Rape Abuse and Harassment Claims
!

 

Home
Up


False charges are self-generating; some people are eager to believe anything negative about others.  The 1990 ‘National Women’s Study,’ in a survey of 4,008 women, reported the incidence of rape is 683,000 per year.  If you believe that, I’ve got a bridge in New York to sell you.  The U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (NCS), in a 1990 survey of 50,000 women, reported 130,000 rapes in a year, and the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 1990 claimed 102,560.

As the saying goes, if a story is worth telling, it’s worth embellishing.  Between 27 percent and 60 percent of rape allegations are false.  The Royal Canadian Mounted Police found 80 percent of rape complainants who take lie detector tests are lying.  Prof. Neil Gilbert of the Univ. of Calif., Berkeley has shown that exaggeration is rampant and definitions of the term, “rape,” are highly dubious.  Despite claims that as high as 37 percent of women have been “raped,” only 1/10 of one percent of women have reported rape.  Like crying “Wolf!” too often, such accusations can backfire if it really happens.

Exaggerated rape allegation figures precipitated widespread rape shield laws which, combined with questionable – indeed illegal – interrogation methods, have unjustly convicted many men.  These laws and language accept as gospel alleged rape victims’ versions of events usually with no opportunity for defense or cross-examination.  They encourage false accusations and convictions, and war with the presumption of innocence.

If a woman accuses a man of rape (spousal or otherwise), brutality or ‘sexual harassment,’ the man is routinely denied due process, not permitted to properly defend himself because it might insult the female complainant, regardless of truth.  Where it is a man’s word against a woman’s, the woman’s is usually believed.  As in all accusations by women against men, the burden is on the man to prove innocence, which is exceedingly difficult.  The opposite maxim to our Constitutional right of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ applies.

Rape doesn’t always live up to its involuntary connotation.  Eighty percent of sentences are for statutory, not forcible, rape.  A Philadelphia study by Menachem Amir, reported in the University of Chicago Press, found no violence in 87 percent of rapes.  Prior and subsequent sexual liaisons bear on the likelihood of consent.  Morning-after remorse precipitates many false rape accusations, as seemed to be the case with Kobe Bryant’s accuser.  A woman can define a sexual event by how she ‘feels’ about it later.  She can call it “rape” or not, and her word counts.  The National Center For Men in New York and Dr. Roy Schenk have devised “consensual sex contracts” to protect men from women who after having consensual sex decide to charge their partners with rape.

Until recently in rape prosecutions it was customary for the judge to read Sir Matthew Hale’s admonition that the jury ought to “view the woman’s testimony with caution.  Rape is an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved and harder to be defended by the party accused though never so innocent.”  No more.  Feminists were furious at the suggestion that a woman might commit perjury, and the legal system, always their obedient servant, suppressed Sir Matthew Hale’s commonsense admonition.

The earliest false rape charge was reported in Biblical times.  Potiphar, the Egyptian potentate to whom the Ishmaelites sold Joseph (Gen. 39:1) was ‘Captain of the Guard.’  Joseph, though a foreigner, gradually gained his confidence, and became overseer over all his possessions.  Potiphar’s wife attempted to seduce Joseph.  When it failed, she accused him of rape.  Believing the false accusation which his profligate wife brought against Joseph, Potiphar cast him into prison, where he remained for several years.

In Michigan, one of our MDA member’s wife ran off with a low-life boyfriend, leaving her husband with the children.  When he filed for divorce and she realized he would obtain custody, she and her mother concocted a scheme to defeat him.  She returned, feigning reconciliation, and persuaded him to go to bed with her, whereupon she jumped up screaming “rape.”  An ambitious prosecutor obtained the 1st conviction under that state’s new Feminist-inspired “wife rape” law.  With his money impounded by the divorce court, the poor man was unable to hire counsel, yet denied a public defender because technically he had money.  Talk about a Catch 22 situation!

