Flooded By False Rape Allegations

This article, which cites testimony from experienced police officers, exposes the lies perpetually emanating from officials working in the UK's Home Office and Crown Prosecution Service when it comes to the issue of rape and sex assault.

After decades of relatively unsuccessful campaigning in order to highlight the fact that domestic violence against men is much worse and more frequent than it is against women, it is very heartening to see that the latest, and biggest ever, study has at least concluded the following ...

"The most comprehensive review of the scholarly domestic violence research literature ever conducted concludes, among other things, that women perpetrate physical and emotional abuse, and engage in control behaviors, at comparable rates to men." 

But, of course, thanks to the wholesale corruption of our government officials working in the western justice systems and the dishonesty of so many 'journalists' in the mainstream media, it is, no doubt, going to take many years before the public actually becomes aware of the fact that men make up the majority of victims of domestic violence; e.g. see Victims of Domestic Violence.

The same will also probably be true when it comes to false allegations of 'abuse'.

 the vast majority of such allegations made to the police these days are malicious and false

The evidence very strongly suggests that the vast majority of such allegations made to the police these days are malicious and false. And they are mostly being made by women who are seeking some kind of advantage for themselves by seeking to use the state to inflict violence on their behalf.

At the same time, however, the evidence also strongly suggests that most victims of abuse do not go to the police.

For example, it is the officially-accepted view these days that only about 10% of victims of rape report their rapes to the police.

There are many reasons why I believe this.

In brief, they are as follows.

1. Most rapes are inflicted by intimates. And most victims of rape will not want to see the lives of their intimates destroyed for what, in most cases, are likely to be relatively trivial events. Remember: more extreme things (like violent rapes) are far less likely to occur than are less extreme things (like pressuring your partner into having sex).

Indeed, most 'rapes' as currently defined are trivial affairs.

2. Even violent rapes by strangers, or even by intimates, are most likely not going to be reported.

In the first case, victims are unlikely to want to find themselves having to go through the horrendous ordeal of a rape trial and the various invasive preliminary procedures and testimonies which precede it - particularly given that the chances of conviction are so low. (And even if their attackers are convicted, wherein lies the benefit to themselves?)

And, in the second case, the victim of a violent intimate might also just be too scared to report the matter lest they become the perpetual target of revenge.

3. In more intermediate circumstances, perhaps a rape (violent or trivial) by the boy next door, it still seems to me highly unlikely that the matter would be reported to the police by the victim.

Quite simply, doing so would likely cause such a huge amount of hurt and aggravation to so many people who are known to the victim that the victim would most likely decide not to pursue the matter.

4. I have seen numerous reports over the years on the internet by women who claim to have been raped, and it seems fairly evident to me that those who are credible (and many of them are not)  do not report their rapes for reasons that seem totally justifiable.

In short, the point to grasp is that the vast majority of victims will not report the matter when it comes to rape.

 most rape victims have nothing really to gain by going to the police

Quite simply, most rape victims have nothing really to gain by going to the police - but they have plenty to lose.

Furthermore, by going to the police, not only would they have to submit themselves to months of stressful aggravation should their cases eventually go to court, they would also suffer even worse trauma from the incident itself as a result of not being allowed to forget about it - and 'move on'.

So why do so many women go to the police to report their rapes?

And the answer is, quite clearly, that they don't.

Because the evidence from a number of sources supports the view that most of those women who do go to the police are false accusers. In other words, they are not coming from the same population of women who have been raped.

Even the police believe this.

Indeed, for two decades now the police and the academics have been in complete opposition to each other when it comes to the issue of false allegations. The academics claim that false allegations are very few in number - about 5% of all allegations - whereas the police often claim (mostly in private, for fear of losing their jobs) that the figure is over 50%.

In short, the academics who are chosen and funded by the government officials who are concerned with such issues claim - without foundation - that false allegations are rare.

However, this claim is fraudulent.

And the first thing to say about this claim is that the academics who make it were not present at the time of the alleged rapes. They do not have a magic wand that allows them to view what actually happened.

Essentially, their 'research' involves going through the police reports about those alleged rape incidents that either resulted in no convictions or that did not even go to court. They then decide whether or not the rape allegations were true.

