Showing posts with label False Accusation. Show all posts

Friday, December 13, 2013

How to Survive in Prison as an Innocent Man Convicted of a Sex Offense (Revised 2013)

From: Issues in Child Abuse Accusations 1997 http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume9/j9_3_6.htm

I wrote the following way back in the 1997 while I was doing time in Oregon. A rather easy prison system to do time in. I was young, tough, and adamant about my innocence. When I did time in the notorious California prison system starting in 2001 I received a huge wake up call. These are real prisons here. I had never seen so much violence in my life. Every time a riot kicked off I was somehow right in the middle of it. I still walked the mainline, but was always concerned about my safety. If my status as a "convicted sex offender" would of came out I could of been killed. Would not have mattered to "my bros" I was innocent. They would of tried to kill me. In 2006, Jessica's Law was passed by CA voters and I went on the run again. I've lived "underground" off and on for the past 25 years trying to escape The Sex Crime Witch Hunters. I always knew I would be recaptured. I always am. Only this time I decided that when I was arrested I was going to put myself In Protective Custody (PC). That's exactly what I did in 2008. Should of done it years ago! What the hell did I have to prove. If your convicted of a sex crime, even if your innocent - go PC ! It could save your life. Another view of mine that has changed is my attitude on taking Psych. Meds in prison. If you're going nuts in there get on medication. The following is an old article of mine, but still has some useful information.

Psychology Editor's Note: This article includes some strong views that may be surprising and challenging. We have chosen to publish it because we believe prisoners have a right to seek interaction with those outside the prison walls. We also believe there are many innocent men and women in prison who are wrongly convicted of sex offenses. They too, have a right to stand up for their innocence. One of the more poignant episodes in our lives was in June, 1985, when Lois Bentz, accused with her husband, Robert, of sexually abusing children in Jordan, Minnesota, was told by her attorney about a very attractive plea bargain. With tears running down her face, Lois said to us, "I did not do it and I will not say I did something I didn't do." The Bentzes rejected the plea bargain and went to trial. The Bentzes were acquitted and the Jordan case is often regarded as the beginning of the "backlash" that has led to increased awareness of false accusations and the reversals of several highly publicized convictions in recent years.
Still there are many many lesser known cases where Large numbers of innocent people remain behind bars. We receive letters every week from men and women in prison who assert their innocence. For years we have agonized about what we can do in response. The most we have been able to do is to try to stay in contact and provide information to assist those working on appeals. Based upon our experience with Ms. Bentz, we have also tried to say what Mr. Anderson repeats several times in this article — maintain your own personal integrity. Mr. Anderson tells us how he has done this for himself. It may not be a way that works for everyone, but this is what he tells us works for him. We believe Mr. Anderson is very likely to walk out of prison when his time is served and be standing up straight and tall.

Your only exposure to what prison is like has been through movies that sensationalize the violence, drug use, and sex in the big house. The prison bus you're on rounds a lonely highway corner and you get your first glimpse of what is to be your home for the next 10-odd years — a steel, razor wire, and concrete house of pain. You wonder how you'll ever make it out of this hate factory alive. You imagine your first day being gang-raped by six huge, tattooed lifers, by the end of the week you're being sold up and down the tier for cigarettes, and within a month, you're found dead in your cell with a twelve-inch "shank" protruding from your chest. Not only are you the new fish in the cell block, but you have been convicted of a sex crime, and you've heard how convicted sex criminals are abused in the joint.

You're one of the thousands of innocent men wrongly convicted of sex crimes in the U.S. every year. Won't it matter to your fellow prisoners that you are not a sex criminal and are completely innocent? Not in the least. It is possible, though, to make it through prison even though you were convicted of a skin beef. You can not only live through the prison experience, you can claim some degree of victory at the end of your unjust prison term. Life will be neither easy nor fun for the innocent man convicted of a sex crime and sent to prison. But, surviving prison is not impossible.

I have spent over seven years in maximum-, medium-, and minimum security prisons after being wrongly convicted of first degree rape — the result of my having been falsely accused of date rape by a mentally deranged woman with a history of falsely accusing men of sex crimes. I am writing this from the Oregon State Correctional Institution. Although life has not been easy for me in prison, I have managed to keep my self-respect, my dignity, and my integrity. I have spent months in solitary confinement for defending myself when necessary. I have allowed no prisoner, no prison guard, and no member of the parole board to disrespect me due to my wrongful conviction. I have consistently maintained my innocence, even when doing so has added years to my prison term.

I earned a college degree behind bars, and have even escaped from prison once. To help other innocent prisoners, I founded the Society Against False Accusations of Rape (SAFAR), and for five years have published the underground prison publication, The SAFAR Newsletter. Currently, I'm working on my book, Falling on the Deaf Ear: False Accusations of Rape, Child Abuse Hoaxes, Innocent People in Prison and How to End the Sex Crime Witchhunt. I know first-hand what it is to be an innocent man in prison, wrongly convicted of a sex crime, and I know how to survive the prison experience.

Now that you have been falsely accused of rape or child abuse, been convicted in record time, lost all your assets along with your reputation, and been sentenced to 10 years in prison by a judge who couldn't care less that you are innocent, you would think your troubles are over. Think again. You not only have to make it out of the prison with your life and sanity, but with your self-respect, honor, and integrity intact. Let's face it. After being wrongly convicted of a sex crime, your sanity, self-respect, honor, and integrity is all you have left. Prison will not break you if you are a man — or learn to become a man, even though the main goal of prison officials is to sap the soul from men, and spit out castrated, submissive males. With all the odds against you, it is even possible to walk out of prison a better man with your head held high. Again, it will be neither fun nor easy, but what battle ever is easy? You can either walk out of prison with your manhood intact knowing you beat the corrupt prison industry or you can crawl out on your belly as a hated sex offender.

Outside Contacts
Don't fool yourself that the community will be outraged that you were convicted and sent to prison for a crime you didn't commit or that may have never even occurred. You are now a convicted sex offender and your innocence means nothing. You're the lowest of the low, in and out of prison. There will be no mass protests at the prison gates demanding your release.

Most people believe the propaganda of the sex crime witch hunters and probably feel you should die in prison. Most of your friends will abandon you and even some members of your family will turn their backs on you. Only your very best friends and your immediate family will stick by your side at first and most of them will fall by the wayside in the coming years as you rot in prison.

One of the most important things for the innocent man in prison is to maintain contact with at least one person on the outside. This person can help you try to prove your innocence and keep you current on what's happening outside the prison walls. If you can maintain contact with at least one free worlder to help you, you'll be doing a lot better than some prisoners. Many prisoners lose their friends and their own families and are isolated in prison with no contact with the outside world. You are going to be walking into prison alone and will be alone while you do your time. You need at least one ally in the outside to help free yourself from the nightmare of being thrown in a cage and given the scarlet letter of a convicted sex offender for a crime you did not commit.

Prison violence
For the most part, prisons and correctional institutions are not the hell holes of years past. The "get tough on crime" craze has mutated into "get tough on prisoners." Although prisons are not for continued and endless punishment, politicians don't want to educate or rehabilitate prisoners. Prisoners are to be warehoused like the commodities they've become. College courses and vocational training in prison are a thing of the past. With all the new prisons being built in the U.S., doing time has become quite sterile — even safe — because all the new prisons are so controlled and high-tech that prisoners now spend most of their time in their cells.

The idea that prisoners really run the joint is a myth. Some of the older prisons are still dangerous, but these are slowly being phased out. It used to be that only the worst, most dangerous, and most hardened criminal was sent to prison. It was no wonder that penitentiaries were dangerous. But these days, with so many first-time offenders doing mandatory prison terms and so many people being sent to prison, the nation's lock-ups have become diluted with nonviolent prisoners. Today most prisons can even be considered safe.

In all my years behind bars, I've never seen a murder, a stabbing, or a rape. I believe some prisoners try to brag how tough prison is to make themselves look tough. They romanticize their prison experience by telling their friends and family how brutal prison was and how they had to fight for their lives every day. Prison, however, may be harder for the innocent man convicted of a sex crime because of the scorn. In the old days, a convicted sex offender — innocent or guilty — was sure to get physically attacked. Today, that is not the case. A man wrongly convicted of a sex crime can make it out of prison unharmed if he stays on his toes and keeps alert.

What about all the violence you read about what goes on in prison? Of course, violence does happen in U.S. penitentiaries, but with over 1.6 million Americans locked up these days, the chance of being one of the few hundred inmates who are killed or seriously injured is slim.

Standing Up for Yourself
Because you were convicted of a sex crime, you will not be winning any popularity contests with your fellow prisoners. At first, the other prisoners may mark you to be victimized and harassed. If you don't stand tall and fight back, you'll be victimized your entire prison term. You must stand up for yourself when you are tested by some idiot who thinks you're a rape-o, "Chester," "tree jumper," or "freak." In 1989, I was compelled to beat a man who attacked me with a folding chair. Besides a little blood, neither one of us was hurt badly. I did accidentally break a guard's hand in the melee and I've also had to fight a couple of other morons who disrespected me, but I haven't had any trouble in years. It is well worth it to spend a few months in solitary confinement for defending yourself when the option is being harassed continually in general population. Another option is hiding for years in Protective Custody (PC), totally separated from the rest of the prison, and locked in a cell for 24-hours a day. But only the weakest prisoners go PC, and I don't recommend it.