The prosecutor offered to ask the court for no further jail time than already served if he would plead guilty.  Being innocent, he refused and pled ‘not guilty.’  The Feminist-pandering judge, Thomas Yeotis, then sentenced him to 15 to 30 years, twice the guidelines, declaring he was “sending a message” to wife-rapists.  Most murderers who are actually guilty of something, certainly the female ones, receive lesser sentences. Even if he were guilty, which I believe he isn’t, he’s been incarcerated far too long.  This innocent man has already served twenty one years, parole boards refusing to release him, despite his failing health – fearful of Feminist wrath.  Would that he had joined the Men’s Defense Assoc. before his trial.  I spoke to famous attorney Alan Dersowitz about this man.  He blew me off.  A crime was committed; not by the prisoner, but by the State of Michigan in so persecuting this man.  Every citizen of Michigan ought to be ashamed that this travesty was committed in his or her name.  Details of this travesty are available online at www.ncfm.org.  Click on William Hetherington.  Every day of my life I think of him and the unspeakable injustice done to him.  Phyllis Schlafly became interested in his case, but to date hasn’t been able to wangle a pardon out of the Michigan Governor, who is not of her political party.

William R. Strong, Jr. has been in a Virginia prison for a decade also on false charges of “wife rape.”  Mr. Strong has been trying to get a DNA test, confident that the semen in the prosecution’s test is not his but that of the lover of his unfaithful wife.  Prosecutors, ignoring their obligation to protect the rights of the innocent, argue that he has no right to the evidence, under the rationalization that Strong was convicted prior to the advent of DNA testing.  The goal of the government should be to see justice done, not to win a case by any means.

In April of 2006, the Duke University Lacrosse team hired a stripper with a criminal record to appear at a team party.  Drunk, she passed out and accused several party-goers of raping her.

An overeager prosecutor, Mike Nifong – as politically ambitious as the railroading prosecutor of Will Heatherington, required the entire 46 team members to submit to DNA testing, an action which violated hell out of Constitutional prohibitions against self-incrimination as well of as state statutes.  Though all DNA tests proved negative, indeed that she had bedded others, a racist mob demanded Grand Jury indictments, and got two.  Meanwhile, the coach was fired, guilty for his innocent association ‘while being male.’  Later documents proved the prosecutor and police withheld hordes of exculpatory evidence in seeking indictments.  The S.O.B. was obviously trying to force a plea bargain.

Dorothy Rabinowitz, in the Wall Street Journal writes, “there is little that is new or strange about Mr. Nifong.  We have seen the likes of this district attorney, uninterested in proofs of innocence, willing to suppress any he found, many times in the busy army of prosecutors claiming to have found evidence of rampant child abuse in nursery schools and other child-care centers around the country in the 1980s and throughout most of the ’90s.”

The situation was so flagrant even the No, Carolina Bar Assn. charged him with violating a rule requiring prosecutors to “refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.”  The bar also charged Nifong with engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.  At this writing it seems Nifong might lose his license to practice law.

Ann Coulter said, “Stripper lied; white boys fried.”  Shades of Tawana Brawley.  I hope the victimized boys sue the pants off everybody – Nifong, the school, the stripper, the newspapers, TV stations and anyone else involved.

(Watch misandrists take passages from this paragraph out of context)  Some women seem to have a rape wish.  If one is curiously attired, or un-attired, it follows that one is going to be the object of curiosity.  For that reason, flirtatious women who go about in public only partially clothed, whether or not in “style,” have little cause to complain about unwanted sexual advances, even vigorous ones, or yobos leering after them.  Even though rape is a natural act, the prehistoric means of perpetuating the species, it is uncivilized in modern times, and must be severely punished — when proven.  As with adultery, the urge is natural but succumbing to it is unacceptable behavior.  Without in any way condoning actual rape, it must be said that it usually involves no physical harm and far less mental harm than that suffered by many men in divorce.

Practically anything a man does – you name it – can be considered sexual harassment, and get him in big trouble.  The U.S. Government General Accounting Office in the early 1990s listed “comments that women did not belong in certain military units” as behavior that constitutes harassment.  In other words, telling the truth is sexual harassment.  Overheard jokes and private pin-ups have constituted harassment.  Women have filed preposterous claims and won outlandish court awards or settlements for minor insults or leers.  Slobs who make drunken passes at women can be practically hounded out of town as sex fiends.

