Do false accusers get off far too lightly?

[summer2007]

First off as you might have guessed I totally hate false accusers I think they are some of the lowest scum on earth.

I had an incident a long time ago in school where two guys falsely accused me of something that could have got me expelled. Well after putting me and my family through hell for 2 months is was proven that it was a total LIE!

I never even got an apology from anyone and the guys that accused me did not get punished at all.

I learned that someone can accuse you of anything really and it can be 100% a lie and it can still go so far.

The worst part is that at any point these guys could have called the whole thing off but instead got up every day and lied about something that could have got me expelled for two months. I just can't forgive someone for doing that. This to me is totally criminal and is such a horrible thing to do to someone.


I remember seeing a show one time that had this guy sue his doctor for supposedly paralyzing him. Well they brought video of the guy that was supposed to be paralyzed into court that showed him working on his roof or something!

Now when they showed the video the guy that was pretending to be paralyzed got up and walked out of the courtroom.

As disgusting as this is you have yet to hear the really disgusting part.

This was PERFECTLY LEGAL to do this to this poor doctor! Think of what he put him through and also he was probably suing for millions. So in effect he was attempting to steal millions but there is no penalty for this!

I had a neighbor that tried this kind of garbage as a hobby...and she never spent one day in jail.


If you pay attention to the news stories there is many many examples of false accusations that ruin peoples lives and are totally unpunished or even rewarded.

Look at the runaway bride......she got community service...and you know what else?? $500,000 for the movie rights!

What about that Duke Lacrosse girl?? She is for sure serving 20 to life for that right?? Nope no charges were even filed on her and she finished college and got a book deal out of it.

Too many other examples to list of people's lives being turned into total hell over someones malicious lies.

I mean lies like this can put you in prison financially ruin you drive you to suicide just to name a few things but most of the time it's treated as no big deal. Heck the person falsely accusing you gets far more sympathy that you do! After all they are the "victim".

My big question is that maybe it's just me that finds false accusations this offensive. I have never sued anyone or even called the police on anyone in my life....neither have my parents. But maybe I'm alone in feeling this way about false accusers so I thought I would put up a poll.

I'm sure I will get complaints on the choices I gave for the poll but I tried.

Jim

 

[ziggy29]

If you knowingly and willingly lie to the police in accusing someone of something you know they didn't do, you should be faced with the same criminal penalty the accused would be facing if they were convicted.

The one problem area here is when a child accuses you of something "inappropriate," maybe because they were mad at you for some reason. You can't really sentence a 6-year-old to 20 years in prison and put them on the sex offender registry for life.

 

[freebird5825]

I personally saw a lot of this going on in a divorce. Enough said.
The accused's ace in the hole was me. I was able to speak to one of the authorities in receipt of the complaints and illuminated them about a few key facts I had personally witnessed regarding the accusers.
My credentials were tough to beat.
No false charges were sustained. Happy ending all around...
There were no repurcussions to the accuser, nor were any admonishments done, to my knowledge. This needs to change.

 

[Martha]

Repeated false accusers sometimes get it on perjury. Or for making a false crime report (if it was a lie about a crime). Or sued for fraud.

Back when I was first a lawyer the judges told me about a couple of people the police knew who repeatedly would make false crime reports. Their problems were mental health problems. The police said if they did it again they would be arrested. I wondered about that; you know, the cry wolf problem.

 

[Westernskies]

Hey, be careful-what you are proposing here would be detrimental to the Reverend Al Sharpton's ability to make a living, Summer2007... and we sure don't want the taxpayers supporting him in the style to which he has become accustomed.

 

[FIREd]

Are there any strong defamation laws in this country? (Pardon my ignorance...) I know that in some parts of Europe at least you'd have to think twice before publicly accusing someone of wrongdoing without solid proof backing up your accusations. I rarely see defamation suits here, so that's why I am asking. I know that in some legal systems, the burden of proof falls on the defamation victim, i.e. the victim has to prove the falsehood of the accusation.

 

[Martha]

Are there any strong defamation laws in this country? (Pardon my ignorance...) I know that in some parts of Europe at least you'd have to think twice before publicly accusing someone of wrongdoing without solid proof backing up your accusations. I rarely see defamation suits here, so that's why I am asking. I know that in some legal systems, the burden of proof falls on the defamation victim, i.e. the victim has to prove the falsehood of the accusation.

When you are talking about the civil system in most places the burden of proof falls on the person bringing the claim. So, if you claim someone defamed you it is up to you to prove the elements of defamation, including that the statement was not true. The standard in most states in the US is a negligence standard, that the person who made the untrue statement knew or should have known in the exercise of reasonable care that the statement was untrue. However, if you are a public figure you instead have to show that the false statement was made with actual malice.