For the most part, even for the wrongly convicted sex offender, if you don't owe debts from gambling or drugs, and if you stay away from the homosexuals, keep your head down, don't bother anyone, and don't act like a wimp and whine about your wrongful conviction, you won't have to worry about prison violence. There is very little chance that you will be killed or even stabbed. But, if something does happen and you need to defend your good name, be a man and do it. In prison, your good name is all you have. If trouble comes your way in prison, you have to deal with it on the spot. Where are you going to run? You're in a cage.

Inmates and Convicts
During my years in prison I have found that there are two types of prisoners — inmates and convicts. Inmates will not fight if their lives depend on it and they will kiss any ass that comes their way. Inmates are the type of prisoners who go on national TV to praise prison officials and prison programs for straightening out their miserable lives. The inmate has no loyalty to anything or anyone except himself. Inmates will do anything to please their captors and cheerfully inform and rat on other prisoners for breaking prison rules. Inmates are not men.

Be aware that you can't always tell an inmate worm by his cover. The biggest, baddest killer on the tier can be the biggest, snitch rat in the joint. On the other hand, convicts used to be very common in U.S. prisons, but are now a dying breed. A true convict would never rat on anyone, would take no disrespect, would fight when necessary and would be loyal and live by a code of honor. Unlike an inmate, a convict is a man.

A convicted sex offender will never be considered a true convict by other prisoners, but you can live by your own code of honor in prison. Never whine or complain about your wrongful conviction; sniveling will only make you appear weak and make you a target. Other prisoners don't care about your innocence. The prison hierarchy has you at the bottom of the prison barrel. Your jacket is that of a sex offender but it's up to you if you wear this degrading jacket. You will find that the only prisoners who hang around the sex offender are other wide-eyed, scared, spineless sex offenders. Even though prison is going to be very lonely for the innocent man convicted of a sex crime, you don't want to befriend confessed sex offenders. Also, stay away from the prison chapel. For some strange reason, confessed sex offenders always find God in prison and carry their Bibles for all to see to show how repentant they are. In short, even though no one convicted of a sex beef can be a true convict, you must strive to be one.

Talking About Your Conviction
You may think that if you don't tell any of your fellow prisoners you were convicted of a sexual offense that no one will be the wiser and you won't be harassed. You may think that you can tell people you're a bank robber and even be a hero in prison. Nice try, but lying about what you were convicted of will not work. There are no secrets in prison, especially on why you are there. You're in prison now, and any possibility of privacy or keeping secrets is long gone. Be honest when talking about your wrongful conviction and get ready to defend yourself if it becomes necessary.

All of the convicted sex offenders (innocent or guilty) whom I've heard tell other prisoners that they were burglars or robbers in an effort to hide their convictions were eventually exposed. If you lie about your conviction, you will be exposed. Then, any attempts to claim innocence will not be believed and your prison time may get very tough. Don't advertise your wrongful conviction, or the facts of your supposed crime, but when asked why you're in prison, be honest.

Although a convicted sex offender can never gain full respect in prison, I've managed to gain some measure of respect by being truthful about why I am in prison, and fighting when necessary. Sure, some punk may call me a "rape-o" behind my back, but no prisoner ever disrespects me face to face. With so many innocent men being sent to prison these days on false accusations of rape and child abuse, the general prison population is starting to understand how widespread the sex crime witch hunt has become, and how many innocent men are now in prison due to false allegations. False reports of rape and other sex crimes are so common that an innocent man wrongfully convicted of a sex crime will not be alone.

Prison Guards
The men and women who hold the key to your freedom (the prison guards) should be considered your enemy. There is a reason that surveys on job status and job satisfaction often rate being a prison guard as the lowest job a person can hold. No one respects prison guards, and they know it. What kind of man or woman would want to examine body openings for contraband, turn keys, and stand around and do nothing for a living? Prison guards hate their jobs and blame prisoners for their unhappy and unfulfilled lives. It takes no ambition, no talent, no drive, or any creativity to be a corrections officer. Even police officers know this, and look down on the lowly prison guard. Think about it. Does any kid have dreams of being a corrections officer when he or she grows up?

The Golden Rule to remember not only about prison guards, but about anyone that works inside the prison in which you are held captive, is to stay as far away from them as possible and avoid even talking to them unnecessarily. Even if you happen to run across a prison guard who appears to be halfway human, don't befriend him. Every inmate whom I've seen develop any type of friendship with any prison employee was, in the end, betrayed and shunned by other prisoners. Don't collaborate with anyone other than fellow prisoners while in prison. Every prison official or staff member is your enemy. Never forget that. They will gladly shoot you in the back if they feel the need. Don't make eye contact with the people who work at the prison because if you avoid eye contact they will leave you alone. The less contact you have with prison employees, the better off you will be.

In all my years in prison, I've observed hundreds of prison guards and only a couple could be considered normal. The typical male guard I have encountered is not someone you would consider a winner. He is usually a skinny geek (or is extremely overweight), is undereducated, has no ambition and is sadistic. His idea of success is a monthly state paycheck, a trailer home, a 12-pack of beer, and nightly TV. The typical female prison guard is homosexual, physically unattractive, overweight, and more masculine than most male prison guards. She's mad at the world for not being born a man and she takes her penis envy out on prisoners.

I fully admit my dislike for prison guards because I am convinced that every prison guard in the U.S. has witnessed, encouraged, and/or participated in the torture or murder of prisoners. Prison guards are cowards with a badge who are protected by the state and prison guard unions. Your only allies in prison are other prisoners. Never forget it.

Keeping Fit
One of the most important things to do while doing your prison time is to keep in the very best physical shape possible. Every prison has a weight room, and I strongly suggest pumping iron. Being in top shape not only feels good, but it's good for your head and will help you think more clearly. By working out, running, exercising, and eating as well as possible, you will be physically able to defend yourself in case of any violent situations. You will also be able to think straight to combat your unjust conviction. All the guys whom I've seen go insane in prison did not care about their health. They rotted in front of a TV for years until they were just a shell of a man. At age thirty-five, I am now in the best shape of my life and feel great.

Another reason to stay healthy in prison is that medical services are notoriously horrid. One of my worst prison experiences was when our prison doctor told me that blood tests indicated that I had liver cancer. He smiled gleefully as he told me I had only a year to live. I tried to learn more, but he refused to answer my questions and ordered me out of his office. For months I thought I was going to leave this mad house on a slab. I learned later that my blood test indicated only that I had been exposed to hepatitis in the past. The good prison doctor told me I was dying for his own sick amusement.

Dental services are just as bad in prison. I'm currently waiting to have a back molar filled. I cracked my tooth on a rock in some chili in the chow hall. I've been on the waiting list to see the dentist for over six months now, and will probably lose the tooth due to neglect. There is nothing I can do about it.

While in prison, stay in shape, work out, run, and try to eat well — even though that's nearly impossible with the garbage that passes for food in prison. But, although you may get depressed, lonely, and frustrated in prison, never go to the prison psychologist. Prison shrinks only want to drug prisoners into submission. One of the newest fads in corrections is tranquilizers that are given out like candy to pacify and control inmates. What better way to turn prisoners into submissive zombies than by medicating them for depression and anxiety. Don't fall into the medication trap in prison. You need to be clear-headed while doing time, not in a drugged-out haze.

When you go to prison, settle down and find a positive routine. After the shock of prison wears off, and the other prisoners figure out you will defend yourself, you'll be left alone to do your time. Don't sit around vegetating in front of a TV, playing cards or reading westerns. Don't waste your time complaining about your wrongful conviction and what a poor victim you are. Don't turn into what I call a "prison zombie" who does his time like he's waiting to die. Your main mission in prison will be trying to get your unjust conviction overturned. Learn as much about the law and the corrupt legal system as you can. Get to know the prisoner law clerks in the law library, and spend as much time in the library as possible. Study every aspect of your case, and stay on top of your attorney. Your lawyer is not the one in prison, you are. The appeals process takes years. Prisoners rarely win a new trial because the criminal justice system is not about truth and justice, but you can't win if you don't try. Fighting the legal system will be frustrating and depressing, but try not to give up hope.
Not only do we prisoners have to stick together, but we men must also join forces in our fight against feminism. Become a soldier in the Men's Rights Fight. Contact the anti feminist, pro-family men's groups in your area, as well as some of the national groups.

Sex Offender Treatment
One of the most profitable scams in the prison behavioral modification business is the sex-offender treatment industry. Because you were convicted of a sex offense, you are now fuel for the sex-offender treatment profiteers. You will be expected to confess to your crime, end all appeals for a fair trial, dismiss all delusions of innocence, and participate in sex-offender treatment along with admitted child molesters and serial rapists. Confession is the main tenet of sex-offender treatment. It does not matter to prison officials that you have always maintained your innocence and are in the process of appeal.