And, generally speaking, these government-appointed academics conclude that the vast majority of these allegations were true.

Now, roughly speaking, some 90% of rape allegations do not result in convictions. Indeed, only some 15% of them actually get to court. The public perception, however, is that the reason for these figures is because it is very difficult for the police to get enough evidence to take a case to court.

in both Europe and America cases are sent to court when there is no objective evidence whatsoever

But this perception is completely wrong, because in both Europe and America cases are sent to court when there is no objective evidence whatsoever that a crime has been committed.

Time and time again we see cases going to court when the only 'evidence' is derived from the accusations of the accuser; resulting in what has been described as He Said/She Said situations.

In Denmark we see, for example, ...

A 16-year-old girl, whose allegation that she was raped at Fredericia train station resulted in the conviction of three teenage boys, unknowingly confessed on a hidden camera that she lied about the incident,

The only valid evidence against these three boys was her testimony.

And yet these three boys were convicted and sent to prison as a result of her testimony.

In America, a District Attorney was actually prosecuted for engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud and deceit for attempting to have convicted three young men at Duke University for rape when he actually knew from the evidence that they had not committed any crime.

And in the UK we even have examples wherein the police have successfully prosecuted men when their accusers were known to be serial false accusers ...

A man jailed when a woman falsely cried rape told of his fury yesterday after learning that police knew the woman was 'unreliable'.

+ Student who wrongly accused Oxford Union president of rape admitted their relationship was consensual almost a year earlier.

As such, we can conclude that in the 85% of allegations that do not go to court the evidential value is actually worth less than that which is found in the He Said/She Said situations.

So how is it possible for government-funded academics to conclude that false allegations are rare?

And the answer to this question is relatively straightforward.

These academics mostly have a mindset and a corresponding ideology that demands the belief that "women never lie" about rape. Furthermore, if any of them even dared to suggest that most allegations were false, they would likely be vilified, demonised, refused funding, kicked out of their jobs and, very often, they are threatened with physical violence.

Indeed, as just one very recent example of this, Robert Colover has had to resign from the UK's Crown Prosecution Service Rape Panel of advocates for describing a 13 year old girl as “predatory” and “sexually experienced”.

Even mentioning the existence of such females costs professionals their jobs.

 the Crown Prosecution Service shows itself to be a corrupt organisation

This is an example of corruption at the highest levels of the justice system because such young girls clearly do exist. And by trying to suppress this fact by intimidating other professionals into silence, the Crown Prosecution Service shows itself to be a corrupt organisation, and that  it has no regard for the truth when it comes to the issue of sexual abuse.

As such, you can safely discard almost anything that its officials say when it comes to such issues.

Indeed, this pattern of unbridled hostility directed towards anyone who offends "feminist" thinking has been going on now for four decades. As a result, only those 'academics' who are willing to come up with politically-correct results are given the funding and the attention.

Indeed, Professor Murray Strauss has described the types of chicanery in which academics themselves engage in order to support the feminist agenda.

They include suppressing evidence, hiding data, citing only studies consistent with their agenda, falsifying their conclusions, obstructing publication of articles, blocking funding, demonising other academics and, they "Harass, Threaten and Penalise Researchers who Produce Evidence that Contradicts Feminist Beliefs".

In other words, absolutely none of the research endorsed by the Home Office or the Crown Prosecution Service can be trusted, because their feminist academics will only manufacture evidence that supports their agenda.

In my own view, there is far more evidence to support the contention that the vast majority of rape and "abuse" allegations made to the police are false and, further, that there is no valid evidence whatsoever to suggest otherwise.

 the majority of those turning up at the police station to make allegations are false accusers.

This is not to say that thousands of women are not sexually assaulted or raped every year, but that the majority of those turning up at the police station to make allegations are false accusers.

These, themselves, mostly come from a tiny proportion of women who are willing to use the state to aggress against their male partners or acquaintances.

Indeed, even if 95% of women would never dream of making a false accusation of "abuse", this still leaves us in the UK with one million adult women who would. And, in fact, this number is more than enough to account for all the rape allegations made to the police over a 50 year period

And, in my view, it is mostly women drawn from this population of one million who, every year, are flooding the UK police with false allegations.

