Rape-Rape

Image via Wikipedia

No, this isn’t a post about Roman Polanski (except, I guess, now his name’s in the post, so it sort of is). It’s a post about rape — real rape versus false allegations of rape, like the one that happened recently at Hofstra University, where a woman had sex with a group of men in a bathroom and then claimed rape, only to recant her charges when a cell-phone video surfaced apparently showing the sex was consensual.

Over at Slate, Emily Bazelon and Rachael Larimore ask the question: “How often do women falsely cry rape?” What’s more, they ask why it’s so hard to come up with solid numbers in answer to their first question. While estimates of false rape reports seem to range from the politically correct (close to 0%) to the wildly offensive (90%), the best numbers Bazelon and Larimore arrive at are around 8-10%. As for why it’s so difficult to get numbers, it seems the problem is that it’s rather difficult to classify what counts as a “false” report. For instance, you get the 90% number when you classify any rape report where the woman didn’t look “beat-up enough” as “false.” Subtler problems control on down the line.

Here’s the thing, though: The actual number doesn’t matter that much. Certainly it matters in the sense that we’d like the number of false reports to be extremely low. But it doesn’t matter inasmuch as even a tiny number of false rape reports can be unbelievably corrosive to the justice system. Take this email Bazelon and Larimore reprint in their article, from an army attorney:

False reports have an incredibly corrosive impact on how sexual assault accusations are policed. Police treat sexual assault accusers badly—much worse than the lawyers do—much worse than the courtroom does. Forget what you see on “Law and Order SVU,” the police end absolutely discourages victims from reporting. Why is this so? Because cops suspect just about every victim is another false accuser, because either he/she has personally dealt with such a problem, or has heard stories from his or her cop buddies to this effect (and yes, in my experience female cops can be even worse offenders). This police behavior is bad, and counterproductive—but it’s real. Putting a real stigma on false reports might combat this a bit—and make it a little easier for actual victims at the police station.

False reports also have a disproportionate impact on juries. How I’d hate to be prosecuting a sexual assault right now. Often in sexual assault prosecutions there’s no debate as to the sex, but everything falls on proving lack of consent—and can only be proven through a convincing and persuasive victim’s testimony. Often, that victim’s testimony has to overcome some less than ideal circumstances—she was drinking, people observed her flirting with the perpetrator etc. That’s something she can own up to, and overcome on her own. What she can’t do on her own is extinguish jury members’ memory of reading of some spectacular false accusation case in the newspaper last month. Every false accusation that makes it into the news makes it that much harder for the real victims to receive justice.

To harp on a Neuroworld favorite, what we’re talking about here is the availability bias. For every Hofstra case, cops are a little more suspicious, juries are a little more dubious, and victims are a little more reluctant to come forward.

I think there’s already a pretty harsh stigma against false rape accusations. As a society, we should strengthen it as much as we can. It only takes a few cases — especially high-profile ones — to throw a real wrench in the wheels of justice.