When you bring this Charles McDowell project, there are several interesting pieces to it. First, he worked this as a internal type project which was not supposed to be public information. AF OSI intended to utilize the information to prepare their agents for the process of a rape investigation. The study came out around 2014 because of a FOIA request to OSI.
What McDowell looked at...was rapes reported within the Air Force for the period of 1980-1984 (a period that I was in the AF as well). He collected the records to 1,218 reported rapes on AF locations (in the US and overseas). In the end, he concluded that 460 cases were legit...546 are unresolved (meaning you could conclude nothing), and 212 were false accusations (meaning that the story was made up, or that evidence simply didn’t support the accusation).
If you go out and talk to people from this period and knew of associates in trouble like this....alcohol tended to always be part of the story.
Yes. I posted the McDowell factors in the previous vanity. See below.
Notice how many seem to be in play in the Kavanaugh accusations:
Factors:
Physical injuries of false accusers usually are limited to superficial cuts, scratches, and abrasions. Scratches often appear in a hatching or crosshatching pattern, due to repeated attempts to make the scratches visible. Scratches that resemble letters or words sometimes are found on false accusers, typically on their abdomens, but are not found on actual victims.
False accusers frequently claim that they offered vigorous and continuing physical resistance but suffered no serious reprisals. Most actual rape victims do not offer vigorous resistance, and those who do often suffer extremely brutal reprisals
A false accusation typically solves some perceived problem for the victim. It may explain a pregnancy or venereal disease, or it may exact revenge. In contrast, actual rapes seldom appear to solve a problem. They usually create serious problems.
False accusers usually do not make their allegations initially to authorities. Typically they make them to friends or relatives who in turn inform the authorities.
False victims, more often than actual ones, claim to have been raped by strangers.
False accusers, much more often that actual ones, claim to have been attacked by multiple assailants who fit an unsavory stereotype.
False accusers typically claim to have been victims of simple penile insertions, or blitz rapes, without collateral sexual activity.
False accusers tend to be vague on the details, but when a false victim does provide details she tends to do so with a relish that actual victims seldom have.
False accusers, far more frequently than actual victims, cannot say exactly where the rape occurred.
In false accusation cases, far more frequently than in actual cases, the purported crime scene and the physical evidence are found to be inconsistent with the allegation
False accusers, more often than actual victims, claim to have received phone calls from their rapists before or after the crime.
False accusers, more often than actual victims, have personal problems, including difficulty in interpersonal relationships and a history of lying and exaggeration.
CONCLUSIONS
False allegations of rape are frequently not recognized as such by investigators and are almost totally neglected in the professional literature. The reason for this seems obvious, these are acts which are designed to appear plausible. The key to understanding false allegations lies in determining how the false allegation “helps” the claimant manipulate, control or recoup. Therefore, it is the context in which the allegation occurs that provides the framework for understanding the dynamics of the case. It is also important to remember that many of the defense mechanisms used in false allegations may also be found in genuine rapes. A final word of caution: even those who are emotionally prone to make a false allegation can be raped. Basic principles of police professionalism require that officers who investigate rapes remain objective and compassionate, otherwise the veracity of an allegation may never be known.