Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

The Falsely Accused & Rape Prosecutions :Common Cause & Statistics

Stained Glass

Member
Verified
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
18
Reaction score
14
Status
Other
Hello All - (and especially Patrick)

I may have missed coverage within the site of the current 'CrowdJustice' challenge to the CPS. It seemed relevant to future falsely accused - and to have the potential to impact significantly. It seems likely to bring out more debate around & within the CPS.

There's evidently a very particular interpretation being given around recent statistics - by Rachel Krys & others involved in this legal action:-
'Figures not yet published (but shared by the government with stakeholders) show rapes reported to the police are up by 173% over the past four years, but the number of cases charged and sent to court is actually down by a shocking 44%.'

(I know it's in the Guardian - and I realise that may suggest that it's another 'one-sided' / blinkered perspective. I've put the link below anyway).

I'm very conscious, Pat, of your own comparison of Crime Survey Stats and those of Rape reports to the police - and the conclusions you've drawn from the extraordinary changes in the last 2 or 3 years. I've done very little reading around this - so am wary ('cautious'!) about raising this here. But .... one of the excellent 'We Believe You' interviewees spoke of the common cause between rape victims & the falsely accused. I think that reality of having a current common cause is a personal & political Truth (however difficult - or impossible - it may currently seem to find 'feminists' or other public voices making this point). With that common cause in mind, it seems to me to be important to be coolly analytical of any evidence being cited by the groups acting now against the CPS.
(eg the argument that CPS action or inaction has been influenced in part by metric performance measures seems wholly plausible).

Good wishes
Tony.

 

Patrick

Barman
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
520
Reaction score
434
Location
Gloucestershire
Status
Acquitted
Yes Tony -
it isn't just the Guardian of course - this is the "Feemenist" (men and women making money out of it) agenda doing its usual misinterpretation - following the standard narrative, pushing the same lying policy it always has...

When all these organisations support the idea that all women are innocent victims, they cannot conceive of the idea that there is another answer as to why their stories are not all leading to successful prosecutions. (they skewed the system so successfully that it is very hard for them to see past their noses to the fact that it has been sabotaged by the 30,000+ new, and not very good at it, false accusers).

The man who spoke of common cause is Liam Allan - and he is pursuing a career in Criminology and changes in the law. He is right of course - in that we victims of failures in the law include all genuine victims
- that is genuine rape victims and genuine false accusation victims. The police have less understanding of what a victim really is than the average Labrador.

However, personally I think he is destined to be upset and disappointed when the FakeFeminists, who dominate the academic side of the legal system, insist that men are fundamentally perpetrators and all women always innocent, (even if they murdered their partner in cold blood) reject his idea of "working together".
They will instead hang on like grim death to the notion that false accusers are vanishingly rare - and all examples given are lies.
In fact I have already seen a Feminist law lecturer insist that just because Liam Allan was found not guilty it doesn't mean that he didn't rape his then girlfriend -
His is a case where 40,000 texts were uncovered from her phone, during the trial, previously hidden by the police but insisted on being revealed by the freelance CPS barrister (Jerry Hayes) that showed texts to him and to her friends revealing she was begging him for "more rough sex", and that "nothing he did was other than what she wanted" - for several weeks after the alleged rape.

The CPS/police were rightly hauled over the coals when it was discovered that they had withheld such evidence in around 70% of (Rape and Serious Sexual Assault) RASSO cases.
DPP Alison Saunders organised a review and "All current RASSO cases were to be studied for evidence failures" - of course once the press mini furore settled down that was reduced, quietly, so a few cases were looked at then dropped ( because they were similarly embarrassing and crooked) and Saunders resigned early to be replaced by Max Hill...
Max is a little determined that the CPS won't be caught out by facts again - hence the CPS have been dropping cases - but actually no more than they did the previous year - the 44% is not a reduction in actual numbers - but a % of the whole of reports made to police...

All this has hardly been reported in the Guardian.

Remember - a massively increased number of these most recent "Failures" were also dropped by the police - so never got the CPS, and these despite the police "believing the victim" and ready to conduct their usual utterly biased "investigation" - The only explanation of why, is that so very many of these reports were so obviously false that even the police felt they could not push them to the CPS

The horrendous Guardian bias is in not showing the ACTUAL figures but just reporting unexamined % - which means no one reading that article will see the leaps over the past few years that I show in my main graph on this site opening post. ( a bit like those bad journalist reports that say things like "caffeine can increase your chances of getting cancer by 50%" - without mentioning that this is from a baseline chance of 0.001% so now 0.0015%)

The Guardian is edited and run by the very people who hold on to the Krys doctrine. I know it is hard to grasp for us almost raised on it as a truth teller, it was for me, but the bias is so heavily inbuilt that you will find, if you research it - that they have consistently supported this line (ignoring the real figures and trying to present the Feminist slant on them using % etc) and been the least likely to tell the stories of the falsely accused and wrongly convicted of all the major newspapers.