Thousands of people work in the sex-offender treatment industry and to justify their high-paying state jobs you must confess to your offense. You are the meal ticket not only of prison guards but also sex-offender treatment providers. As a wrongly convicted prisoner, you should have nothing to do with sex-offender treatment. Be a man, and stand up for what is right. There will be repercussions for you for not confessing and becoming another admitted sex offender. You will be denied any good-time off your prison term and early parole will be out of the question. I have always refused to even speak to sex-offender treatment counselors. Not only have I been denied any time off my sentence for good behavior, but the Oregon Parole Board has labeled me mentally unfit and dangerous to society because I refuse to confess, show remorse, and beg for forgiveness.
Not only should you avoid sex-offender treatment, but I suggest you refuse to participate in any behavior modification programs in prison. Don't admit anything to prison officials or prison counselors. Those who work in the behavior modification industry behind prison walls will use anything you tell them against you. Tell them nothing about your past. Prison counselors are not your friends.

Never talk to any prison psychologist. There is no faster way to be labeled mentally and emotionally unfit than to trust a prison psychologist. As a convicted sex offender, innocent or not, you are the bread and butter of the sex-offender treatment industry, prison counselors/psychologists, and prison guards. The only way they can justify their jobs is to keep you in their prison programs as long as possible. Be aware of their true motives, don't trust them, tell them nothing, and never doubt yourself. You owe them nothing.

You are an innocent man in prison. Act like one, and good luck my friend.

Friday, June 22, 2012

Group Accuses People of Molestation On-Line

From: WSMV - Nashville,
http://www.wsmv.com/story/18387940/nashville-based-group-accused-people-online-of-pedophilia

Nashville-based group accuses people online of pedophilia

NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) -

A Nashville-based citizen activist group is posting online the photographs and personal information of people whom the group accuses of being pedophiles.

Many of the people on the site have never been charged with a sex crime.

The underground group, which calls itself Evil Unveiled, does research in Internet chat rooms and forums often devoted to sinister, sexual fantasies such as pedophilia.

The group records that information, stores it and begins to track the people who are posting only using nicknames, waiting for them to reveal personal details.

"And you just keep collecting information until they accidentally post their email they didn't mean to post. And then it all falls together, and this is the real person behind the nickname," said Victoria, the creator of the group, who asked us to conceal her identity.

Victoria said she knows the website where the information is revealed, http://evilunveiled.com, is controversial. Members of the group aren't professional investigators or law enforcement officers, but they are making serious accusations for anyone to read.

Several people on the website are from Tennessee, including a realtor in Nashville and a man in Sevierville.

"Do you worry that some of this information might be wrong, that you're putting the wrong people on the Web?" asked Channel 4 I-Team chief investigative reporter Jeremy Finley.

"No, I don't. We have a lot of checks and balances, a lot of different ways to prove in a court of law that the information on the site is correct," Victoria said.

One person whom Evil Unveiled accused of being a pedophile called himself "Wolfy" in forums and chat rooms.

Victoria said after awhile, she began to see Wolfy was posting personal information and showing a picture of himself.

The first photo "Wolfy" posted was a picture that appeared in a local newspaper of Albert Rankin, a man once involved with Occupy Nashville and who did several interviews with the local media.

"I look like a boss. This was in the newspaper," said one chat room post by Wolfy.

Wolfy later posted another picture of himself, again showing a photo of Rankin.

A Channel 4 I-Team investigation found that Rankin's MySpace page, email address and Skype account all contain the word 'Wolfy.'

Rankin said "Wolfy" is his nickname, and he posts in forums and chat rooms using the name "Wolfy."

"Wolfy is a nickname I had as a kid and it just kind of stuck," Rankin said.

But Rankin said the "Wolfy" making the pedophilia statements isn't him, and he said Evil Unveiled has wrongly identified him.

"I'd have to say I'm a little confused. If they're targeting me specifically, I'm not sure why. I'll have to look into this. That's a really serious allegation," Rankin said.

Rankin agreed to speak with the Channel 4 I-Team via Skype from where he now lives in Oklahoma City.

The Channel 4 I-Team told Rankin we wanted to speak with him about his time spent with Occupy Nashville in order to confirm that the person on Skype was indeed the same person who was associated with Occupy Nashville.

The Channel 4 I-Team then told Rankin he was listed on the Evil Unveiled website.

Rankin said he'd never heard of the site, but he did answer our questions about "Wolfy."

Finley held up printed pictures of what Wolfy posted online.

"This person (Wolfy) actually posted pictures of himself. And these are they pictures that he posted. This is you," Finley said.

"Oh yeah, that's a picture of me," Rankin said.

"And that's you," Finley said, referencing another photograph. "So is this you posting in these chat rooms?"

"Uh, no. I've put my pictures out all over the Internet," Rankin said.

The Channel 4 I-Team also asked Rankin about the fact that Wolfy wrote about personal details in his life, including that he was in a military family, that he was in the Army and that he had spent 90 days in a tent for Occupy Nashville.

When Wolfy wrote that information, he also stated that he was a pedophile.

Rankin said while all the information about his military history and involvement with Occupy Nashville was accurate about his own life, he denied writing it in the forum and stated he never wrote that he was a pedophile.

Rankin said he had never visited the chat room where those statements were made.

"If this isn't you, then this person has a whole lot of personal information about you," Finley said.

"It's not hard to emulate somebody if you talk to them for a while," Rankin said.

On the day we interviewed Rankin, records from a chat room show Wolfy was posting again.

Wolfy made a disturbing statement about pedophilia, and then 30 minutes later, Wolfy posted that he had to get rest soon because he was doing an interview for NBC.

Rankin said when Wolfy was writing about his interview, that was indeed him posting.

But he said the other Wolfy talking about pedophilia just 30 minutes earlier wasn't him.

"I've told you before, I've used the name 'Wolfy' on various places, but I also use other names as well. There are plenty of places that I peruse on the Internet," Rankin said.

Rankin said he suspects someone is trying to slander him and that other members of Occupy Nashville have had their nicknames stolen in order to post on news websites in an effort to discredit the activists.

"Honestly, I guess if they're (Evil Unveiled) trying to make the Occupy movement look bad, that's one way to do it," Rankin said.

But Victoria, with Evil Unveiled, said she had no problem with Occupy Nashville. Victoria said her only battle is with people she believes are pedophiles and is ready to fight in the courtroom if need be.

"You know, at some point, you could be sued. You know someone could say, 'This isn't true,'" Finley said.

"Absolutely," Victoria said.

A representative for Occupy Nashville did confirm that as soon as members read the Evil Unveiled posting about Rankin, they went to speak with him about it, but Rankin was suddenly missing from Legislative Plaza and never returned.

That representative said they were told Rankin had left to take a job out of town.

The Channel 4 I-Team wanted to ask Rankin about that and if he planned to take any legal action against the website, but he did not respond to our follow-up email.

Victoria said the group has received no word from Rankin asking to remove his profile from the Evil Unveiled website.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Refusing to Charge for Rape Lie

From: Cry Rape, http://cryrape.blogspot.com/

Cassandra Kennedy, 23

Does refusing to charge for rape lie that put innocent man away for nine years undermine public confidence in the way rape claims are handled?

Cassandra Kennedy, 23, admitted that she lied about her father raping her when she was 11. Her accusation put her father behind bars for nine years.

Ms. Kennedy will not be charged with a crime because prosecutors fear it could stop others from reporting sexual assaults. Prosecutor Sue Baur said: "This is the kind of thing that shouldn't happen." But she said that charging Kennedy might discourage victims from coming forward.

Kennedy admitted her lie because of a guilty conscience. "I did a horrible thing," she told detectives last January. She was allegedly bitter following her parents' divorce ten years earlier."I wanted him to love me," Kennedy said, "and I didn't think he did at that time. I took my own vengeance."

Kennedy told police she got the idea of setting up her father from a friend whose stepfather had been sent to prison for a child sex crime. "I thought that is what I would do to make my dad go away." She told a teacher about the alleged abuse, and repeated the stories with consistency. The details seemed beyond the sexual knowledge of an 11-year-old.

Her father denied the allegation but a jury convicted him of three counts of rape of a child and he was sentenced to more than 15 years in jail.

The father was released last week and the charges against him were dismissed. He told a reporter that he did not want to comment but is simply trying to get on with his life.

The decision not to prosecute this apparent crime is troubling.

First, the prosecutor's concern that charging Ms. Kennedy might deter others from reporting their sexual assaults is speculative and unsupported by any evidence of which we are aware. Charging Ms. Kennedy would not send a signal that the prosecutor intends to charge any woman who makes a disputed rape claim that the police don't believe. The instant case caused grievous harm and is extreme. It involves an admitted rape lie that had a catastrophic effect on another person's life. Charging the author of such a lie would not likely deter anyone from reporting her own sexual assault.

Second, Ms. Baur's rationale for not prosecuting Ms. Kennedy sends a message that can only hurt the wrongly accused. The absence of any punishment for an apparent crime that caused a man to forfeit his liberty for almost a decade can only encourage similarly motivated persons to make false accusations. According to Dr. Valerie Wright, research analyst at The Sentencing Project: "People who perceive that sanctions are more certain tend to be less likely to engage in criminal activity."And: "Research to date generally indicates that increases in the certainty of punishment, as opposed to the severity of punishment, are more likely to produce deterrent benefits." If crimes such as this one are not deterred, society invites more abuse of the criminal justice system at the expense of the innocent.

