Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 6:09:08 GMT -5
The subject of false accusations is generally a red herring. In reality false accusations, ie those with a malicious intent are very uncommon. A higher percentage eminate from persons with some forms of mental health issues. Then there are those which are false alarms but were made with good intent, ie a genuine concern over some matter which investigation later proved to have an innocent explanation. Taking all these things into consideration I would guestimate that CD's 5% is not too far away from the truth. Is your percentage (or CDs) based on false charges as a percentage of total charges laid, or does it include false allegations where no charges are laid? Do you count multiple charges as 1 false allegation or as multiple false allegations? For example, false allegations are often made around messy divorce/estrangement cases, but no charges are laid. My guesstimate (based upon recollections from my experience) is based upon "complaints made." No proceedings should arise from the categories I mentioned, ie the 5 or so per cent, other than some of the malicious complaints (against the complainer!). Of the remaining 95% I would estimate that anything up to half (very roughly) do not proceed beyond the enquiry stage due to insufficient evidence or other limiting factors. The false alarm- good intent factor is very common generally speaking with other suspicious matters, but with csa the set up over here is pretty good at eliminating them before the reporting stage. A few years back I saw a report that stated less than 7% of "reported" rape cases actually resulted in court proceedings. I don't know further details though. Regarding your divorce question. These are normally proceeded through the civil courts where muck slinging is common place. This should not be mixed in with criminal procedural matters which are entirely diofferent. Criminal allegations made during divorce proceedings are largely ignored with regards to criminal prosecution. They are merely elastications of the truth conjured up, with the assistance of lawyers, to justify a divorce and in the past to secure greater amounts of alimony/division of property etc. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 6:11:31 GMT -5
The subject of false accusations is generally a red herring. In reality false accusations, ie those with a malicious intent are very uncommon. A higher percentage eminate from persons with some forms of mental health issues. Then there are those which are false alarms but were made with good intent, ie a genuine concern over some matter which investigation later proved to have an innocent explanation. Taking all these things into consideration I would guestimate that CD's 5% is not too far away from the truth. We need to be thinking about the damage 19 perpetrators can do while we wring our hands over the possibility of one false accusation. Careful JO. You're thinking! Do that again and you might get a ban from posting for a while! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 6:42:42 GMT -5
Is your percentage (or CDs) based on false charges as a percentage of total charges laid, or does it include false allegations where no charges are laid? Do you count multiple charges as 1 false allegation or as multiple false allegations? For example, false allegations are often made around messy divorce/estrangement cases, but no charges are laid. My guesstimate (based upon recollections from my experience) is based upon "complaints made." No proceedings should arise from the categories I mentioned, ie the 5 or so per cent, other than some of the malicious complaints (against the complainer!). Of the remaining 95% I would estimate that anything up to half (very roughly) do not proceed beyond the enquiry stage due to insufficient evidence or other limiting factors. The false alarm- good intent factor is very common generally speaking with other suspicious matters, but with csa the set up over here is pretty good at eliminating them before the reporting stage. A few years back I saw a report that stated less than 7% of "reported" rape cases actually resulted in court proceedings. I don't know further details though. Regarding your divorce question. These are normally proceeded through the civil courts where muck slinging is common place. This should not be mixed in with criminal procedural matters which are entirely diofferent. Criminal allegations made during divorce proceedings are largely ignored with regards to criminal prosecution. They are merely elastications of the truth conjured up, with the assistance of lawyers, to justify a divorce and in the past to secure greater amounts of alimony/division of property etc. My understanding is that false allegations of child abuse (not necessarily CSA) most commonly arise from a spouse in the separation stage for custody reasons. Young children claiming falsely to be victims is extremely low. Of the few false allegations, they are more likely to come from older complainants with, as ram, points out, a malicious intent against the alleged offender. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 7:39:53 GMT -5