Most often you have to prove you were actually damaged as well, though there are some exceptions.

Test next week.

 

[FIREd]

Thanks Martha, that explains why you don't hear much about defamation lawsuits here.

So let's imagine the following scenario:

You lay off a bunch of people and one of them feels disgruntled. That person wants revenge and starts circulating rumors in the community, falsely accusing you of rape which allegedly happened several years ago. That person "did not go to the police or to a doctor" at the time because of fears of losing his/her job. Therefore there are no physical evidence of a "crime", just a case of he said she said. In cases like these, people are quick to make a moral judgment and few would risk siding with a potential rapist. As a result of these accusations, you lose your job, your spouse and your good name even though you have never committed or even been convicted of a crime. If I understand well, the only recourse to clear your name is to prove that rape did not happen years ago while the alleged victim does not have to provide any information to support the veracity of his/her accusations? How can you possibly prove that rape did not happen in this case?

 

[freebird5825]

Thanks Martha, that explains why you don't hear much about defamation lawsuits here.

So let's imagine the following scenario:

You lay off a bunch of people and one of them feels disgruntled. That person wants revenge and starts circulating rumors in the community, falsely accusing you of rape which allegedly happened several years ago. That person "did not go to the police or to a doctor" at the time because of fears of losing his/her job. Therefore there are no physical evidence of a "crime", just a case of he said she said. In cases like these, people are quick to make a moral judgment and few would risk siding with a potential rapist. As a result of these accusations, you lose your job, your spouse and your good name even though you have never committed or even been convicted of a crime. If I understand well, the only recourse to clear your name is to prove that rape did not happen years ago while the alleged victim does not have to provide any information to support the veracity of his/her accusations? How can you possibly prove that rape did not happen in this case?

I'll take an ameteur's shot at this.
My guess is in the absence of physical evidence of the alleged crime, no formal charges could be filed. However, an investigation might be opened if the police were convinced a crime really happened. The accuser would have to give details about time, location, method, motive, etc. and be consistent in the description.
Or be related to the police or judge or DA.
As far as character defamation caused directly by a false accusation, I don't see how anyone could protect themselves unless they had a bulletproof alibi for the date/time/location the accuser stated the crime occurred. Common receipts and transaction records (like ATMs) would help if not too much time had passed.
LE and legal FIREees - how did I do?

 

[Darryl]

Favorite one for me personally was about ten years ago. I had a supplier not doing her job. She called me while I was holding a staff meeting and I covered my concerns about her performance. After the meeting I called her supervisors to bring them up to speed and they said they were coming to my place the next day and we could discuss it then.
They came in the next day and were concerned about all the things I had said to her ( I don't remember if she accused me of making a pass at her or if it was all slurs that would equate to unemployment) but they barely started presenting their concerns and I got this big smile and they looked surprised and stopped talking.
I said I don't care if you guys fire her or not but she will never set foot in this building again.
They were dumbfounded.
I told them I was holding a staff meeting when she called none of the things she claimed had ever happened and I would be willing to sit right in the chair I was in while they interviewed all eight people who were in the meeting (4 men & 4 women). They folded up their notebooks said that wouldn't be necessary and left.

 

[Shawn]

What about that Duke Lacrosse girl?? She is for sure serving 20 to life for that right?? Nope no charges were even filed on her and she finished college and got a book deal out of it.

The primary reasons for not prosecuting Crystal Magnum were that: 1) she was severely mentally disturbed; and 2) sending her to prison wouldn't be fair to her children. It's important that we don't separate children from mothers who are so psychotic that they create bizarre fantasies in their head about being gang raped.

 

[haha]

The primary reasons for not prosecuting Crystal Magnum were that: 1) she was severely mentally disturbed; and 2) sending her to prison wouldn't be fair to her children. It's important that we don't separate children from mothers who are so psychotic that they create bizarre fantasies in their head about being gang raped.

Absolutely. How else would this socially useful behavior repetoire be reliably passed on?

Ha

 

[tryan]

I like the Brits legal system where "loser pays the winner". Idea being, the loser of a legal suit pays the winner for legal costs. So when a frivalous law suit settles in favor of the defendent the fool who brought it on eats the defense legal costs.

When you know you're innocent ... sky's the limit. Such a law can really cut thru the BS we see in the court system.

 

[Darryl]

First time I went to small claims court, as I filed the papers the clerk asked how I wanted the papers served.
I asked if the loser had to pay costs, she said yes and I said send them the most expensive way you can (personal service with the sheriffs deputies).
I had a slam dunk case which I won against an out of control megacorp it felt a little better jacking up the cost of their loss after the way they had been so unreasonable with my polite attempts.

 

[samclem]

I like the Brits legal system where "loser pays the winner".