Third, Ms. Bauer's rationale for not prosecuting Ms. Kennedy undermines public confidence in the way rape claims are handled. The prosecutor should want the public to regard rape as a serious crime deserving of serious penalties. Indeed, juries want to punish rapists but are loathe to risk punishing the innocent. Juries will be all the more wary of convicting men of rape, even those who deserve to be convicted, if they believe that prosecutors cavalierly allow accusers to tell rape lies with impunity.

Fourth, the victim should have a say in whether the false accuser is prosecuted. The victim in this case did not publicly express an opinion on the subject, and we are wondering if anyone bothered to ask him.

Sources:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2124170/Cassandra-Kennedy-Father-freed-decade-jail-daughter-admits-lied-raping-11.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

http://www.tbd.com/blogs/amanda-hess/2010/09/uninvestigated-rapes-live-blogging-senate-hearing-on-rape-in-the-u-s--1734.html

Monday, June 11, 2012

What If You Didn't Do It ?

What If You Didn’t Do It?

Posted on June 10, 2012 by Dakota0526

(Ed.- Falsely accusing your former spouse of child abuse is a common tactic in the Family Court System. Don’t be surprised if your ex throws this one at you. Given the current political and social attitude towards child abusers. It has become a witch hunt to eradicate these animals from our society. Because you are going through a divorce the chances that this tactic will be used are very good. The reason is simple: “If you are accused of being an abuser, then the kids will go to mom and you will pay through the nose to support her.”)

First, you must fully understand that when defending abuse cases the accused is guilty until proved innocent. It is arguably the one crime or tort where the accused must literally try and prove a negative. To do so, please know that most judges and juries will err on the side of caution – on the side of a woman’s or child’s abuse outcry. There are three types of accusers: 1. Malicious 2. Mental 3. Mistaken While only 2%-5% of abuse allegations are false; ones made in bad faith with malice aforethought, another 60% or more are unfounded, or without foundation. It is essential that your defense team be adept at adjoining science with the law. In other words, your case will require an expert, or experts to work with your attorney because most attorneys do not understand what source misattributions are, or what other conditions could cause bilateral retinal hemorrhages, or the significance of male propensity testing in an abuse case. It is essential you choose the correct attorney(s) to litigate (notice I did not type mediate) your case(s) in juvenile, family, criminal, and/or administrative law court. You may also need a forensic trial expert consultant to work with your litigator(s) and help she/he/them with questions on Direct and Cross Examination of all witnesses, especially experts. Impeaching a young child’s outcry of sexual abuse cannot be done alone by an attorney without an expert reviewing and critiquing the child’s forensic interview on DVD/Video/Audio/Transcript, therapists’ session progress notes, medical rape exam report, and CPS/Police Intake notes, reports, et al. Lawyers can only conduct cross examination and recross of adverse witnesses in court. They cannot issue reports that can come into evidence on the record and cannot testify in court as experts to reasonable degrees of scientific certainty. Make no mistake. In cases of he said – she said - and/or what a young child said – with no proof or evidence, your win or loss in court may very well come down to a battle of the experts. And I can tell you, from my 25 years of experience in this field, they are not all created equal. But, take solace in knowing that an aggressive and proactive defense team and strategy can intimidate and force the prosecution/plaintiff/petitioner into a settlement; one that not only can clear your good name, but also afford you normal parenting time with your child(ren).
You should realize the impact that child abuse allegations or charges may have on your life. As a suspect in an abuse case, you may have your child or children removed from your care, lose custody or visitation rights, be arrested and jailed, ruin your future career prospects, and in some cases, have friends and relatives turn against you. If it is a sexual abuse charge, add to the list having criminal charges filed against you, your name added to a Central Registry of potential child abusers, and label yourself a sex offender.
This is all before you have been convicted, possibly not even charged with anything, and are supposedly presumed innocent until proved guilty. You may find yourself fighting charges in civil, criminal and juvenile court, sometimes all at the same time. If convicted, you may be sentenced for up to life in prison depending on the charge and the state in which you are convicted.
To make matters worse, a San Diego Superior Court Judge recently ruled that hearsay is now admissible as evidence in cases of child abuse. What this means is that the standards of evidence required for common criminals don’t apply to child abuse cases. It is important to deal with the issue of child abuse in our society. But denying individuals their Constitutional rights and due process of law to that en d is no t the way.

WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?

You should be aware of the problems the child in an abuse case may face. They may be separated from you for long periods of time. Years of separation are not uncommon in these cases. They may be subjected to various physical and psychological examinations.
During the interviewing process, they may be turned against you and eventually come to believe that something really did happen (Ed. – Case in point is the McMartin case where the “ethical” professionals guided the interrogation of the children to build their case. These are the same tactics used in POW camps as psychological warfare. All in the “best interest of the child” mind you!) Poorly trained interviewers often “coach” a child into giving the answers they want. The child may become confused by the leading format of the questioning and try to give the answers they believe the authority figure wants to hear. The child becomes labeled an “abused child” and may be subjected to psychological treatment, furthering their belief that something must have happened.

THE SYSTEM: WHAT YOU’RE UP AGAINST

The legal system is set up to protect the child at all costs. The theory in general is, if a judicial mistake is made, let it be on the side that assures the safety of the child. This is a fact that can greatly hurt you and your child.
From the moment an allegation is made, you will generally be treated as guilty and separated from your child. Most interviews are conducted with the assumption that something did occur. An unbiased investigator is rarely seen. Most interviewers are trained to believe that children don’t lie, especially in divorce and custody situations.
The Court tends to believe the “experts”, even if the “expert” is a poorly trained social worker or a physician who has never had experience with an abuse case. A small child’s testimony about an event that supposedly occurred up to several years before your trial is enough to convict you in many states, even if no other evidence of abuse exists. The attitude of the public and the media towards an abuse suspect is usually hostile and prejudiced in a trial situation.
THINK BACK TO YOUR OWN FEELINGS WHEN YOU READ ABOUT A CHILD ABUSE CASE. THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE UP AGAINST NOW!

ASSESSING YOUR SITUATION TODAY

Have the allegations become worse since they were first made?

Does my attorney have a successful defense record in handling child abuse cases? How much experience does he/she have in dealing with this type of case?

Have I arranged for experts who are nationally recognized in the area of child abuse to testify for my defense?

Have I taken aggressive, effective action in destroying these allegations or have I just been reacting to what the other side is doing?

How can I improve my situation TODAY?

ADVICE FOR THE ACCUSED

Do have all interviews with the child videotaped.

Take all allegations of abuse very seriously from the moment it occurs.

Do hire an attorney who believes in your innocence.

Do have the child examined by a pediatrician or (if appropriate) a psychologist of your choosing, if physical or sexual abuse is alleged.

Do not rely on the legal system to clear you, even though you know you are innocent.

Do not talk to the press.

Do not take a polygraph or lie detector test.

Do not take “good advice” from people around you who mean well, but know nothing about this type of problem.

Do not hire an attorney who has not won this type of case in the past.

Do not make any Plea Bargains or legal decisions with the prosecutor without careful consideration. No matter what you are told, you may not realize the implications of such action.

REMEMBER THAT YOUR ACTIONS WILL AFFECT THE REST OF YOUR LIFE AND THAT OF YOUR CHILD’S!

Saturday, June 9, 2012

Truth Test to Uncover False Rape Accusations

From: The Independant, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/truth-test-to-uncover-false-rape-allegations-634512.html?afid=af