We need to be thinking about the damage 19 perpetrators can do while we wring our hands over the possibility of one false accusation. Careful JO. You're thinking! Do that again and you might get a ban from posting for a while! What a thought! We live a very complex world in which we do need to think again. Many countries in the world have abolished the death penalty for murder because of pressure from organisations like amnesty international who focussed on the possibility of one innocent person being wrongfully exected. It is said that one innocent execution is one too many. The result is that many found guilty of murder are given life sentences and some of are released after serving their sentences only to commit murder again. So to protect those who may be falsely accused, others who are guilty may escape proper punishment only to offend again - recidivism. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 7:45:59 GMT -5
Careful JO. You're thinking! Do that again and you might get a ban from posting for a while! What a thought! We live a very complex world in which we do need to think again. Many countries in the world have abolished the death penalty for murder because of pressure from organisations like amnesty international who focussed on the possibility of one innocent person being wrongfully exected. It is said that one innocent execution is one too many. The result is that many found guilty of murder are given life sentences and some of are released after serving their sentences only to commit murder again. So to protect those who may be falsely accused, others who are guilty may escape proper punishment only to offend again - recidivism. Consider yourself cautioned Partaker! As self appointed "Thinking Moderator" I have decided to warn you that a further example of thinking on your part will earn you a temporary ban from posting. Further examples of thinking may result in a permanent ban. Partaker, do not partake in thinking on this board! |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 20, 2012 8:46:26 GMT -5
Are there legal ramifications for making a false report or accusation?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 8:53:33 GMT -5
Are there legal ramifications for making a false report or accusation? As far as I know, there is no direct criminal law against a false accusation. The law really protects people who report because they are required to report "suspicions" so it is understood that there may be no substance to it. There are a few possible ramifications that I know of. From the criminal perspective you could be subject to Obstruction of Justice and if it goes to a trial you could face Perjury. The most likely jeopardy is from the Civil side. Filing a false report could result in civil damages to the falsely accused person who could file a civil suit and obtain monetary damages against the complainant. I doubt that the law system will ever properly address false accusations as the outcome would likely severely reduce true accusations from people who fear a bungled prosecution. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 20, 2012 9:07:57 GMT -5
uihhhh.... you might want to look that up.... What do you think the twins were charged with?
Most places there is a law about filing a false report.
|
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 20, 2012 9:37:41 GMT -5
A number of years ago a 50+ year old farmer was accused of sexual molestation by a granddaughter. The local newspaper ran the story on the front page.
Many who knew the man could just not believe it. He went about his daily life as if the story did not exist and most around him did the same.
About a week later on an inside page (perhaps 4) the newspaper ran a one inch article that local man was falsely accused.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 11:06:22 GMT -5
Are there legal ramifications for making a false report or accusation? In my country it is a criminal offence to deliberately and knowingly make false reports of a crime. These may be maliciously made against another person or reporting a "theft" etc in order to con insurance companies etc. There are many other examples. It centres on wasting police time by causing them to make undue enquiries and rendering the lieges liable to suspicion. There must be malicious, mischievous or criminal intent. Other countries will have similar laws I'm sure. It is not against the law to make reports in good faith, even if one's suspicions are later proved to be completely unfounded. It happens all the time and is not to be discouraged. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 20, 2012 11:35:55 GMT -5
In the interests of ballance, does anyone know of cases where accusations of child sexual offending amongst friends and workers has proven to be unfounded? Frankly I find it frustrating that apologists for the status quo are more concerned about "false accusations" and "gossip" than protecting children from the sexual predators amongst us. Some years ago I worked with one of the friends who was falsely accused and ultimately cleared of all charges against him. In fact, it was Googl-ing concerning that incident that first led me to the TMB. The point I would make in his case is that adequate disclosure policies would not have hurt him any more than he was hurt by gossip and suspicion surrounding the case. Honest disclosure would have been better than the rumour and innuendo that surrounded him for about two years. Basically, his life was hell during that time, but mainly for reasons that have nothing to do with the friends; he was not allowed near his other children until he was eventually cleared. After the friends learn how to deal with CSA, the next step is to learn how to deal with forgiveness of the offender and where possible, rehabilitation of the offender. I believe they won't get to the second stage until they get past the first. Wasn't there a professing man who had false allegations on him more then once? I thought one of those in the twins' case had been hit twice with false allegations of CSA? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 11:38:28 GMT -5
