I am struck by the continued presumption of members of the HS panel and the article on WRAL.com, quoting Prof Joyner from NCCU, that somehow the accuser's statement that a rape occurred should be taken at face value. This should only ever hold if there is physical evidence that a crime actually was committed. Over recent months I am sure we have dicsussed the incidence of false rape accusations, but I decided to check it out again and came up with the following link:
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1719
It seems from the data that false accusations or more specifically falsely identified rapists occur between 25% and 40% per cent of the time. These numbers are somewhat surprising and they do need to be interpreted carefully.
This data clearly suggest that Nifong's rush to judgment cannot be based on the assertion that such false accusations rarely occur. The author of the above commentary clearly indicates that the oft quoted "less than 2% false accusations" has no empirical basis.
This data clearly suggest that Nifong's rush to judgment cannot be based on the assertion that such false accusations rarely occur. The author of the above commentary clearly indicates that the oft quoted "less than 2% false accusations" has no empirical basis.
It was quoted again in an article referenced here earlier:
http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/07122006/nhnews-ph-p-fake.rape.html
Feminism is based on lies, and this is one of the biggest whoppers.
When you consider that so many newspapers get away with printing this discredited factoid by attributing it to a radical feminist and putting quotation marks around it, you get an idea of the sheer magnitude of The Hoax.
It's not just confined to this case.