A "lie-detector" test to help uncover false allegations of rape is being developed by the police and criminologists.
Between 10 and 41 per cent of allegations of rape are made up by the "victim", according to previous research. In the new test, a claimant's statement is analysed and points are given from a list of set clues - people who have made up a rape allegation get a low score, while genuine complaints get a high score.
Using this technique in two studies, police officers and researchers had a success rate of between 72 and 100 per cent in identifying genuine rape victims from liars. All the cases were real-life examples selected because of the existence of strong evidence, such as closed-circuit television footage, to prove the defendants' guilt or innocence.
The two pieces of research indicate that police officers who rely on their detective skills and intuition when examining a statement by an alleged rape victim are no better than a member of the public at identifying a genuine complainant from a false one.
The researchers found that the three main motivations for reporting false rape are to provide an alibi where the accuser believes she may be pregnant or has had illicit consensual sex, revenge against a partner, and a desperate attempt to seek sympathy or attention.
The National Crime Faculty, which develops new investigative techniques, is studying the rape testing system, known as statement validity analysis (SVA). This form of analysis is already used by a handful of officers in Britain. Criminologists hope it will help detect malicious complaints - which can ruin the reputations of the people falsely accused - to allow police to concentrate more on genuine cases.
The small number of false allegations that make it to court have harmed the campaign by women's groups, the Home Office and police to increase the conviction rate for rape, which fell from 24 per cent in 1985 to 9 per cent in 1997.
In the year ending March 2000, the number of rapes recorded by police in England and Wales increased by 9.5 per cent to 7,809 offences involving a female victim, and by 19 per cent in male rapes to 600.
The two studies adapted SVA, which was first developed to test allegations of child abuse, to help assess rape cases. Points were given for different aspects of the complainant's statement including how it was structured, what details were included and excluded and the type of language and description used. The researchers say that genuine rape victims include unexpected details and structure their statements in a different way from false claimants.
In one of the studies, Andrew Parker, a Metropolitan Police officer who works at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, and Jennifer Brown, professor in the psychology department at the University of Surrey, tested 43 statements of alleged rape victims from London, 38 of which were made by women.
The testing system successfully predicted all the eventual outcomes of their cases - 24 were believed to be "credible", 16 "non-credible", and three undecided. Of the non-credible cases, the police later found that six involved serial allegers suffering from psychiatric disturbances, four involved complainants who admitted making malicious allegations, and two were made by delusional alcoholics.
Their report, "Detection of Deception", published in the Legal and Criminological Psychology journal, concluded: "SVA is not intended to replace the detective, but it can be used as a significant aid in the assessment of complex and emotional victim and witness testimony."
In the second study, Detective Sergeant Chris Few, working at the Centre for Applied Psychology at Leicester University, tested the system on 32 police officers. He trained half in the new analysis technique, which uses a check list of 15 criteria or clues when studying a statement. They examined four statements, of which four were genuine and four were false. The officers using the system correctly predicted the validity of the statements in 72 per cent of the cases, while those using their own judgement were accurate in just over half.
DS Few said: "Virtually all the training police officers are given to assess whether someone is telling the truth, focuses on verbal and non-verbal behaviour such as body language. Most research suggests this does not work.
"Police officers are no better than anyone else at telling whether someone is lying or not about a rape allegation. Most have about the same chances of success as tossing a coin." He added: "The tests need refining further but they should be able to help investigators better assess the credibility of witnesses in serious sexual offences."

What can make a Full Grown Man Cry

From: The Spearhead, http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/05/27/what-can-make-a-grown-man-cry/

What Can Make a Grown Man Cry?

by W.F. Price on May 27, 2012

Thanks to some help from the Innocence Project, Brian Banks just got out of prison after serving over five years for a rape he didn’t commit. Faced with a 46-years-to-life sentence, he pleaded no contest to forcible rape. While he was locked up, his accuser collected a $1.5 million payout from the California Public Schools.
After he had spent a few years in prison, his accuser had the gall to contact him on FaceBook, asking to meet with him. Sensing an opportunity, Banks swallowed his pride and played along, giving Innocence Project activists the opportunity to record her recanting the accusation. Prosecutors, who so vigorously hounded the innocent man, say they will leave the false accuser – a criminal – alone. Bearing false witness used to be considered serious crime, but it seems an exception has been carved out for women who lie about rape.
Before he was locked up, Mr. Banks hoped to become an NFL player, and his chances were pretty good at the time. He’s said he wants to give it another shot, but at 26 years old, he’s middle aged for the NFL. His false conviction may have cost him millions of dollars and a glorious career. In the meanwhile, Wanetta Gibson, the criminal who stole those precious years, walks free.
Imagine a man kidnapped a woman, held her for five years, and managed to extract $1.5 million in the process. Then imagine that after the woman escaped, prosecutors said “the kidnapping happened years ago, so we won’t prosecute.”
There is no moral difference between what Wanetta Gibson did and kidnapping a woman for ransom. Both are vile crimes.
Most men freed by the Innocence Project have been falsely accused of rape. More innocent men are imprisoned for rape than any other serious crime. Probably because many women, like Wanetta Gibson, have a free pass to falsely accuse men and then collect money for doing so.

Friday, June 8, 2012

June is False Allegation Awareness Month

From: A Voice for Men, http://www.avoiceformen.com/updates/save-june-is-false-allegation-awareness-month/

SAVE: June is False Allegation Awareness Month

Publisher’s note: In respect to June being False Allegation Awareness Month, we encourage AVfM contributors to submit articles on the false allegation problem. PE

June is False Allegations Awareness Month, and this year SAVE will be addressing false allegations of domestic violence, sexual assault, and child abuse. False allegations are a huge problem in our country — according to our national survey, 1 in 10 persons have been falsely accused of abuse.

SAVE will be sponsoring a variety of activities designed to heighten public awareness:

Radio interviews

Press releases

Social media

Lobbying day in Congress, June 29

False Allegations Summit, June 30 in Washington DC

Of interest, public concern about the Dept. of Education Sexual Assault Directive continues to mount because it strips persons of due process protections and will increase false allegations of sexual assault on campus. To date, 13 organizations and over 35 editorials have come out against the DED policy.

And progress in reforming the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill also gives us a sense of optimism.

We encourage you to begin planning now for an event in your area to highlight False Allegations Awareness Month. A listing of resources can be found here.

The SAVE Teamis

False Allegations Awareness Month Resources

One in 10 persons has been falsely accused of domestic violence, sexual assault, or child abuse. False Allegations Awareness Month is our opportunity to get the word out and bring about change!

A. Activities You Can Do for False Allegations Awareness Month
B. National Survey of False Allegations of Abuse

C. Interest Groups

D. Model Language to Stop False Allegations of Domestic Violence
E. Special Reports

F. Fact Sheets

G. Tip Sheets: How to Avoid and Survive a False Allegation
H. Videos — a sampling of the hundreds that are on the Web

Thursday, June 7, 2012

Munchausen Syndrome and False Accusations

From: http://home.earthlink.net/~elnunes/malinger.htm

- False and Self-Inflicted Injuries -

A Brief Word About Syndromes - Simulations

A syndrome is a group of signs and symptoms that occur together and characterize a particular abnormality or a condition or an identifiable pattern of behavior. Munchausen syndrome is a condition where a person malingers by pretending or exaggerating incapacity or an illness to avoid work or for the specific purpose of being treated as a medical patient. Sometimes, these individuals will self-inflict injuries on their body or use makeup or prosthetics to fabricate an illness or an injury.

False and self-inflicted injuries are perhaps the most misunderstood phenomena involving false allegations. But it goes further than this, because some parents will abuse their child to prevent the other parent from receiving custody or visitation rights of their child through a simulation of a criminal offence. The problem is that society is so transfixed with the notion that women have the unfettered right to falsely accuse anyone that it is willing to set aside the truth. So instead of trying to solve this problem, many ignore it in hope that it would magically go away but it doesn’t.

Faked injuries are usually simulated by using makeup, prosthetics, and torn clothing and drug and medical supply stores are common sources of material. Most colleges and universities have an Arts or Drama department that can produce more sophisticated materials that are often used in legitimate productions. The most important point to remember is that most faked injuries that incorporate these materials cannot be subjected to actual testing because they would reveal the fraud that is being made. Did you know that scabs can be simulated by glue and coloring?

Color Changes in Injuries

This is why photographs are often used to portray injuries that never did exist. One way of proving that a bruise is real and that bruises change color as they heal - they go from red to blue to cyan and to yellow. Another way of checking the authenticity of a bruise is that they contain clotting material and this material can be extracted for testing.

Blood plasma contains proteins that cause blood to clot but they normally circulate in an inactive form. However, when a blood vessel is damaged, the platelets help in clotting the blood by adhering to other platelets and to the epithelium (a cellular membrane). Then the fibrous tissue changes into strands that crisscross and create a mesh that squeezes out the fluid and forms a solid clot (hardened blood and serum). These clots, called scabs, can be collected and then tested in a laboratory.

Today, most physicians prescribe low dose aspirin to prevent blood clots while warfarin is used in the treatment of atrial fibrillation, pulmonary embolism, venous thrombosis and other medical conditions. Too much warfarin or aspirin or can result in excessive bruising or bleeding. Blood testing can reveal that a person is using them to induce bruising or bleeding in themselves or that they are trying to poison another person. Women are far more likely to use poisons than men.

Scams and simulations are used by the perpetrator to direct attention away from them and to the targeted person. These often include feigned assaults and false allegations. Although self-inflicted injuries can be symptomatic of Borderline Personality Disorder, they are usually a result of the actor trying to draw attention to themselves. However, self-mutilation is often used to garner attention or to avoid conflict especially after the perpetrator has manipulated or harmed others. I call this the ‘poor me’ excuse because the offender blames the victim by saying that ‘you made me do it’.

Handedness

The hands of a person are mirror images of each other and they have a specific arrangement: thumb, index, middle finger, ring, and pinkie (little). So when the hands are placed are placed palm to palm, each finger has a corresponding opposite finger. This is also true of human feet and toes. However, did you know that most people who are right-handed are also right-footed and those who are left-handed are more likely to be left-footed but not always?

Handedness refers a tendency to use one hand rather than the other. While most people are right-handed, others are left-handed, and a few can use both hands with equal ease and that could be described as ambidextrous or cross-dominance. The reason that handedness is important is that it can be used to determine whether an injury was inflicted by a right-handed person, a left-handed person, or was self-inflicted.

For an example if two people faced each other, then a right-handed person would usually strike their victim's left side while a left-handed person would strike their victim's right side. Otherwise, the strike would be on the opposite side if they did not face each other. In other words, face-to-face strikes are mirror images while strikes from behind are not. However, the most important evidence is that the DNA of the victim and the DNA of the assailant is exchanged between the two. However, if there is no exchange, then there was no DNA and accused did not strike the purported victim.