uihhhh.... you might want to look that up.... What do you think the twins were charged with? Most places there is a law about filing a false report. Whoops you're right, there is specific charge for that. Apparently it can be a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the jurisdiction. I think my statement stands though with regard to CSA reporting. Suspicions are supposed to be reported and there are laws to protect reporters should the suspicions turn out to be nothing. However, there is no doubt that criminal charges would come up with there was false information given.....I would have expected that to be considered Obstruction of Justice which is basically "lying to the cops".....and so is "filing a false police report". |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 20, 2012 11:48:31 GMT -5
What a thought! We live a very complex world in which we do need to think again. Many countries in the world have abolished the death penalty for murder because of pressure from organisations like amnesty international who focussed on the possibility of one innocent person being wrongfully exected. It is said that one innocent execution is one too many. The result is that many found guilty of murder are given life sentences and some of are released after serving their sentences only to commit murder again. So to protect those who may be falsely accused, others who are guilty may escape proper punishment only to offend again - recidivism. Consider yourself cautioned Partaker! As self appointed "Thinking Moderator" I have decided to warn you that a further example of thinking on your part will earn you a temporary ban from posting. Further examples of thinking may result in a permanent ban. Partaker, do not partake in thinking on this board! Sheesh! Ram! You sent me down the hall 2 doors on the right when you accused me of "thinking".....seems unfair that I can continue to "think" but Partaker isn't allowed!  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 20, 2012 11:51:33 GMT -5
uihhhh.... you might want to look that up.... What do you think the twins were charged with? Most places there is a law about filing a false report. Scott's correct on this....in this area people who file a malicious-type of false allegations can end up in jail for a short stay and other times have had to pay a fine.... And in the Twins' case their false allegations made it imperative that they get psychololgical help... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 11:54:11 GMT -5
Over here they call the crime "Public Mischief."
|
|
jwatt
Senior Member
Posts: 211
|
Post by jwatt on Apr 20, 2012 13:29:41 GMT -5
I would hope this would be the first step, protect those children, while waiting to see if someone is guilty of this offence. There appears to be more concern for the guilty and to keep this quiet. If not found guilty then it has to b a huge relief for all concerned but at least children would be kept safe in the meantime. Thank you very much, John, for saying that! If the workers like yourself could be the very ones who start all this "caring of the children" without being punished for it by the rogue rulers of the workership, then the fellowship would certainly become a much more pleasant place for anyone to be. Im not John!! Just thought I better correct that! |
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2012 13:55:49 GMT -5
uihhhh.... you might want to look that up.... What do you think the twins were charged with? Most places there is a law about filing a false report. I think the key question is whether the false report is made in good faith. In our province the law says "reasonable grounds" are required to report (going from memory here). Later- Oops. I see ram said the same, must be right then. |
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2012 14:05:33 GMT -5
Thank you very much, John, for saying that! If the workers like yourself could be the very ones who start all this "caring of the children" without being punished for it by the rogue rulers of the workership, then the fellowship would certainly become a much more pleasant place for anyone to be. Im not John!! Just thought I better correct that! One way to correct that would be a better handle. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2012 14:09:04 GMT -5
A number of years ago a 50+ year old farmer was accused of sexual molestation by a granddaughter. The local newspaper ran the story on the front page. Many who knew the man could just not believe it. He went about his daily life as if the story did not exist and most around him did the same. About a week later on an inside page (perhaps 4) the newspaper ran a one inch article that local man was falsely accused. In a very sad case here, a high school teacher committed suicide on the basis of allegations that subsequently turned out to be vindictive and false on the part of several students. |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 20, 2012 14:56:52 GMT -5
