabrication.
After the hearing Mr Blackwell said the ordeal had made him "a very angry" man.

I'm not fucking surprised, frankly. I, too, would be livid.
Mr Blackwell was jailed for three years at Northampton Crown Court in 1999, but the sentence was later found to be "unduly lenient" and was increased to five years.

He was also placed on the sex offenders' register.

In addition to which, as Mr Blackwell points out, his family have spent "a massive amount of money"; given all of this, we can expect some compensation, eh?
The commission referred to new evidence which gave rise to a "very real doubt" over whether the complainant was a victim of any assault at all.

The court was told the complainant had made "strikingly similar allegations" about other sex attacks, had an "ability to lie" and a possible propensity to self harm.

So, essentially, the "victim" is a self-obsessed nut whose fantasy assault has put an innocent man behind bars and cost his family an immense amount of money.

So you would imagine that this little cunt will be tried for wasting police time and perjury? Er, no...
The court recommended that the complainant's details be shared with police forces across the country in case she tried to repeat the accusations.

What is this? Put her on trial and, if she is guilty, then fine her (with the money being divided between Mr Blackwell and the taxpayer) and lock her away; she has committed the crime of perjury (and is bearing false witness still a crime?) and she is going to get away with... well... fuck all punishment? All that's gioing to happen is that she's going to go on to some kind of False Accuser's Register. What the hell is going on?

Let's hope Mr Blackwell sues the pants off her in a Civil Court and really fucks her...*


* Yes, all bad taste puns intended.

4 comments:

Mr Eugenides said...

She remains anonymous, of course.

Ross F said...

The woman should be jailed for a long time and the investigating officers and prosecution lawyers should face an inquirey into how they managed to fuck up so completely. By definition there could not have been any evidence contradicting Mr Blackwell's story because it was genuine yet the CPS and Northamptonshire police didn't manage to spot it.

ContraTory said...

I am sure that Professor Jennifer Temkin will remain unabashed.

Danny Vice said...

Although this case exposes the outlandish miscarriage of justice towards the wrongly accused in the UK, we wish this were an isolated incident. The fact is, even in the United States, restitution for those incarcerated is certainly not guaranteed.

In fact, in many states, there are more government resources for those released on parole than there are for those who have been wrongly incarcerated and later exonerated and released.

Currently, an overwhelming number of people who have been exonerated of a crime are not compensated for the toll the incarceration took on their lives socially and economically.

Thus far, only 22 states in the US have laws in place to provide some level of compensation for those who were wrongly convicted. This means a majority of those who went back to court and proved their innocence are then required to sue for this compensation.

This process utilizes significant resources that a recently released inmate typically does not have. For those who do have the knowledge or financial ability to bring a case, the enormous cost of the additional legal wrangling involved may soak up much of the payout. Many victims of this outrageous process are handed the more daunting challenge of simply restoring their name, let alone consideration of a lawsuit that may or may not result in restitution for the time that has been lost.

What's more, the payout often times received is meager in comparison to what is usually lost. Marty Tankleff for example was sentenced to a New York state prison after being wrongly convicted of killing his parents. Although his case was recently overturned, Marty just recently visited his parent's graves for the first time since their deaths.

Ronnie Taylor, a Houston man who was recently exonerated of a crime he didn't commit was engaged to be married before his arrest in 1993. DNA testing proved his innocence 14 years later - allowing him to finally marry his bride Jeanette Brown. (source)

The Innocence Protect, one organization established in 1992 utilizes DNA testing as a means to force new hearings for those who are wrongly accused. It's website lists hundreds of cases of wrongly convicted individuals who's cases were overturned after a conviction.

While the Weekly Vice does not subscribe to every point of view of the Project's mission statement, one has to wonder where our culture would be without such advocates. Many wrongfully accused individuals have languished in prison for decades before their faulty convictions were tossed out.

Here are a few more examples of justice gone horribly wrong:

Dennis Brown from Louisiana was convicted of a 1984 rape and spent 19 years in prison before DNA testing confirmed that he could not have been the rapist.

Marvin Anderson became the ninety-ninth person in the US to be exonerated of a crime due to post-conviction DNA testing. Even when another individual confessed to the crime Lamont was accused of, the Judge upheld the conviction until DNA evidence finally confirmed Lamont's innocence. He wasn't exonerated until 1992, nearly 20 years after his arrest.

Orlando Boquete's wrongful conviction of attempted sexual battery was vacated a staggering 24 years after his arrest back in 1982.

Robert Clark, wrongly convicted of rape, kidnapping and armed robbery in 1982, languished in prison primarily by mistaken eyewitness. Mistaken identity seems to be a common theme with the cases that later get overturned by post-conviction DNA evidence. Clark was finally vindicated 24 years later.

Luis Diaz was wrongly convicted in 1980 as the 'Bird Road Rapist', where 25 women were attacked, many of them sexually assaulted. Diaz was convicted for 8 of them. His case was overturned 25 years later in 2005.

Conclusion:

These are only a handful of the cases you can view HERE, however they are a sampling of the many instances where our legal system goes horribly wrong to such degree that compensation for one's life cannot be calculated as a mere loss of wages as most restitution awarding states provide.

The Weekly Vice supports tough sentencing guidelines for all sexual assault cases, particularly those of minor children. We also believe however, that states should be equally aggressive with some level of state subsidy, restitution or other adjudged compensation that is deemed appropriate for each individual case. A dismal 22 states is not a goodwill showing for a nation who prides itself on a Justice For All philosophy.

Danny Vice
The Weekly Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com