Faked and Self-Inflicted Injuries in False Allegations of Abuse or Rape

Most self-inflicted injuries are either faked with cosmetics or made by sharp or pointed objects or by other means and most of these faked injuries are usually shallow or surface abrasions. Also, the account given by the 'victim' is often in contrast with the lack of severity of the injuries and not consistent with a typical attack or the dynamics of an actual encounter. Moreover, as with false allegations of rape, the reporting officer will extensively quote the accuser while dismissing the account of the purported offender (italics added) giving a false appearance of genuineness.

There should be no problem with protecting the rights of the accused while seeking the truth but many others don’t want it that way. This is why false allegations are so easily made and hard to refute, that those who support this evil doctrine do so through subterfuge, and extortion. They don’t care about the truth, because they want a predetermined result of their own making. And so, this is why there are no significant differences between false allegations of rape and false allegations of abuse. Women are responsible for nearly all the false allegations of rape and abuse because these particular offenses do not require corroborating evidence for arrest and conviction.

The Constitutional right to confrontation is especially significant when dealing with allegations of abuse and rape in most jurisdictions, because these are the only crimes that do not require corroborating evidence for conviction. If there are no witnesses and no physical evidence (the accuser delays in filing a report), the matter must be decided as to the credibility of the accuser. This is the person who had waited until the evidence would have dissipated and that is the essence of premeditation.

Features of Faked and Self-Inflicted Injuries

Many faked and self-inflicted injuries are a result of an attempt to obtain compensation from an insurance company. Since insurance companies are aware of this behavior, they will refer such claims to their own experts for evaluation. When the instance is a result of rape, they will insist that the insured will undergo a rape kit examination. This is to prove that the crime occurred and that the evidence has been collected to substantiate the claim.

The problem is that women, who do claim rape, are not required to fully participate in the rape examination. This may mean that the crucial evidence would not be collected and this allows her to make a false claim at some point in the future. This is also true of other forms of abuse, including spousal battery. The features of faked and self-inflicted injuries are listed below.

        The use of fingernails and sharp or pointed tools.

        The presence of shallow abrasions and cuts.

        Isolated lesions.

        Lesions with uniform curved or linear features.

        Parallel or crisscross lesions.

        Lesions that appear on the opposite (non dominant) side of the body

        The location of injury is easily reachable by the ‘victim’.

        Sensitive body regions are neither harmed nor damaged.

        Clothing is undamaged or the damage is inconsistent.

        There are no defense injuries on the hands, arms, and legs.

        Old scars that are consistent with present injuries.

        Multiple ‘trial’ cuttings and stabs.

The most important feature about real injuries and bruises is that they may spread but they don’t move. One of the best ways to detect a faked injury is to take photographs and then wait a few hours or to the next day and see if they have changed position, extent, or coloration.

Munchausen Syndrome

Munchausen syndrome is (or can be) an adjunct to false allegations of child abuse, rape, spousal abuse, and other forms of abuse such as the ‘my way or no way’ ultimatum. Munchausen syndrome by proxy is a psychological disorder where the parent (typically the mother) lies about the child's family and medical history. A mother may falsely accuse the father of child abuse or spousal abuse and then tamper with medications and medical specimens to create an impression of and the evidence of abuse.

Factitious Disorders and Shams

Sometimes, ‘Munchausen syndrome’ is used interchangeably with factitious disorder. This disorder is characterized by an illness or injury that is intentionally produced to appear sick. The difference is that sometimes the ‘sick’ person is not aware of its cause and so the illness might be psychosomatic or simulated in nature resulting from neurosis. So Munchausen syndrome may apply to a person who has a chronic variant of a factitious disorder with mostly physical signs and symptoms. That is why the term, "psychosomatic" relates to symptoms caused by a mental or emotional disturbance. There are some unconfirmed reports about psychosomatic Munchausen syndrome.

Some persons who are affected by Munchausen syndrome intentionally cause signs and symptoms of an illness or injury by self infliction of injuries to their body, often to the point of having to be hospitalized. These persons are sometimes eager to undergo invasive medical interventions and so they go to doctor to doctor to satisfy their craving for attention. According to the literature, there are about 33 illnesses and conditions that are commonly feigned by persons with Munchausen Syndrome. These include Sexual Abuse, Spousal Abuse, and Ideation (the capacity for - or the act of forming self entertaining ideas - such as suicide). Please see the literature on this and other personality and mental disorders.

The Causes of Wrongful Conviction

From: The Innocence Project, http://www.innocenceproject.org/

The Causes of Wrongful Conviction

As the pace of DNA exonerations has grown across the country in recent years, wrongful convictions have revealed disturbing fissures and trends in our criminal justice system. Together, these cases show us how the criminal justice system is broken – and how urgently it needs to be fixed.

We should learn from the system’s failures. In each case where DNA has proven innocence beyond doubt, an overlapping array of causes has emerged – from mistakes to misconduct to factors of race and class.

Countless cases
Those exonerated by DNA testing aren’t the only people who have been wrongfully convicted in recent decades. For every case that involves DNA, there are thousands that do not.

Only a fraction of criminal cases involve biological evidence that can be subjected to DNA testing, and even when such evidence exists, it is often lost or destroyed after a conviction. Since they don’t have access to a definitive test like DNA, many wrongfully convicted people have a slim chance of ever proving their innocence.
Common Causes
Here you will find further information about seven of the most common causes of wrongful convictions:

These factors are not the only causes of wrongful conviction. Each case is unique and many include a combination of the above issues. Review our case profiles to learn how the common causes of wrongful convictions have affected real cases and how these injustices could have been prevented.

To stop these wrongful convictions from continuing, we must fix the criminal justice system. Click here to learn about Innocence Commissions, a reform that can help identify and address the fundamental flaws in the criminal justice system that lead to wrongful convictions.

Exonerations in CA, 1989 - 2012

From: The National Registry of Exonerations http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx

Exonerations in the United States, 1989 – 2012
Report by the National Registry of Exonerations

California (79)
Contra Costa 1
Fresno 2
Kern 20
Lake 1
Los Angeles 23
Merced 1
Monterey 1
Orange 5
Riverside 1
Sacramento 2
San Diego 4
San Francisco 4
San Joaquin 1
San Mateo 1
Santa Clara 10
Siskiyou 2

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Falsely Accused HS Football Star

From: National Coalation of Free Men, http://ncfm.org/2012/05/news/criminal-sentencing/woman-admits-she-falsely-accused-hs-football-star-of-rape-he-receives-five-years-in-prison-she-receives-1-5-million-of-taxpayers-money/

Woman Admits She Falsely Accused HS Football Star of Rape – He Receives Five Years In Prison, She Receives $1.5 Million of Taxpayers’ Money.

May 29, 2012

By NCFM

Wanetta Gibson falsely accused Brian Banks of rape! She should be in jail and be made to pay restitution.

By Al Rava, NCFM Secretary
Last Thursday, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mark C. Kim overturned the decade-old forcible rape conviction against Brian Banks after his accuser Wanetta Gibson admitted she falsely accused Banks of the crime. At the time of the false accusation, Banks was a 17-year-old football star at Long Beach Poly High School, who had verbally committed to playing for USC, and Gibson was a 15-year-old classmate. Gibson said Banks raped her on school grounds, Banks said the sex was consensual.
Banks, represented by a public defender, agreed to a plea deal serving five years behind bars instead of risking a prison term of 41 years to life. Only 17 at the time of the plea deal with little or no knowledge about the criminal justice system, Banks was not allowed to speak with his parents when offered the plea deal.
Recently, Wanetta Gibson reached out to Banks on Facebook, arranged a meeting where she admitted that she fabricated the rape accusation. Banks was accompanied at the meeting by a private investigator who recorded Gibson’s admission.
Shortly after Banks’ plea deal, Gibson’s mother, on behalf of her minor daughter, sued the Long Beach Unified School District for maintaining an unsafe environment. The lawsuit resulted in Gibson receiving a $1.5-million settlement.
Unfortunately, Los Angeles County prosecutors do not plan to charge Gibson, now 24, for perjuring herself by making false accusations, because prosecutors claim it would be hard to prove their case. Perhaps because the private investigator’s recording would not be admissible in a criminal or civil case against Gibson.
The Long Beach Police Department has not opened an “official investigation” into Gibson’s false accusation, although it is communicating with prosecutors about Gibson’s actions.
During a recent interview with a San Diego radio station, Banks talked of visiting Sea World yesterday with his attorney’s family and how great it felt to be able to wear shorts in public. He was able to wear shorts because his rape conviction had required him to register as a sex offender and wear an ankle monitor
Gibson admitted to falsely accusing Banks. Regardless of whether the incriminating tape recording is admissible in a criminal or civil action, she should be charged with appropriate crimes. Charging her with perjury, filing a false police report, and whatever else applies at least establishes a criminal record.
Banks deserves some justice. Gibson deserves to be held accountable. Society deserves protection from such women. It is inconceivable that no effort will be made to recover Gibson’s ill-gotten gains. Whoever in the District Attorney’s Office decided not to prosecute Gibson should be fired.
.