We need to see these articles and the pressure being put on the CPS for what it is - the "Women as Holy Victims" industry pushing its narrative hard.

*see a soon to be published Guardian article for more lies on Domestic violence, a linchpin of the industry, yet again described as if women were only ever victims and not the perpetrators as they are in roughly 40% of cases, nationwide. ( 52% in Cornwall for some reason!)
 
Last edited:

Roy catchpole

Senior Patron
Verified
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
356
Reaction score
241
Status
Other
Two interesting and informative contributions, Tony and Patrick. Thank you. Keeping the fire alight and stoking the evidence for transformation and change. An encouraging reminder that we are all under the threat of danger from self-righteous bigots and vested interests.
 

Stained Glass

Member
Verified
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
18
Reaction score
14
Status
Other
Yes Tony -
it isn't just the Guardian of course - this is the "Feemenist" (men and women making money out of it) agenda doing its usual misinterpretation - following the standard narrative, pushing the same lying policy it always has...

When all these organisations support the idea that all women are innocent victims, they cannot conceive of the idea that there is another answer as to why their stories are not all leading to successful prosecutions. (they skewed the system so successfully that it is very hard for them to see past their noses to the fact that it has been sabotaged by the 30,000+ new, and not very good at it, false accusers).

The man who spoke of common cause is Liam Allan - and he is pursuing a career in Criminology and changes in the law. He is right of course - in that we victims of failures in the law include all genuine victims
- that is genuine rape victims and genuine false accusation victims. The police have less understanding of what a victim really is than the average Labrador.

However, personally I think he is destined to be upset and disappointed when the FakeFeminists, who dominate the academic side of the legal system, insist that men are fundamentally perpetrators and all women always innocent, (even if they murdered their partner in cold blood) reject his idea of "working together".
They will instead hang on like grim death to the notion that false accusers are vanishingly rare - and all examples given are lies.
In fact I have already seen a Feminist law lecturer insist that just because Liam Allan was found not guilty it doesn't mean that he didn't rape his then girlfriend -
His is a case where 40,000 texts were uncovered from her phone, during the trial, previously hidden by the police but insisted on being revealed by the freelance CPS barrister (Jerry Hayes) that showed texts to him and to her friends revealing she was begging him for "more rough sex", and that "nothing he did was other than what she wanted" - for several weeks after the alleged rape.

The CPS/police were rightly hauled over the coals when it was discovered that they had withheld such evidence in around 70% of (Rape and Serious Sexual Assault) RASSO cases.
DPP Alison Saunders organised a review and "All current RASSO cases were to be studied for evidence failures" - of course once the press mini furore settled down that was reduced, quietly, so a few cases were looked at then dropped ( because they were similarly embarrassing and crooked) and Saunders resigned early to be replaced by Max Hill...
Max is a little determined that the CPS won't be caught out by facts again - hence the CPS have been dropping cases - but actually no more than they did the previous year - the 44% is not a reduction in actual numbers - but a % of the whole of reports made to police...

All this has hardly been reported in the Guardian.

Remember - a massively increased number of these most recent "Failures" were also dropped by the police - so never got the CPS, and these despite the police "believing the victim" and ready to conduct their usual utterly biased "investigation" - The only explanation of why, is that so very many of these reports were so obviously false that even the police felt they could not push them to the CPS

The horrendous Guardian bias is in not showing the ACTUAL figures but just reporting unexamined % - which means no one reading that article will see the leaps over the past few years that I show in my main graph on this site opening post. ( a bit like those bad journalist reports that say things like "caffeine can increase your chances of getting cancer by 50%" - without mentioning that this is from a baseline chance of 0.001% so now 0.0015%)

The Guardian is edited and run by the very people who hold on to the Krys doctrine. I know it is hard to grasp for us almost raised on it as a truth teller, it was for me, but the bias is so heavily inbuilt that you will find, if you research it - that they have consistently supported this line (ignoring the real figures and trying to present the Feminist slant on them using % etc) and been the least likely to tell the stories of the falsely accused and wrongly convicted of all the major newspapers.

