What is a "False Allegation" ?

(We have used Rape as an example below)

False allegations appear to serve three major functions for the complainants: providing an alibi, seeking revenge, and obtaining sympathy and attention.

The definition for false allegations is imprecise, and this creates confusion when discussing the issue or attempting to estimate its prevalence. For example, many attempts to define what is and is not a false allegation have rested on the motivation of the complainant.

Several definitions have required that the motive for a false allegation must be deliberate deception, yet this is clearly not required for a charge to be baseless. A false allegation of sexual assault could be forwarded without deceit but rather due to mental illness or simple mistake (i.e., the individual believes that she/he was sexually assaulted when she/he was not).

Another critically important issue in this arena is "how false" an allegation needs to be to be considered a "false allegation".

Must the entire allegation be false to be considered a false allegation? How false must it be? Is it more serious to make false accusations against a person than to falsify other aspects of a crime?

Many victims will give inconsistent or untrue information as part of their statement/s, but this should not be confused with a false allegation.

For example, victims might give inconsistent or untrue information out of trauma or disorganisation, discomfort relaying sexual details, fear of being doubted or blamed, or out of an attempt to make the assault sound more like the stereotype "real rape" with which we are all familiar.

How to address inconsistent or untrue statements

First, it is critically important that the reader realise that these inconsistencies or untruths are understandable and should not be confused with a "false" allegation.

It is the job of a good legal team (i.e. Barrister, Solicitor and or Investigator) to then address inconsistencies or untruths in the complainant’s statement by exploring the issue gently and non-judgmentally.

So how false does a false allegation need to be?

Given the many reasons for doing so, it is understandable and perhaps even inevitable that complainant will often make inconsistent or untrue statements about their assault.

However, many investigators and others have mistakenly concluded on this basis that the entire allegation is false.

There are a number of interpretations of what constitutes a false allegation, but the most reasonable definition is that it is a claim of sexual assault (when dealing in this area) where the elements of sexual assault are not met. The false allegation could be made out of deliberate deceit, fantasy, or mistake. For example, an unwanted sexual act may have taken place that simply did not meet the legal definition for sexual assault.

However, "false allegation" should not be used to refer to cases in which the assault took place but the complainant provides inconsistent or untrue information within the context of her / his statement.

Cases in which the complainant provides partial or distorted information are certainly difficult to investigate, but they should not be considered false unless there is evidence to prove that the assault simply did not occur.

Rather, "all complaints must, of necessity, be taken at face value and, unless there is some specific reason to believe otherwise, handled accordingly".

Unfortunately, cases are sometimes seen as unfounded when the complainant "changes her / his story" by recalling additional information, telling different aspects of the same story, or making inconsistent statements out of trauma and cognitive disorganisation.

Cases are also viewed as false when the victim recants, either out of fear or when she / he realises the impact that the investigation and prosecution will have on her / his life.

Thus, there are clearly a number of situations in which sexual assault cases are improperly unfounded when they have not been determined to be false.

Another reason why many cases are improperly unfounded is because they are viewed with suspicion that is not grounded in investigative facts but rather due to particular characteristics of the case or complainant. Sexual assault cases are often viewed with suspicion when they do not meet the cultural stereotype of "real rape".

For example, the general public often view with suspicion any claims of sexual assault made when the complainant and suspect knew each other, especially if there was a prior sexual relationship, if the complainant delayed reporting, and if the complainant did not describe either physical resistance or violence/weapons used by the suspect.

It is completely inappropriate to use these characteristics as reasons for doubting the validity of a sexual assault claim.

The fact is that most sexual assault victims know their attacker, most delay reporting (or never report), most do not use physical resistance, and most suspects do not resort to physical violence or use of a weapon.

These characteristics should thus not be confused with a "false allegation" and should never be used as the basis for un-founded a sexual assault case.

Thus, even in cases where victims sustained (for example) bruises, black eyes, cigarette burns and even bitten nipples, some members of the general public have declared complaints unfounded if there was a previous sexual relationship between the parties.

Cases can be difficult when the complainant refuses to cooperate with the investigation or fails to appear for interviews or other court proceedings. Cases are also difficult when the complainant has characteristics that will undermine her / his credibility in court, including drug use, prostitution, a criminal history, etc. Yet none of these are legitimate reasons for un-founded a sexual assault case.

By approaching cases with the assumption that they are valid, complainants will respond with increased openness and trust that will facilitate investigation.

By conducting complainant’s interviews in accordance with strict guidelines, the interviewer will be rewarded with increased cooperation, and information. By taking steps to reduce the likelihood of inconsistent or untrue information in the complainant’s statement, investigators will learn to better distinguish allegations that are false from those that are true but described with partial or distorted information.

The percentage of false sexual assault allegations is not as high as commonly perceived (although there has been a rapid increase in the past five years) this does not deny their terrible reality. False allegations do exist and they are very damaging to the judicial system as well as the real victims whose credibility they undermine.