To learn more about Brian Banks, visit www.brianbanks.org , where you can contribute to a documentary about Brian’s struggle and exoneration.

A University's Shame

From:The Brown Spector, http://brown-spectator.com/2012/05/a-universitys-shame-how-brown-betrayed-one-of-its-students/

A University’s Shame: How Brown betrayed one of its students

When Michael Burch – a former assistant wrestling coach – met William McCormick III on Sept. 13, 2006, he fit the role of an accused rapist. McCormick was a 6’4”, 275-pound, lumbering heavyweight wrestler who was asking help from Burch in dealing with a sexual assault charge that had just been filed against him. The case against him was strong; the charge was extreme and the University told Burch that physical evidence was coming. McCormick even seemed like a guy who would take advantage of a girl; he was a big, strong, and socially awkward student who was adjusting to his first few weeks in college. After meeting with McCormick – who was adamant about his innocence – Burch could tell that he was scared, and for good reason. The young woman who had accused him was Marcella “Beth” Dresdale ’10, daughter of the founder of a $2.1 billion equity firm and an essential donor to the University, Richard Dresdale ’78 P’10.

McCormick’s Life Is Turned Inside Out:

When they began their lives at Brown in fall 2006, McCormick and Dresdale were both freshmen living in the same residential hall. They met, like most other new students, during the icebreaker activities of orientation, quickly becoming friends within the first week and exchanging both phone calls and emails. After a few days, however, Dresdale’s contact with William dwindled, even though he continued to email and call her regularly. The situation came to a head on Sept. 5, 2006, seven days into their stay at Brown, when Dresdale spoke with her Residential Counselor accusing McCormick of acting “creepy” and stalking her. On Sept. 7, Dresdale made a sexual harassment complaint against McCormick.

Brown’s reaction to the allegation was swift. On Sept. 8, McCormick was ordered to move all his belongings across campus without any assistance from the University. He was also forced to drop two of his courses because they were in the same building as some of Dresdale’s classes. He was restricted to only eating at dining halls and participating in clubs located on Pembroke Campus. During this time, however, Dresdale did not file an official report with the Providence Police Department.

After learning about the initial charge, McCormick contacted Michael Burch about becoming his faculty advocate for the impending student hearing. Burch took McCormick’s case and anticipated a student hearing on the sexual harassment complaint, but there never was one. Instead, on Sept. 13, 2006, Dresdale’s Residential Counselor, Shane Reil, lodged Dresdale’s second complaint via email that McCormick raped Dresdale on the night of Sept. 6. Brown police immediately removed McCormick from campus, even though it would later be discovered that the allegation had not been reported to the campus police, and took him to Michael Burch’s house. Within 14 hours of the rape charge being filed, McCormick was on a plane back to his home in Wisconsin, never to return to Brown again.

While in Wisconsin, Richard Dresdale’s attorney, Joe Cavanagh of the Rhode Island law firm Blish-Cavanagh, allegedly pressured McCormick into signing a waiver that forbade him from ever returning as a student to Brown, indefinitely prohibited him from traveling to Providence without the permission of the Dresdale family, and required that he seek approval from the family before he could apply to any graduate school, fearing that Beth may be attending the same one. On Oct. 15, McCormick officially withdrew from Brown – having never received his student hearing – citing a previously existing seizure condition. This condition caused him to have about one seizure a day since childhood, but by the time he returned home to Wisconsin, he was allegedly having 20-30 seizures a day. In Sept. 2009, McCormick filed a complaint against Richard Dresdale, Marcella Dresdale, and Brown University claiming wrongdoing in his dismissal from Brown.

Richard Dresdale Plays Dirty:

Richard Dresdale’s influence over Brown stems from his significant donations to the University. He has a medical school scholarship named after him. He and three other donors were lauded for their “extraordinary generosity” in building the Brown Rugby field. He is one of only 54 members of the Brown Annual Fund Leadership Council. He is on the board of directors for the Brown University Sports Foundation. He is a past recipient of the H. Anthony Ittleson ‘60 Cup, which is given to extraordinary donors to the Brown Annual Fund. By contrast, McCormick was attending Brown on full financial aid.

From the beginning, Dresdale tried to use his wealth and influence to force McCormick out of the University. On Sept. 6, the day after Beth Dresdale accused McCormick of stalking her, Richard Dresdale emailed former Associate Vice President Ronald Dalgliesh ’91. Dalgliesh indicated that the issue was going to be resolved with the help of Shane Reil, Beth’s Residential Counselor. On Sept. 7 Beth Dresdale writes a sexual harassment complaint. On Sept. 9, Richard Dresdale went to Providence to take Shane Reil out to dinner at fellow alum and also wealthy private equity manager Habib Gorgi’s ’78 home and watch a football game with Beth Dresdale. On Sept. 11, Shane Reil wrote Richard Dresdale an email saying that Beth Dresdale had mentioned her father would “help straighten out a path for [his] future,” that he was thankful Dresdale was “making [him]self available to [him] as a mentor” and that he and Beth were “becoming very close.” Two days later, Reil filed the rape charge — retroactively changing the original sexual assault complaint — against McCormick and allegedly included vicious character attacks against him.

Dresdale’s influence didn’t stop with Shane Reil. He also asserted his authority over President Ruth Simmons. Not only was Dresdale one of the biggest donors to Simmons’s university, but they were also business partners. Dresdale’s Fenway Partners worked closely with Goldman Sachs (where Ruth Simmons was on the board of directors at the time), and they were involved with the takeover of Simmons (no relation) Mattresses – according to a report by PR Newswire. On Oct. 3, Dresdale emailed Simmons saying, “Ruth … I am working to resolve the matter with the student who attacked Beth — the goal is to have him withdraw from Brown and not have a University hearing. This will enable Beth and the other students to avoid having to come in contact with the student and face questioning from his advocate [Burch].” Consequently, there never was a student hearing.

The Deans Engage in Misconduct:

Richard Dresdale wielded such considerable influence that he was able to prevent any semblance of a fair trial for McCormick. Not only were the deans unwilling to give McCormick his due process, but they were also instrumental in his dismissal. In an interview, Burch singled out Associate Dean Terry Addison, then-Interim Vice President for Campus Life and Student Services Russell Carey ’91 (who personally handed McCormick his one-way ticket home), and then Associate Vice President for Campus Life and Dean for Student Life Margaret Klawunn, whom Burch described as a “ringleader”. The only dean whom Burch claimed was privately sympathetic to McCormick was former Associate Dean of Student Life Robert Samuels, who told Burch, “We are all scared for our jobs.”

Perhaps it was this fear that prompted the deans to perform a wholly inadequate job of granting McCormick a fair trial. They allegedly disregarded, hid, or tampered with vital pieces of evidence in the case

The first instance of alleged misconduct by the deans occurred when witnesses re-wrote character assessments for McCormick, a highly unusual and dubious action. The original statements, which the Spectator has obtained, described McCormick as an average freshman with no outward signs of violent tendencies. What makes the deans’ integrity questionable is that the new assessments – from the same students, whom Burch claimed at the time may have rewritten their accounts at the prompting of the deans – came back as acerbic assaults against McCormick’s character, a curious result considering that these students had not seen much of McCormick in between the writing of these assessments since he had already been removed and barred from campus.

One of the more puzzling aspects of the entire case was the fact that the rape was not reported to the Providence Police Department or the Brown Campus Police. In an interview with both Margaret Klawunn and Senior Associate Dean of Student Life Jonah Ward that the Spectator conducted on May 2, 2012, when asked if “it would be unusual for an egregious sexual assault not to be reported to the police” Klawunn responded, “Absolutely” and Ward concurred saying, “Right, right.” One can only wonder why neither Klawunn nor Ward – both involved with the McCormick case – reported to the Providence Police after Dresdale filed her complaint.

The deans also appear to have ignored a closer examination of the incident’s timeline. Beth Dresdale claimed that the rape occurred on the evening of Sept.6, curiously the same day that she spent the entire afternoon discussing the “creepy” McCormick with her RC and a University advisor. Furthermore, just hours after the alleged rape occurred, Dresdale and McCormick were seen together at a birthday party in their dorm. In two separate emails to Terry Addison – both dated Sept. 15 – two witnesses described Dresdale and McCormick as behaving normally. When this detail was brought to their attention, Klawunn and Carey proceeded to keep McCormick out of Brown, while Dresdale enjoyed college life at her father and grandfather’s university.

Perhaps the most destructive misconduct that deans committed was concealing evidence from McCormick and his advocate Burch. In the entire rape case, there was only one piece of supposed evidence against McCormick: a pair of ripped boxers. Beth Dresdale claimed to have the pair of boxers that she was wearing when McCormick allegedly ripped them off and proceed to rape her. This being the one and only alleged piece of physical evidence in the entire case, Burch rightfully asked to see it in order to examine it for finger prints and DNA — anything to help determine McCormick’s innocence. The deans refused. In an email from Terry Addison, dated Sept. 25 he said, “The boxer shorts will not be entered as material evidence. References to the shorts in witness statements will not be stricken” i.e. witnesses can still claim that the boxers were ripped off. In an email to Spectator editor Ryan Fleming dated May 3, 2012, Ward wrote, “If there is a question about sexual activity, any reasonable evidence to help determine the truth would be admissible and reviewed by both the complainant and respondent.” That, unfortunately, does not appear to be a right afforded to William McCormick.