The climate has gotten so crazy that sailors talking like sailors in the presence of delicate female navel personnel ears is a court marshal offense, as Lt. Bryan  Black discovered.  Fox TV’s commentator Bill O’Reilly was sued for $60 million by his former associate producer Andrea Mackris for sexual harassment by “phone sex”.  The lawsuit was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount, perhaps answering the question of why this complainant or others similarly situated don’t just hang up.  It is preposterous to pose the claim that tasteless remarks are worth $60 million, so what has the world come to when such suits are admitted into court?

Consider the “Tail hook” incident.  Horny women cavorting with high-testosterone Navy fliers at a drinking party, like strippers performing before athletic young bucks, should know exactly what to expect.  As the expression goes, “You mess with the bull and you get the horn.”  The widespread credit given the ridiculous charges Anita Hill brought against Judge Clarence Thomas is another example.  The 10-year-old charges were a blatantly political and spiteful attempt to deprive this patently decent man of a Supreme Court position.

An unbalanced woman’s unsubstantiated charge that she had a lengthy affair with her father-in-law, George C. Roach Jr., President of Hillsdale College, caused Roach’s resignation and disgrace.  More recently, a University of New Hampshire school flyer was distributed indicating women students gained 10 to 15 pounds in their 1st year   In response, student Timothy Garneau posted a flyer urging overweight freshwomen to lose weight by walking up stairs instead of using the elevator.  For his troubles, Garneau was evicted from his dormitory, forced to undergo psychological counseling and write a 3,000 word paper reflection about the counseling.  The penalties were reduced somewhat after Garneau contacted the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)  A study by the American Association of University Women found that “nearly two-thirds of college students experience sexual harassment at some point during college.”  Consider what the AAUW’s definition of sexual harassment is: unwanted or unwelcome sexual behavior that interferes with your life”

For a male, there is no statute of limitations for molestation, as Bill Cosby can attest.  Even in the unlikely case that his accuser was telling the truth, should the good man Cosby is now be punished for what this alleged groper may have done 30 years ago?

During Hurricane Katrina a team of Indiana firemen went to Atlanta to help rescue victims, instead federal bureaucrats instructed them to attend hours of courses on sexual harassment and equal employment opportunity, then hand out flyers.  When CIA officer Robert Baer asked for Farsi speakers in Afghanistan, he was offered a sexual harassment team instead.

The hype began with Lin Farley’s book, Sexual Shakedown: The Sexual Harassment of Women on the Job, published in 1978.  Later the book Sexual Harassment of Working Women (1979) by Catharine MacKinnon defined sexual harassment as a legal issue.  Ellison v. Brady introduced the “reasonable woman” standard into law.  Conduct was no longer analyzed from the perspective of a “reasonable person,” but of a “reasonable woman,” from the perspective of the complainant, not of the defendant.

In line with their agenda of re-engineering our society to fit their theories, Feminists have expanded the definition of abuse.  Under the term “psychological battery,” it now includes: “acts of lying, humiliation, withholding information, refusing help with child care or housework.”  And bear in mind that it is only men who behave this way in the Feminist definition.

Illinois Republican state Representative Robert Pritchard proposed a database of domestic violence “offenders” similar to the “Sex Offenders Registry.”  Imagine the weapon false accusers would have if this passes.

Demonstrating how easily a woman can obtain a restraining order against a man, a Santa Fe judge granted a temporary restraining order against TV talk show host David Letterman on behalf of an unbalanced woman who alleged Letterman mentally harassed her through his TV broadcasts.

A Brockton, Massachusetts first-grader whose last name is Dorinvil was suspended for three days for sexual harassment after he put two fingers inside a classmate’s waistband to snap it after the girl touched him.

Prosecutors claim Michael Wiley, a triple amputee attacked his wife, by shoving himself into her and causing her to knock over a lamp.  Division Director Mike Halkitis has said he will push for the maximum sentence of five years for Wiley.

In March of '06, U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney (D. Ga.) slugged a House of Representatives guard who had asked her for her credentials, then accused him of assaulting her because she’s a black female.  As Dan Amneus   would say, it out-chutzpahs chutzpah!  The Grand Jury declined to indict her.
 


Send mail to Webmaster  with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2013 Men's Defense Association
Last modified: October 12, 2013