Flooded By False Rape Allegations
This article, which cites testimony from experienced police
officers, exposes the lies perpetually emanating from officials working in
the UK's Home Office and Crown Prosecution Service when it comes to the
issue of rape and sex assault.
After decades of relatively unsuccessful campaigning in order to
highlight the fact that domestic violence against men is much worse and
more frequent than it is against women, it is very heartening to see that
the latest, and biggest ever, study has at least concluded the following
most comprehensive review of the scholarly domestic violence research
literature ever conducted concludes, among other things, that women
perpetrate physical and emotional abuse, and engage in control behaviors,
at comparable rates to men."
But, of course, thanks to the wholesale corruption of our government
officials working in the western justice systems and the dishonesty of so
many 'journalists' in the mainstream media, it is, no doubt, going to take
many years before the public actually becomes aware of the fact that men
make up the majority of victims of domestic violence; e.g. see
Victims of Domestic
The same will also probably be true when it comes to false allegations
the vast majority of such allegations made to the
police these days are malicious and false
The evidence very strongly suggests that the vast majority of such
allegations made to the police these days are malicious and false. And
they are mostly being made by women who are seeking some kind of advantage
for themselves by seeking to use the state to inflict violence on their
At the same time, however, the evidence also strongly suggests that
most victims of abuse do not go to the police.
For example, it is the officially-accepted view these days that only
about 10% of victims of rape report their rapes to the police.
There are many reasons why I believe this.
In brief, they are as follows.
1. Most rapes are inflicted by intimates. And most victims of rape will
not want to see the lives of their intimates destroyed for what, in most
cases, are likely to be relatively trivial events. Remember: more extreme
things (like violent rapes) are far less likely to occur than are less
extreme things (like pressuring your partner into having sex).
Indeed, most 'rapes' as currently defined are trivial affairs.
2. Even violent rapes by strangers, or even by intimates, are most
likely not going to be reported.
In the first case, victims are unlikely to want to find themselves
having to go through the horrendous ordeal of a rape trial and the various
invasive preliminary procedures and testimonies which precede it -
particularly given that the chances of conviction are so low. (And even if
their attackers are convicted, wherein lies the benefit to themselves?)
And, in the second case, the victim of a violent intimate might also
just be too scared to report the matter lest they become the perpetual
target of revenge.
3. In more intermediate circumstances, perhaps a rape (violent or
trivial) by the boy next door, it still seems to me highly unlikely that
the matter would be reported to the police by the victim.
Quite simply, doing so would likely cause such a huge amount of hurt
and aggravation to so many people who are known to the victim that the
victim would most likely decide not to pursue the matter.
4. I have seen numerous reports over the years on the internet by women
who claim to have been raped, and it seems fairly evident to me that those
who are credible (and many of them are not) do not report their
rapes for reasons that seem totally justifiable.
In short, the point to grasp is that the vast majority of victims will
not report the matter when it comes to rape.
most rape victims have nothing really to gain by
going to the police
Quite simply, most rape victims have nothing really to gain by going to
the police - but they have plenty to lose.
Furthermore, by going to the police, not only would they have to submit
themselves to months of stressful aggravation should their cases
eventually go to court, they would also suffer even worse trauma from the
incident itself as a result of not being allowed to forget about it - and
So why do so many women go to the police to report their rapes?
And the answer is, quite clearly, that they don't.
Because the evidence from a number of sources supports the view that
most of those women who do go to the police are false accusers. In other
words, they are not coming from the same population of women who have been
Even the police believe this.
Indeed, for two decades now the police and the academics have been in
complete opposition to each other when it comes to the issue of false
allegations. The academics claim that false allegations are very few in
number - about 5% of all allegations - whereas the police often claim
(mostly in private, for fear of losing their jobs) that the figure is over
In short, the academics who are chosen and funded by the government
officials who are concerned with such issues claim - without foundation -
that false allegations are rare.
However, this claim is fraudulent.
And the first thing to say about this claim is that the academics who
make it were not present at the time of the alleged rapes. They do not
have a magic wand that allows them to view what actually happened.
Essentially, their 'research' involves going through the police reports
about those alleged rape incidents that either resulted in no convictions
or that did not even go to court. They then decide whether or not the rape
allegations were true.
And, generally speaking, these government-appointed academics conclude
that the vast majority of these allegations were true.
Now, roughly speaking, some 90% of rape allegations do not result in
convictions. Indeed, only some 15% of them actually get to court. The
public perception, however, is that the reason for these figures is
because it is very difficult for the police to get enough evidence to take
a case to court.
in both Europe and America cases are sent to court when
there is no objective evidence whatsoever
But this perception is completely wrong, because in both Europe and
America cases are sent to court when there is no objective evidence
whatsoever that a crime has been committed.
Time and time again we see cases going to court when the only
'evidence' is derived from the accusations of the accuser; resulting in
what has been described as He Said/She Said situations.
In Denmark we see, for example, ...
A 16-year-old girl, whose allegation that she was raped at Fredericia
train station resulted in the conviction of three teenage boys,
unknowingly confessed on a hidden camera that she lied about the incident,
The only valid evidence against these three boys was her testimony.
And yet these three boys were convicted and sent to prison as a result
of her testimony.
