![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
My friends
Feb. 25th, 2007 12:35 pm1. Xanax
2. Eurax
3. Processed foods
2. Eurax
3. Processed foods
Feb. 25th, 2007
Women tell the truth: Google
Feb. 25th, 2007 07:03 pmGood grief. I tried a simple Google search for any information on the rate of false reports of rape, but any reliable information was utterly swamped by bullshit. What I want is research, not factoids, whining from convicted rapists, conspiracy theories, and - I'm trying to think of a polite way to describe the pandering to men by faux "feminists". *ahem* I think I'll stick to the literature.
I feel dirty.
I think I can already draw some basic conclusions from the research I've got.
1. There is no clear evidence that women frequently make false rape reports. There is some evidence that they do not. But there is no way to say for sure; more research is needed.
2. With no clear evidence that women frequently make false reports, there is no reason to assume that a woman reporting rape is lying. Instead, her claim should be assessed on the basis of the evidence, like any crime report.
3. Statistics on rape reports are frequently distorted to exaggerate the rate of false reports. IMHO, this distortion serves two purposes: to discredit feminism, and to protect rapists.
I feel dirty.
I think I can already draw some basic conclusions from the research I've got.
1. There is no clear evidence that women frequently make false rape reports. There is some evidence that they do not. But there is no way to say for sure; more research is needed.
2. With no clear evidence that women frequently make false reports, there is no reason to assume that a woman reporting rape is lying. Instead, her claim should be assessed on the basis of the evidence, like any crime report.
3. Statistics on rape reports are frequently distorted to exaggerate the rate of false reports. IMHO, this distortion serves two purposes: to discredit feminism, and to protect rapists.
- UK figures from a 2005 Home Office Research Study, A gap or a chasm? Attrition in reported rape cases: "Nine per cent of reported cases were designated false... However, closer analysis of this category applying Home Office counting rules reduces this to three per cent. Even the higher figure is considerably lower than the extent of false reporting estimated by police officers interviewed in this study." [My emphasis] ETA: "... the Home Office guidance on 'no criming' and false complaints in particular was not always followed with cases having neither an admission by the complainant nor strong evidentiary grounds." (Kelly 2010)
- A second paper I found, a report from the Villanova University School of Law, discusses the results of the belief that false reports are common, in the law and in police procedure, but points out: "In fact, there is no good empirical data on false rape complaints either historically or currently... As a scientific matter, the frequency of false rape complaints to police or other legal authorities remains unknown." [My emphasis] (Anderson, Michelle J. The Legacy of the Prompt Complaint Requirement, Corroboration Requirement, and Cautionary Instructions on Campus Sexual Assault. Villanova University School of Law, Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper No. 2004-10, June 2004.)
- A Canadian figure: in a study of rape reports to the Winnebago PD in 1976 and 1977, 27.3% of the cases were labelled "unfounded", but only 5.2% were false reports. (Johnson, Stuart, Rick Linden, and Candice Minch. Attrition in the Processing of Rape Cases. Canadian Journal of Criminology 29 1987.)