Richard Dresdale Gets Caught in the Act:

In April 2010, Burch discussed part of the story to the Brown Daily Herald. A few months afterwards, Richard Dresdale began to target McCormick’s advocate. In fall 2010, he hired a private investigator to intimidate Burch.

On Sept. 27, 2010, a package addressed to Michael Burch was delivered to the house of his girlfriend, a single mother. Burch had not shared the location of his girlfriend’s house to any of his coworkers and was disturbed that someone had located him at that address. Upon opening the package, Burch discovered an invitation to a free meal at McCormick’s attorney’s – Scott Kilpatrick – favorite restaurant, the once popular Down City Diner in downtown Providence. When he arrived for dinner, he learned that two anonymous women had paid for his meal. The next day, he received a call from a woman claiming to be in charge of a company that delivers anonymous gifts, inquiring whether he had enjoyed his dinner. When Burch questioned her about the company, she hung up. The message to him was clear: People were watching his and Kilpatrick’s every move.

Through court subpoenas, Burch was able to trace the calls back to former New York Police Department Detective Patrick Brosnan (whom Dresdale glowingly praises in an online testimonial), the current CEO of Brosnan Risk Consultants, an investigative firm. Brosnan had been hired by Richard Dresdale to “keep a close eye on Burch, out of concern for his daughter.” Dresdale had paid $10,000 to Brosnan so that he could keep constant watch on Burch.

Shortly after the incident, Kilpatrick – a former Assistant Attorney General, in the Criminal Division for Rhode Island – filed a motion to default for the ongoing case of McCormick vs. Dresdale on account of witness intimidation, i.e. that the defense – Dresdale – would automatically default (lose) their case. After a deposition of Brosnan, Kilpatrick withdrew his motion to default and stopped the witness intimidation investigation. In a letter dated Nov. 8, 2010 Burch wrote to Kilpatrick “Scott…you are acting like someone who has been threatened. If this is baseless, then I really need some very, very good explanations for why you are taking such a different tact since Brosnan’s deposition.”

Burch, fearing for his own safety, was granted a temporary restraining order against Dresdale and filed an official complaint with the Pawtucket Police Department. Despite initial enthusiasm for investigating the case, the police quickly responded that they would not pursue the investigation. Burch speculated that it could have been because of Dresdale’s influence went beyond Brown University to elected officials (i.e. Democratic Senator Jack Reed, to whom he donated $3,300 in 2007) as well as Dresdale’s firm, Fenway Partners, receiving significant investments from the Rhode Island’s state pension fund, $15 million according to Pensions and Investments.

Not Just Isolated Cases:

A case like this seems like an anomaly. It cannot be too often that a university like Brown is seemingly willing to sacrifice the wellbeing of one of its students simply to protect their endowment funds. Unfortunately, there is evidence that Brown’s actions in the McCormick case may have been the rule, not the exception.

In September 2009, just three years after the McCormick incident, there was another eerily similar case. A student, who wishes to remain anonymous, approached Michael Burch — who was known for advocating on behalf of McCormick — seeking help after being accused of sexual assault.

The student dated the daughter of another wealthy member of a private equity firm throughout the 2008 school year until they had a tumultuous break-up during the summer of 2009. After the break-up, the daughter allegedly filed a sexual assault complaint with Brown Police but told them not to process it. Then the student claimed that he was indirectly warned by a Brown police officer that there was a potential charge against him. Upon learning this, the male student contacted Michael Burch asking for help.

At Burch’s suggestion, he filed a slander charge against the female student. However, for nearly three months neither Burch nor the male student knew if there was an official complaint filed against him. They claim to have repeatedly visited, called, and emailed Brown Department of Public Safety, Jonah Ward, and Margaret Klawunn asking if there was an official charge, but they never received a clear answer.

After months of asking, Brown officials finally told the male student that a formal complaint was never filed against him. He claimed that he was advised by the university to not proceed with his complaint and let both charges fade away since he was graduating later that year.

The male student wished to proceed with his slander charge, seeking an apology from the female student and a retraction of her statements. He was told to meet with Dean Richard Bova. The student claims that Brown would not allow Burch to attend the meeting. When they finally acquiesced, neither Burch nor the student could make the meeting in time. Days later, the student claims that he was told that the meeting that they had missed was in fact the judicial hearing for the case and that the University would not disclose the outcome of the hearing. Having a student hearing without the accuser being present would contradict statements made in the interview with Klawunn and Ward, where Ward clearly stated that at any judicial hearing the accused, the accuser, an advisor and a student conduct panel would be present.

The McCormick case was not entirely unique in Beth Dresdale’s history. Two years into the McCormick case, a former high school teacher of Beth Dresdale’s revealed that he allegedly had a similar experience and that during Beth Dresdale’s freshman year of high school, she was involved in another sexual misconduct scandal.

In spring 2003, Beth Dresdale was allegedly caught cheating on a 10-point quiz by her science teacher, who wished to remain anonymous for this story. Following the teacher’s personal policy on cheating, he did not give Beth a zero on the quiz, but instead talked with her privately about the incident and discussed the possibility of retaking it. After their discussion, Dresdale accused the teacher, who had 32 years of experience, of sexual harassment. According to the teacher, Richard Dresdale quickly became involved, taking the case to the police. The police dismissed the claim and told the school to handle the situation. Within a week the teacher was escorted out of the school and was later released. Following the incident, Beth Dresdale transferred to an all-girls private school in the fall.

Legacy:

Following his coerced withdrawal from Brown, McCormick sued the University Beth Dresdale and Richard Dresdale. In December 2011 the case was settled after McCormick had been offered approximately $1 million, according to Go Local Providence,who had obtained a secret recording of Kilpatrick discussing the settlement negotiations. McCormick finished his college career at Bucknell University, where he continued to wrestle, and majored in Film. Beth Dresdale graduated from Brown without interruption in 2010.

Burch continued to work for Brown until 2009, when he resigned from his coaching position, claiming that he was pressured to do so. In 2010 the University cancelled his summer teaching contract that he had had for 7 years prior. After his dismissal from Brown, Burch continues to support McCormick’s innocence, saying, “as long as there is a Brown University I will talk about this story for fear it will some day be repeated, whether it be falsely accused students or victimized students who are denied justice, Brown cannot be trusted when their money or public image is at stake. We ought to be thankful that William McCormick stood up against such odds – he did so for a lot of people.”

Klawunn, who headed the case against McCormick, was promoted to vice president for campus life and student services shortly after, while the sympathetic Robert Samuels left Brown not long after the case. Unfortunately, The Spectator could not find any solid evidence linking these outcomes directly to the deans’ involvement in the case.

Perhaps the greatest legacy of the case is a loss of faith in the University. Brown is supposedly a place where students can learn, experiment, and express themselves in a protected environment regardless of personal background. The University, however, has punctured that dream. Furthermore, both Beth Dresdale and Brown have unnecessarily called into question the veracity of any rape accusation. Through their actions, they prove accusing someone of sexual misconduct can be used as a means of manipulation. Brown’s unwavering protection of the accuser at the expense of the accused — no matter how much the evidence points in the other direction — is a major flaw in the University’s judicial system. One hopes that what happened to McCormick will never happen again, but with the current judicial structure and Brown’s own track record, there is little reason to believe this will be a unique occurrence.

“I came along with African-American parents who couldn’t read or write all that well, but they brought along traditions from their parents. I would love to live in a world where people are valued on the basis of what qualities they offer as a person, rather than on the means that they happen to have at any given time. …”

Ruth Simmons, Ebony Magazine, June 1^st, 1996

Total Pageviews

Friday, December 13, 2013

Friday, June 22, 2012

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

From: Cry Rape, http://cryrape.blogspot.com/

Monday, June 11, 2012

WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?

THE SYSTEM: WHAT YOU’RE UP AGAINST

ASSESSING YOUR SITUATION TODAY

ADVICE FOR THE ACCUSED

Saturday, June 9, 2012

'Truth test' to uncover false rape allegations

As number of sex crimes rises but conviction rate falls, 'lie detector' could help police weed out bogus claims

From: The Spearhead, http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/05/27/what-can-make-a-grown-man-cry/

What Can Make a Grown Man Cry?

Friday, June 8, 2012

From: A Voice for Men, http://www.avoiceformen.com/updates/save-june-is-false-allegation-awareness-month/

SAVE: June is False Allegation Awareness Month

False Allegations Awareness Month Resources

Thursday, June 7, 2012

From: The Innocence Project, http://www.innocenceproject.org/

The Causes of Wrongful Conviction

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Woman Admits She Falsely Accused HS Football Star of Rape – He Receives Five Years In Prison, She Receives $1.5 Million of Taxpayers’ Money.

Wanetta Gibson falsely accused Brian Banks of rape! She should be in jail and be made to pay restitution.

From:The Brown Spector, http://brown-spectator.com/2012/05/a-universitys-shame-how-brown-betrayed-one-of-its-students/

A University’s Shame: How Brown betrayed one of its students