Now, whether this is truly the case or not is somewhat irrelevant when it comes to criticising deceitful government officials for proclaiming that false allegations are rare because, as we have seen above, they can have no legitimate basis for this claim.

the officials working at the Home Office and in the Crown Prosecution Service are lying.

In other words, the officials working at the Home Office and in the Crown Prosecution Service are lying.

As such, the claims by the Home Office and the Crown Prosecution Service (that false allegations are rare) represent a true corruption of the justice system in numerous ways, not least of which is the fact that they prejudice all jury trials by indoctrinating jurors with the view that defendants are highly likely to be guilty on the basis of accusations alone - accusations which are levied by persons who are clearly very hostile to the defendants and who are often seeking financial compensation.

Furthermore, it is quite clear that these government officials are proclaiming that nearly all of those who have been accused are 'guilty', even though the Crown Prosecution Service cannot find enough evidence to convict them.

This disgraceful claim embeds into the public mind the view that those people who are not prosecuted, or who are found not guilty at trial, are, in fact, guilty.

A more shameful corruption of the justice system is hard to imagine; particularly given that innocent men often lose their families, their homes, their friends, their jobs and their lives (through suicide) as a direct result of it - because people believe that these innocent men must have been guilty merely following an accusation thanks to the falsehoods being promulgated by the Crown Prosecution Service.

these government officials are planting false evidence into the minds of the public and into the minds of jurors.

Effectively, these government officials are planting false evidence into the minds of the public and into the minds of jurors.

Furthermore, they compound this corruption by referring to rape accusers as "victims". This prejudices any future trials, and it also tells the public that the men who have been accused are, most likely, guilty.

In summary, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the vast majority of rape victims do not report their rapes to the police, but there is no valid evidence whatsoever to support the view that false allegations are rare.

On the contrary, there is considerable evidence to suggest that the vast majority of rape allegations are false and malicious, and that they are mostly coming from a small proportion of women who are quite prepared to make false allegations.

(Also see Incredible Rape Statistics.)

 UK Police Officer Speaks Out

UK ...

As a serving policeman, there are several things I am not allowed to talk about.

There are plenty of operational secrets we cannot discuss, but I'm not referring to those. I'm talking about the taboo subjects. The ‘detection’ rate for rape is one of these.

It's very frustrating to sit and listen to pundits talking about the low number of rape convictions in Court, when as police officers we all know what lies behind these poor numbers.

out of every ten rapes which are reported in XXXXton, at least eight turn out to be nonsense

For example, I couldn't possibly tell you that out of every ten rapes which are reported in XXXXton, at least eight turn out to be nonsense. To be fair, eight out of ten of everything reported at XXXXton police station is nonsense, why should rape be any different?

I couldn't tell you that of the remaining two, an existing alcohol-fuelled chaotic drug-based relationship is a factor in at least one of these, and ‘consent’ is probably present in the other to some degree. In my whole service I can only recall three stranger rapes and a half a dozen where consent was withdrawn at the time and he carried on. But I can't tell you that.

I can't tell you that most of the adult rapes reported in XXXXton represent either the latest in a series of allegations designed to score points against an ‘ex', lies designed to fend off an angry parent when a curfew has been missed or a defence mechanism when a jilted ‘partner’ discovers an infidelity.

A rape once reported, even if withdrawn later, is in the system and a failure to bring someone to justice, even if it never happened, shows up in the ‘detection’ rate. The ‘detection rate’ is low because the number of rapes which actually happen is low. I couldn't possibly say that though.

So who suffers when Charlene drops by the nick [i.e. the police station] to accuse Wayne of raping her because she is hacked off that he used her child benefit money for drugs? Who suffers when we deploy a full investigation team, send officers out to arrest Wayne and deploy CSI's and specialist rape officers to the victim suite, all for Charlene to suddenly decide that she loves him and he didn't do it after all? Who loses when she can't identify a scene (because there never was a scene) when we can see on CCTV that Wayne was in the High Street (on his own) at the material time and that her mobile phone records show that she was texting her mate who works at Tesco, right at the time she was supposed to be being brutally taken by the boy?

The next genuine rape victim to walk into the police station, that's who. The next genuine victim who may face the cynical looks and delayed reaction from officers who have just finished dealing with the last ten Charlenes.