We need to be thinking about the damage 19 perpetrators can do while we wring our hands over the possibility of one false accusation. Well, hang on. While I agree in principle about that not being the main determinant, you can't just ignore this either. That '1 in 20' credible but false allegation can be incredibly devastating to the person who has lived through it. While publicity is necessary to protect children, due diligence has to be exercised in invoking disclosure procedures, and care has to be taken to explain that charges don't mean that the person is guilty. Incidentally, in this NZ case have charges been laid? What is the recommendation in the guidelines regarding disclosure if allegations have been made and no charges laid? This situation occurs frequently, I believe. Hey WHAT, I suggested we need to be thinking and you come back with: "Well, hang on." So you're thinking that thinking is a bad idea??? I think (if that's OK?) that I have as much compassion as anyone for the falsely accused. In posting as I did, I had in mind (oops, that's sort of like thinking) the persistent hand-wringing by a few on this board who are so fearful of a false accusation that they would have us do nothing about the child sexual abuse that causes so much hurt to vulnerable people in our fellowship. I would like everyone in the fellowship to understand that child sexual abuse is evil and not acceptable amongst us. We need to "think" about how that could be achieved. |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 20, 2012 15:24:34 GMT -5
This man was recommended to us and in our consultations with him we have found him to be excellent; knowledgeable and helpful. Why would we need to consult further with a person who uses this thread to recommend herself? Perhaps it is also worth mentioning that our ministry also has communication with a member of the section of the New Zealand police force who is involved CSA matters. There are several reasons to consider working with Lynn C: First, she has experience in the culture of the 2x2s, which your current experts may not have. Second, she would have insights into the female psych that a male consultant may not have, especially into the 2x2 female psych. Third, when consulting with professionals, it helps to have a range of expertise in a subject. Most professionals will have a variety of points in agreement, a rouge professional will not. This way, you would know if you are receiving the most and the best current information available. As to why you should be willing to discuss the matter in an above-board manner: First, to demonstrate your care and concern for things being done in an informed and well-intentioned manner. Second, to show that you understand that serious matters like CSA are a concern for all, and cannot be hidden. Third, you will be legally advised to do these things. Fourth, you have always been a pioneering-type worker and now is a time to show that you can be a pioneer in communicating with everyone on serious matters for the 2x2s. |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 20, 2012 15:26:55 GMT -5
A number of years ago a 50+ year old farmer was accused of sexual molestation by a granddaughter. The local newspaper ran the story on the front page. Many who knew the man could just not believe it. He went about his daily life as if the story did not exist and most around him did the same. About a week later on an inside page (perhaps 4) the newspaper ran a one inch article that local man was falsely accused. In a very sad case here, a high school teacher committed suicide on the basis of allegations that subsequently turned out to be vindictive and false on the part of several students. Very sad. The students invovled should be asked "which of your parents - mom or dad - do you want locked up and never to be seen by you again?" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 15:29:06 GMT -5
Consider yourself cautioned Partaker! As self appointed "Thinking Moderator" I have decided to warn you that a further example of thinking on your part will earn you a temporary ban from posting. Further examples of thinking may result in a permanent ban. Partaker, do not partake in thinking on this board! Sheesh! Ram! You sent me down the hall 2 doors on the right when you accused me of "thinking".....seems unfair that I can continue to "think" but Partaker isn't allowed! ;D Well sharonw, that is my luck of the draw.  |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 20, 2012 16:26:29 GMT -5
You and anyone else who has interest in the issue you raise need only reread the posts that Lynn C has made in this thread and read posts she makes under the other poster name she uses and you'll be able to understand why she is unable to be of any help to our ministry. What is that other poster name? |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 20, 2012 16:42:44 GMT -5
What is that other poster name? I respect other posters wish for anonymity but you won't need too many brains to be able to work what her other poster identity is. Or perhaps you already know and are just 'testing' and 'playing (tmb) games' with me? Lots of 'interesting' techniques and games played on TMB!  Okay, following that lead I will not ask Lynn C what other name she might be using. I have not recognized any posts under another name that might have been written by Lynn C. So, apparently I am short of whatever amount of brains needed to recognize that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2012 17:10:14 GMT -5