Interestingly, most of the indications described are exactly contrary to those often seen by the police and public as cues for suspicion. This is not a coincidence. Consider this: If a woman is going to fabricate a claim of sexual assault she is likely to base this invented crime on the same stereotype of "real rape". For example, false allegations are more likely than valid claims to include a vaguely described stranger who used a great deal of force and to which the victim responded with her / his utmost physical resistance.

An allegation should only be considered suspect when many of the indication’s spoken about here are present, and it should only be determined to be false when the investigative facts directly contradict the victim’s account of events.

When false allegations of sexual assault are made, there are a number of reasons that might motivate this act. One of the most prominent among these is that some women/men fabricate allegations of sexual assault out of a desperate need for attention. Other reasons could include a need for denying or shifting responsibility for consensual sexual activity, and more commonly over the last five years family issues.

Regardless of the reason, the false allegation can range from a somewhat vague description of an event to a detailed account perhaps supported by self-inflicted

Indications of false rape allegations

There is, of course, no simple way to determine the legitimacy of any criminal complaint. This is true whether the accusation/s concerns the commission of a rape, a murder, burglary, or any other offence. All complaints must, of necessity, be taken at face value and, unless there is some specific reason to believe otherwise, handled accordingly. In most instances, it is impossible to determine whether the crime actually occurred unless the victim is moved to admit that the accusation/s was false. However, as in the false burglary or robbery complaint, certain characteristics are found with greater frequency in false rape reports than in actual rape cases. In and of themselves, none of these characteristics are significant, but taken together, they indicate a potential that the facts may be different from those reported.

The mind can freely shift responsibility from itself to the offender and ultimately to the police without fear of being contradicted.

One of the more obvious features of rape is that its victims typically report being overwhelmed by fear. Because of this, the actual level of physical resistance is frequently low and thus the actual force used by the rapist may not go beyond verbal threats. Even though the rapist may not employ physical methods or a visible weapon in his/her attack, the victim is convinced she/he is in mortal danger and reacts by doing whatever appears most likely to preserve her/his life. Often this involves a relatively non violent submission to her/his assailant. On the other hand, those making false complaints seem to claim more frequently to have fought with all their ability.

They typically report punching, kicking, and scratching their assailants until they are themselves finally overpowered. Others bolster an inability to resist by claiming they were attacked and raped by more than one person. In other cases, the pseudo-victim claims the assailant was exceptionally large or powerful and able to overcome her/his resistance with relative ease. The important point is that false victims more frequently include the face-saving element of either having resisted or having been confronted with a situation that made resistance impossible.

Nature of the sexual acts performed

Although common law traditionally defines rape as an act involving sexual intercourse, the crime may also involve any number of other sexual acts.

In a significant proportion of rape cases, women are subjected to acts other than or in addition to sexual intercourse. Such acts appear to be reported less frequently in the case of false complaints. Apparently, the report of rape is not seen by false claimants as requiring collateral reports of oral or anal sex, unless such acts are included in the person’s sexual repertoire. Thus, the false claim of rape is usually found to be narrower in its construction and seldom includes much more than allegations of penile penetration and the manual manipulation of breasts or genitalia.

These characteristics may arise from the reasoning that other acts are not required to support the claim, that the individual finds such acts personally repugnant and does not wish to debase her/him or that the mind does not require her/him to be more deceitful than is absolutely necessary. Just as important, under-describing of the attack may be another manifestation of the false claimant’s naiveté as to what actually occurs in these crimes.

Recall of details

Women and men who have been raped are generally able to provide a reasonably accurate description of the event, including the nature and sequence of the sexual acts performed. Women who make false allegations seem to more frequently report that they had their eyes closed at the time, that they "passed out" and do not recall the penetration, or that they cannot recall the specifics of the actual sex act itself. In the opposite extreme, they may also provide an emotionless, but exquisitely detailed, description of the event.

It is important to note here that actual rape victims may also provide an emotionless description of what happened, a procedure that reflects their attempt to mentally disassociate themselves from the unacceptable experience. However, in the case of an actual rape, the description is seldom in the same exquisite detail.

Recounting the event may be embarrassing and emotionally unpleasant for the rape victim, but it is basically a recitation of what occurred. The person making a false complaint is in a different situation. They must either "invent" the acts they allege, or they must convert a consensual sexual experience into a "rape." In so doing, they find themselves in a culturally anomalous situation.

Our society does not encourage women to discuss their sexual activities with others, especially with strangers (e.g., police officers, investigators). Reporting a false rape places the woman or man in just that circumstance. Unable to recount objectively something that was done to her/him, she/he tends either to become vague and evasive or to cross the cultural barrier and become overly descriptive.

Physical injury

Based on experience, approximately one-third of the legitimate rapes include some form of violence against the victim. In most instances this involves hitting or slapping the victim, choking her, knocking her to the ground, and/or forcibly tearing her clothes off. In the small percentage of the above cases, the level of violence is devastating.