I also shouldn't tell you that it is Force Policy, in all but the most exceptional cases, not to prosecute Charlene for wasting police time. Apparently this would prevent genuine victims from coming forward. Make no mistake, the genuine victims suffer, the detection rate is low and we keep pretending that everything is alright.

The facts about rape seen from the street are this: most genuine rapes are against children under 13 years old and are within the family or family circle. Genuine adult rape is rare and nearly always charged to Court; what a jury do next is for them, but it usually comes down to ‘consent’ issues, and being as they were not in the bedroom at the time, and we are not simply proving intercourse because that is already admitted by the defendant, it's not really within our gift to prove or disprove consent. Consent can amount to one word, said in a half whisper six months before in a darkened room where no one else was present.

But we can't possibly say any of this. We will simply accept that it's all our fault and promise to do better in the future.

American Police Officer Speaks Out

For 16 years, I was a kickass prosecutor who made most of my reputation vigorously prosecuting rapists. I am unaware of any Colorado prosecutor who put as many rapists away for as much prison time as I did during my prosecutorial career. Several dozen rapists are serving thousands of years as a result of my efforts.

 during my time as a prosecutor who made case filing decisions, I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations that were made

However, during my time as a prosecutor who made case filing decisions, I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations that were made to the Denver Police Department. It was remarkable and surprising to me. You would have to see it to believe it.

Any honest veteran sex assault investigator will tell you that rape is one of the most falsely reported crimes that there is.

... The above statements are heresy to say publicly for many politically correct prosecutors. That is especially true if they want to maintain good relations with the victim advocacy community. 

Craig Silverman

Feminist Police Officer Protests

On Channel 4 TV about a year ago, a female police officer whose identity was kept hidden, and who proclaimed herself to be a feminist, said that she, herself, would think twice before going to the police to report a rape. I quote, ...

"I would have a lot of trouble reporting it [a rape] and I'm a serving police officer. I'm a feminist. I'm a blogger. I'm an independent-thinking woman. And I would be in two minds whether to report it [a rape] because of the grief it causes. And just the hassle of it, knowing the questions that are going to be put to you, and thinking, "Are you going to be getting anything out of it?" I've had seasoned detectives tell me that they think that the majority of allegations they've dealt with are false. And this is based on nothing more than the fact that they couldn't get enough evidence for a conviction."

So, there you have it.

Seasoned detectives believe that the majority of rape allegations are false.

1. Seasoned detectives believe that the majority of rape allegations are false.

2. This anonymous feminist policewoman thinks that these seasoned detectives are basing their conclusions solely on the basis of the fact that they cannot find enough evidence for conviction; i.e. she believes that these seasoned detectives (which will consist of both men and women detectives) are too stupid to differentiate between 'not finding enough evidence for a conviction' and a false allegation.

But the main point to be made here is this.

The 'seasoned detectives' whom she criticises clearly agree with my point of view.

The false allegation rate is closer to 90% than it is to 10%.

Indeed, here are two posts by police officers on this policewoman's blog, ...

"A colleague of mine spent a weekend attached to a sexual offences unit, took three allegations, and was able to prove categorically in EVERY case that the victim was either lying or being seriously economical with the truth."

...

"Some of the greatest cynics I have spoken to are the SOLO officers [Sexual Offences Liason Officers] that are the initial investigaters in these matters. These are nearly always female officers with many years experience. The reason is that the majority of allegations they deal with are fabrications and that they spend alot of time and effort for nothing."

 Lies From The Very Top

According to the Overview of Sexual Offending in England and Wales - published by the UK's Home Office and the Ministry of Justice - the UK police "recorded" 16,000 "rapes" for 2011/2012.

And they are lying.

They are wilfully and purposely deceiving the public.

They actually recorded 16,000 allegations of rape - more than 80% of which could not be substantiated.

Also see, ...

Incredible Rape Statistics (approx 5 min reading time)

How Official Rape Statistics are Distorted and Inflated (5 min)

The Truth About The Rape Statistics (8 min)

Can You Trust Academic Research? (6 min)

Also see my short YouTube video entitled, ...

Understanding the Rape Statistics

... to get some idea of just how ludicrous are the official claims about rape.