Steffan, I cannot verify for you whether the said elder is still taking the meetings in his own home, or not. I do not know which case you are talking about. I do know that in some instances in NZ, where an elder has been guilty of some misdemeanour, that the meeting has been left in his home, but someone else steps in to give out the hymns. In one case I know of, a relative of a “guilty elder” told me that elder was not to take meetings in his home for a certain length of time, and in that time the workers in the area were to attend each week, so that the friends would not suspect any untoward behaviour having taken place! A certain humility WAS present for a few weeks, apparently. But later an even more tragic event that took place in that home came to light later, that has caused a lot of heartache, and has never been resolved in a satisfactory way. Punishment of that sort seems to miss the point somehow. To be honest, I find your other questions, while more general, equally as profound. Many here feel that since "his co-helper died a few years back", that fear of man has been playing an increasingly larger role, along with a certain lack of fear of man....a feeling of, I stand above it all, untouchable. The independent observation definitely has some truth in it. We know here of several situations where no action has been taken, for such reasons as..." It could affect his children if I put him out", or " His wife has enough to suffer, and she would suffer more if we took the meeting away" , or "The person with the misdemeanour has a difficult nature". And such reasons are reasons enough to do nothing We are living in scary times here. So- why doesn’t he act ? Out of fear? Out of caution? Out of wisdom? Out of pride? We cannot judge that completely. Or is there a complacent feeling that most friends will be nobly loyal whatever? Simon, I think I should clarify now that the man concerned, while still having the meeting in his home, is not actually taking that meeting. I am satisfied that this is correct. This contradicts what I mentioned in my opening post when I said he was still operating as 'elder'. I owe everybody here an apology for getting that point wrong at the outset. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 20, 2012 17:10:14 GMT -5
Thank you very much, John, for saying that! If the workers like yourself could be the very ones who start all this "caring of the children" without being punished for it by the rogue rulers of the workership, then the fellowship would certainly become a much more pleasant place for anyone to be. Im not John!! Just thought I better correct that! Sorry, J! But with a handle of "jwatt" you're apt to get mistaken more then once! |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 20, 2012 17:17:49 GMT -5
Well, hang on. While I agree in principle about that not being the main determinant, you can't just ignore this either. That '1 in 20' credible but false allegation can be incredibly devastating to the person who has lived through it. While publicity is necessary to protect children, due diligence has to be exercised in invoking disclosure procedures, and care has to be taken to explain that charges don't mean that the person is guilty. Incidentally, in this NZ case have charges been laid? What is the recommendation in the guidelines regarding disclosure if allegations have been made and no charges laid? This situation occurs frequently, I believe. Hey WHAT, I suggested we need to be thinking and you come back with: "Well, hang on." So you're thinking that thinking is a bad idea??? I think (if that's OK?) that I have as much compassion as anyone for the falsely accused. In posting as I did, I had in mind (oops, that's sort of like thinking) the persistent hand-wringing by a few on this board who are so fearful of a false accusation that they would have us do nothing about the child sexual abuse that causes so much hurt to vulnerable people in our fellowship. I would like everyone in the fellowship to understand that child sexual abuse is evil and not acceptable amongst us. We need to "think" about how that could be achieved. It likely should be brought down to the "thinking" that which party is going to be able to get over and handle the fall out the best. That said I know how devastating false allegations can be for those who are under that issue....it isn't an easy road to walk for sure...and I have known of several here in this area that have been put on administrative leave and due to the issue not being cleared very quickly, they lost their jobs entirely....though AFTER the fact, their previous boss did write a letter of apology and reccommendation. Sometimes, esp. in this day and age when there are so many people out of work due to the financial crisis that has extended over a lot of the world, I think employers are a bit quicker to get rid of someone who "may" turn out to be a problem....the employee is too east to replace these days. So CSA isn't a pretty picture however one looks at it. It turns people's lives upside down.....perhaps the other prisoners in prison that are not very gracious to convicted CSA Perps know more about what should be done, eh? It WAS a stoning offense in the OT! I think if people who have that propensity REALLY would research what can happen to you if you're found guilty of this crime....then maybe they could keep their evil propensity under wraps....or one would hope, eh? |
|
;D