We need to see these articles and the pressure being put on the CPS for what it is - the "Women as Holy Victims" industry pushing its narrative hard.

*see a soon to be published Guardian article for more lies on Domestic violence, a linchpin of the industry, yet again described as if women were only ever victims and not the perpetrators as they are in roughly 40% of cases, nationwide. ( 52% in Cornwall for some reason!)
Thanks Pat - I see the Guardian & its journalists as selective, subject to bias and flawed. I'm only a sporadic reader - though I've read some very good stuff in there, including in recent times. I've printed out your response - hoping to start sleeping better & so feel more on top of things & re-read it when at ease.
I know that I (& others) can be overly cautious . I'm also keenly aware that I (& friends/colleagues) can make sweeping condemnations & dismissals during arguments (eg in Brighton around climate change & in NHS campaigning). When I argue in a driven way (in speech or writing) I know that I can sometimes damage my case (either in over-reaching or out of a generalised anger. That's me. I need to come back to your points - and continue to listen & engage.
Tony x
 
Last edited:

Patrick

Barman
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
520
Reaction score
434
Location
Gloucestershire
Status
Acquitted
I am only too aware that my anger (upon discovering that there was and is a huge swathe of modern feminism that is not only faking the idea of equality as a goal - but is happy to raise up the notion* of men being responsible for all ills and women having a status of holy victims), - does not go down well with those of my generation or older who picture Germaine Greer and the equal pay act as true ideas of what Feminism looks like.

It has been a slow and gear grinding change of direction for me, despite the speed of discovery that the legal system had bought into the core idea described above*.

People who do find it hard to accept that Feminism is now more of a major problem than a good thing...are citing all sorts of examples that show this is not exclusively the case - but using exceptional examples is a clue as to why they fail to spot the culture that I am referring to - and how it plays out online in social media and elsewhere.
the failure to deal with facts is all I can use to tackle it - since personal prejudices are never really challenged by other people's experiences and opinions.

The facts on Domestic violence are ones that I would not have believed before working on the Men's group in Cwmbran -and the lovely woman from Torfaen Women's Aid who helped set it up -
something she did because she knew the reality - when she was getting an average of 2 calls per week from male victims who didn't know where to turn.

That reality is that of domestic violence where it is clear that it was started by one partner, national research has the split as 27% female caused, 32% male caused. - the odd area has more male victims than female victims - though nationally more fatalities are women by a ratio of 4 -1
When it comes to the lying about being raped - all the latest figures show that at least 50% of women reporting rape to the police are not telling the truth.

and yet
I sense that the majority of good, right thinking people - even those who are happy to look at the actual government figures - when pushed to look at them are busy finding ways to disbelieve them.
Many men (and it is mainly men) who have chosen to "argue" (generally just contradict) against these figures and the obvious conclusions, are clearly heavily influenced by the repetitive majority backed view that "false accusations are vanishingly rare".
No one has looked at the figures objectively and offered any rational explanation that counters the obvious one I put forward.

This is why I feel like an Atheist in a nation that is religiously feminist.
and just as you can logically destroy 90% of the Biblical stories as obvious BS without winning any argument. - the people who choose to believe the religious view are a larger number than just the devoutly religious...

I have managed to get one law lecturer to concede that the figures are extremely interesting and do point towards disproving the established ideas. - mainly she conceded that the original figures (CSEW and Police) have been trusted and accepted for decades - and it is only now - when the rape reports have jumped by 400% in 5 years that suddenly they are not good enough to use...

I am one of thousands who know the reality from bitter experience - but the Guardian will never report this. - any of this.
 

Roy catchpole

Senior Patron
Verified
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
356
Reaction score
241
Status
Other
Thanks Pat - I see the Guardian & its journalists as selective, subject to bias and flawed. I'm only a sporadic reader - though I've read some very good stuff in there, including in recent times. I've printed out your response - hoping to start sleeping better & so feel more on top of things & re-read it when at ease.
I know that I (& others) can be overly cautious . I'm also keenly aware that I (& friends/colleagues) can make sweeping condemnations & dismissals during arguments (eg in Brighton around climate change & in NHS campaigning). When I argue in a driven way (in speech or writing) I know that I can sometimes damage my case (either in over-reaching or out of a generalised anger. That's me. I need to come back to your points - and continue to listen & engage.
Tony x
You are not alone in this.
 
Top