Sounds good, and I like some aspects of it, but there are problems when the sides are grossly mismatched. For example, say Megacorp ruins my credit rating by reporting incorrect payment info to the credit reporting agencies. They won't do anything to fix the problem. So, I incur costs of about $10K to clean up te mess--hire an accountant and an attorney, collect statements from various parties and have them sent to the credit reporting agencies, etc. Okay, I'd like to recover that $10k from Megacorp, so I consider suing them. I think I've got a great case, but they could easily show that they put ten lawyers and accountants on the case for 40 hours each, which puts their cost at about $60,000. Truth is, these guys are on their staff anyway, and this job can be handled easily between their other big work--Megacorp pays relatively little for this case. When they are done, they'll have a very polished presentation with tons of case law to cite, charts, graphs, etc. There I stand with my single lawyer and my manila folder. If I lose, I pay them $60K plus I am still out the $10K I spent. Is it worth the risk? Does this further the cause of justice?

We need some basic criteria to prevent frivolous lawsuits, but loser pays isn't a good fit for all situatons.

 

[Martha]

Sounds good, and I like some aspects of it, but there are problems when the sides are grossly mismatched. For example, say Megacorp ruins my credit rating by reporting incorrect payment info to the credit reporting agencies. They won't do anything to fix the problem. So, I incur costs of about $10K to clean up te mess--hire an accountant and an attorney, collect statements from various parties and have them sent to the credit reporting agencies, etc. Okay, I'd like to recover that $10k from Megacorp, so I consider suing them. I think I've got a great case, but they could easily show that they put ten lawyers and accountants on the case for 40 hours each, which puts their cost at about $60,000. Truth is, these guys are on their staff anyway, and this job can be handled easily between their other big work--Megacorp pays relatively little for this case. When they are done, they'll have a very polished presentation with tons of case law to cite, charts, graphs, etc. There I stand with my single lawyer and my manila folder. If I lose, I pay them $60K plus I am still out the $10K I spent. Is it worth the risk? Does this further the cause of justice?

We need some basic criteria to prevent frivolous lawsuits, but loser pays isn't a good fit for all situatons.

The "English Rule" where the loser pays the other side's attorney fees is thought to be a deterrent to the small guy bringing suits (both solid claims and frivolous claims) in countries where that rule applies, like the UK and Canada.

 

[summer2007]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

It looks like the majority of people on here 90% feel the way I do about false accusers....but society and the legal system pretty much lets them off with nothing.


Freebird

In a sane world you would think you would need proof but someone's word is enough to put you in prison or ruin your life in other ways.

Darryl

You could have easily been fired from your job or worse and I bet the lady that falsely accused you got away with nothing or came out ahead!


The way it works now if you file a false malpractice lawsuit for 5 million it's perfectly legal. But if you attempt to rob a bank you go to prison for a decade.

And if you falsely accuse someone of a sex crime and ruin their life or put them in prison you can expect no punishment at all.....and you get to remain anonymous!

But if you pee in public you will be on a sex offender registry!

Jim

 

[ziggy29]

The way it works now if you file a false malpractice lawsuit for 5 million it's perfectly legal. But if you attempt to rob a bank you go to prison for a decade.

And if you falsely accuse someone of a sex crime and ruin their life or put them in prison you can expect no punishment at all.....and you get to remain anonymous!

But if you pee in public you will be on a sex offender registry!

I trust you've been following that alleged rape and kidnapping case in Tennessee where the alleged victim was rescued by a pizza delivery guy?

 

[BunsGettingFirm]

When dates falsely accuse me of something, I always say, "Yes, you're right. I did take you to McDonald's, and we did split a $1 Meal." That usually ends any false accuser's taste for continuing with the accusation.

As for people in school, work, or other competitive situation, I make sure that I get the reputation out there that I'm willing to go any length to make your life a misery. Most of these types just need to be shown where the boundaries are, and the longer you take to show them the boundaries, the more they take, so it's actually nicer for both you and them to step on them early.

 

[summer2007]

Ziggy


I did not hear anything about that story. I will have to go look it up.

I really hate the "news" I just ended up being exposed to so much of it because one of my family members was pretty much addicted to it and had it on just about every waking hour! And would not even turn it off if you asked to talk...you would have to wait for a commercial!

Lucky for me my family member found the digital music stations on cable and has been watching that instead....which has been like a half ass deliverance for me!

So I have not seen or heard much news lately.


But I always listened closely when someone is accused of something. Almost always when the accusations are proven to be lies the false accuser is not punished and usually not even NAMED! The innocent person who was put through hell is lucky to get a 1 minute spot on tv or a 1 paragraph article buried in the back of the newspaper. After the media made a mint off of putting this persons name and face on tv as a murderer or rapist or whatever.

It's one crime that destroys lives that is pretty much perfectly legal.