In America, a
District Attorney was actually prosecuted for engaging in conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud and deceit for attempting to have convicted
three young men at Duke University for rape when he actually knew from the
evidence that they had not committed any crime.
And in the UK we even have examples wherein the police have
successfully prosecuted men when
their accusers were known to be serial false accusers ...
A man jailed when a woman falsely cried rape told of his fury yesterday
after learning that police knew the woman was 'unreliable'.
Student who wrongly accused Oxford Union president of rape admitted their
relationship was consensual almost a year earlier.
As such, we can conclude that in the 85% of allegations that do not go
to court the evidential value is actually worth less than that which is
found in the He Said/She Said situations.
So how is it possible for government-funded academics to conclude that
false allegations are rare?
And the answer to this question is relatively straightforward.
These academics mostly have a mindset and a corresponding ideology that
demands the belief that "women never lie" about rape. Furthermore, if any
of them even dared to suggest that most allegations were false, they would
likely be vilified, demonised, refused funding, kicked out of their jobs
and, very often, they are threatened with physical violence.
Indeed, as just one very recent example of this, Robert Colover has had
to resign from the UK's Crown Prosecution Service Rape Panel of advocates
for describing a 13 year old girl as “predatory” and “sexually
Even mentioning the existence of such females costs professionals their
the Crown Prosecution Service shows itself to be
a corrupt organisation
This is an example of corruption at the highest levels of the justice
system because such young girls clearly do exist. And by trying to
suppress this fact by intimidating other professionals into silence, the
Crown Prosecution Service shows itself to be a corrupt organisation, and
that it has no regard for the truth when it comes to the issue of
As such, you can safely discard almost anything that its officials say
when it comes to such issues.
Indeed, this pattern of unbridled hostility directed towards anyone who offends
"feminist" thinking has been going on now for four decades. As a result,
only those 'academics' who are willing to come up with politically-correct
results are given the funding and the attention.
Professor Murray Strauss has described the types of chicanery in which
academics themselves engage in order to support the feminist agenda.
They include suppressing evidence, hiding data, citing only studies
consistent with their agenda, falsifying their conclusions, obstructing
publication of articles, blocking funding, demonising other academics and,
they "Harass, Threaten and Penalise Researchers who Produce Evidence that
Contradicts Feminist Beliefs".
In other words, absolutely none of the research endorsed by the Home
Office or the Crown Prosecution Service can be trusted, because their
feminist academics will
only manufacture evidence that supports their agenda.
In my own view, there is far more evidence to support the contention
that the vast majority of rape and "abuse" allegations made to the police
are false and, further, that there is no valid evidence whatsoever to suggest
the majority of those turning up at the police
station to make allegations are false accusers.
This is not to say that thousands of women are not sexually assaulted
or raped every year, but that the majority of those turning up at the
police station to make allegations are false accusers.
These, themselves, mostly come from a tiny proportion of women who are
willing to use the state to aggress against their male partners or
Indeed, even if 95% of women would never dream of making a false
accusation of "abuse", this still leaves us in the UK with one million
adult women who would. And, in fact, this number is more than enough to
account for all the rape allegations
made to the police over a 50 year period
And, in my view, it is mostly women drawn from this population of one
million who, every year, are flooding the UK police with false
Now, whether this is truly the case or not is somewhat irrelevant when
it comes to criticising deceitful government officials for proclaiming that
false allegations are rare because, as we have seen above, they can have
no legitimate basis for this claim.
the officials working at the Home Office and in the
Crown Prosecution Service are lying.
In other words, the officials working at the Home Office and in the
Crown Prosecution Service are lying.
As such, the claims by the Home Office and the Crown Prosecution
Service (that false allegations are rare) represent a true corruption of
the justice system in numerous ways, not least of which is the fact that
they prejudice all jury trials by indoctrinating jurors with the view that
defendants are highly likely to be guilty on the basis of accusations
alone - accusations which are levied by persons who are clearly very hostile to
the defendants and who are often seeking financial compensation.
Furthermore, it is quite clear that these government officials are
proclaiming that nearly all of those who have been accused are 'guilty',
even though the Crown Prosecution Service cannot find enough evidence to
This disgraceful claim embeds into the public mind the view that those
people who are not prosecuted, or who are found not guilty at trial, are,
in fact, guilty.
A more shameful corruption of the justice system is hard to imagine;
particularly given that innocent men often lose their families, their
homes, their friends, their jobs and their lives (through suicide) as a
direct result of it - because people believe that these innocent men must
have been guilty merely following an accusation thanks to the falsehoods
being promulgated by the Crown Prosecution Service.
these government officials are planting false evidence
into the minds of the public and into the minds of jurors.
Effectively, these government officials are planting false evidence
into the minds of the public and into the minds of jurors.
Furthermore, they compound this corruption by referring to rape
accusers as "victims". This prejudices any future trials, and it
also tells the public that the men who have been accused are, most likely,
In summary, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the vast
majority of rape victims do not report their rapes to the police, but
there is no valid evidence whatsoever
to support the view that false allegations are rare.
On the contrary, there is considerable evidence to suggest that the
vast majority of rape allegations are false and malicious, and that they
are mostly coming from a small proportion of women who are quite prepared
to make false allegations.
(Also see Incredible Rape