|
How To Know The Difference Between Real And False Allegations Of Child Molestation And Cild Abuse |
 |
 |
 |
FALSE ALLEGATIONS OF CHILD MOLESTATION AND CHILD ABUSE: WHAT IS REAL AND WHAT ONLY APPEARS TO BE REAL, AND HOW TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE
By: Edward Martinovich, Attorney at Law and Ariella Rosenberg
July 20, 2009 at 4:31 pm
In 1986, a defendant was convicted of four counts of first-degree sexual offense and ordered to serve two life sentences. In 2001, after spending fourteen years in prison, this defendant was released, two years after his daughter, admitted that she had lied about her father molesting her. Although a medical examiner had found no evidence of the defendant’s alleged sexual abuse, the daughters story was so convincing that it held up until she finally admitted to the falsehood. Her excuse: she had lied to escape her strict, religious upbringing. The cost: 14 years of freedom and his reputation. His life was irreparably harmed.
A similar case occurred last year, when, after spending twelve years in prison, the defendant walked free. The defendant had been sentenced to forty years in prison in 1992 for molesting a 3-year-old girl. A few years ago, the alleged victim found out that the defendant was in prison and told a relative that she had been coerced into lying to authorities. Apparently, another relative, who had harbored a long-standing grudge against the defendant, had coached the girl.
Sadly, false accusations of molestation are a frequent reality in the criminal justice system. Besides detracting from credible cases of true sexual abuse, false accusations have put many innocent men and women behind bars, while destroying their families and ruining their lives. The motives for manipulating a child into making a false accusation can range from revenge over a broken relationship to a desire to gain full custody of a child. In cases where there are huge sums of money at stake, or in cases involving celebrities, such as the recent Michael Jackson trial, the motives often include a desire to obtain a financial winfall from a public figure.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Dangerous Myths About Rape |
|
|
|
|
Predators may not look and act like we expect
by Bert Sass
Special Projects Producer - Mar. 24, 2009 10:06 PM
12 News
The most prominent images of rapists as seedy, threatening characters lurking in the dark are far from the truth in most cases. Police and safety experts say, because of these myths, many woman let down their caution at times when they need it most.
Elizabeth Houde, President and CEO of the Arizona Sexual Assault Network (ASAN), says, “When you hear the term sex offender, you'll immediately think of the middle age man who jumped out of a bush, abducted a little girl, raped her and killed her, something along that line.” She says most sex crimes are not committed by that type of person. Rather, she says, “This is someone that's in your family. This is someone that's next door to you that's committing the majority of these crimes.”
Sgt. Jim Starkey, with the Phoenix Police sex crimes unit, estimates 60 to 70 percent of the sexual assaults his detectives investigate involve an assault by someone the victim knew.
Hilary Peele’s case does not happen to fit into that category. But when she was raped in 2004, it dispelled what she believes is the biggest myth: “That it can’t happen to me.” Peele says many women feel that way because they avoid parties and risky places, and stay at home with doors and windows locked. She what she had done the night a stranger broke into her Tempe apartment and raped her.
Peele and Houde point to other myths that are common. Some people think it’s mainly young women who are attacked, but sexual assault can happen to the elderly, to juveniles and even to men. Another myth is that the victim must have done something wrong, either inviting the attack or not being careful enough. Peele says, “I still get questions about what I would have done differently” even though she took all the logical precautions.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
False Sex-Crime Accusations in Michigan: A Minefield |
|
|
|
Posted by marin2008
Monday, 15 June 2009
One of the most devastating things that can happen to someone is to be falsely accused of a sex crime. The negative effects last a lifetime and permeate every aspect of a defendant's existence. Even if the charges are eventually dropped or the defendant is found not guilty of the crime, stigma and mistrust will almost certainly continue to haunt him or her.
If the accused is convicted of the charge in Michigan, he or she will probably be listed and pictured on the Internet on the Public Sex Offender Registry (PSOR) for 25 years or life, and have continued restrictions placed on where he or she can live or work. Offenders listed on the Michigan PSOR are automatically also included in the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website (NSOPW), a service of the US Department of Justice.
Inevitable Loss of Fundamental Rights
Many in the press and legal community believe that those accused of sex crimes automatically face deprivation of the fundamental constitutional right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, the repulsive nature of such a crime makes it difficult to hold your head up and maintain your innocence in the face of public suspicion. Many people react in fear and disgust to a sex crime defendant without thought to the presumption of innocence, and this stigma can even continue beyond a finding of innocence, on the chance that the justice system may have gotten it wrong. |
|
Read more...
|
|
Adam Walsh Act Goes Too Far |
|
|
|
|
Posted on Fri, Apr. 10, 2009
States are facing a July deadline to track sex offenders under a misguided federal law that casts too wide a net and is too harsh toward juveniles.
The Adam Walsh Act - named for a 6-year-old boy abducted and murdered in 1981 - makes it a federal felony for a convicted sex offender to fail to reregister after moving to a new state. It also raises the penalties in many states for offenders who never registered.
The law approved by Congress in 2006 is an effort to monitor more effectively an estimated 100,000 sex offenders who are not living where they registered. Many states, including Pennsylvania, already have sex-offender registries modeled after New Jersey's first-in-the-nation "Megan's Law."
But states are finding the new federal law too cumbersome and costly to comply with. Of the 20 or so states that have submitted plans to Washington, none has been deemed in full compliance. Many others have asked the Justice Department for an extension of one or two years.
States that don't comply with the law risk losing some of their federal crime-prevention grants. Some state officials say the loss of grant money would be far cheaper than the cost of meeting all the new requirements for tracking offenders. California estimates that implementing the new law would cost the state at least an extra $38 million.
Pennsylvania is still reviewing its options, said Chuck Ardo, a spokesman for Gov. Rendell. The state should ask for a delay, to give Congress more time to address numerous concerns with the legislation.
For example, the law requires juvenile sex offenders age 14 or older to be on the registry - possibly for life - with their identities publicized. This provision flies against state laws that generally protect the identities of minors charged with crimes. And it ignores the data showing that juveniles are less likely than adults to commit another sex crime later in life.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