Rape victims who are physically assaulted (beyond the rape itself) may sustain serious injuries, including the loss of teeth, broken bones, mutilation of the genitalia and breasts, and internal injuries. Indeed, some rape victims are murdered during the assault. False complainants do not usually present serious physical injuries. However, as one moves along the continuum of personal pathology, the extent of self-inflicted harm can increase.

Example: A 21-year old woman was found, in a dazed state, lying on the ground in the kitchen area in her house. A threatening letter was found tucked in her underwear. She claimed to have been assaulted, but not raped. She sustained a number of scratches and bruises but was not seriously injured. About three weeks later, she claimed to have been assaulted in her bedroom, resulting in serious lacerations. A message written in blood informed her that she had been "warned".

This woman had been previously discharged from an office environment for having made a false rape allegation, which was accompanied by self-mutilations. She had a history of hospital attendants for suspicious injuries. She was experiencing serious marital and financial problems and was having difficulty in evening courses. The allegation provided her with an opportunity to become a "legitimate" victim and to receive care, sympathy, and support otherwise missing in her life.

These self-inflicted injuries are typically different from those that occur in actual sexual assaults. There are two characteristics about the injuries claimed in false rape allegations that should be of interest. The first involves the wounds themselves, and the second concerns the victim’s reaction to her injuries.

False victims who have injured themselves tend to exhibit an unusually wide array of wounds. In spite of this, extremely sensitive organs or tissues such as the eyes, nipples, lips, or genitalia are almost never injured.

Self-inflicted injuries are usually caused by scratching with fingernails or by cutting with a razor or other sharp instruments. As such, the wounds tend to be located within reach and at unusual angles. Often they conform to the range of motion of the person’s arm or hands. This is particularly noticeable in cuts or scratches on the sides, front, and lower back of the torso. Although the wounds may range from minor scratches to life-threatening lacerations or punctures, they usually appear more severe than they really are. This is because they are inflicted for the purpose of supporting the individual’s claim rather than to mutilate or kill. They also frequently reflect a sophisticated understanding of anatomy (i.e., major arteries or tendons are avoided and the likelihood of permanent disfigurement is minimal).

The second characteristic of pseudo-victims who injure themselves is their tendency to be strangely indifferent to their wounds. They appear to accept their injuries with a degree of nonchalance not found in people who sustain similar injuries at the hands of others. Variations of this syndrome are often referred to as "la belle indifference," and the feature is usually quite noticeable even though a general anxiety may be present.

Evidence

Because of the nature of a rape case (as in any case), evidence is particularly important, although legalappeal.co.uk has over the last two years dealt with several cases where there was absolutely no evidence whatsoever of any rape ever having taken place and indeed some cases where reported some twenty years after the alleged assault took place. Just merely the accuser making the allegations was enough to send the suspect/s down for eight years or more, leaving the suspect/s like “sitting ducks”.

Moreover, the consistency or inconsistency of the evidence may suggest that a rape complaint has been exaggerated or is completely false. An absence of the kinds of evidence usually associated with rapes can sometimes be as revealing in identifying false allegations as its presence is in establishing that a rape has actually taken place.

Some of the types of evidence that appear to suggest a false allegation are:

The complainant cannot recall where the crime took place even though she does not report being blindfolded, under influence of drugs or alcohol, or moved from location to location.
The area where the crime took place does not support story (i.e., ground cover not disturbed; no footprints where there should be; no signs of struggle when they should logically be present and timing).
Damage to her clothing is inconsistent with any injuries she reports (i.e., cuts or scratches inconsistent with tears or cuts in clothing).
Complainant presents cut-and-paste letters allegedly from the rapist in which death or rape threats are made.
A note or letter is identifiable with pseudo-victim (via handwriting analysis, indented writing, typewriter comparison, paper stock, or fingerprint comparison).
Confirming laboratory findings are absent.
Personality and lifestyle considerations

In false rape allegations, extensive and important information on the complainant is often available. In general, this information suggests that the pseudo-victim has experienced numerous personal problems and that her ability to cope is seriously impaired. For example:
In temporal sequence, the "rape" follows one or more escalating incidents revealing difficulties in her personal relationships.
The complainant has history of mental or emotional problems (particularly referencing self injurious behaviour, with hysterical or borderline features).
The Complainant has previous record of having been assaulted or raped under similar circumstances.
The allegation was made after a similar crime received publicity (suggesting modelling or "copycat" motive in which the similarity to the publicised crime offers credibility).
The complainant has extensive record of medical care for dramatic illnesses or injuries.
Family, friends and or associates report that the complainant’s post assault behaviour and activities were inconsistent with her/s allegation.
The complainant becomes outraged when asked to corroborate her victimisation.
The complainant tries to steer an interview into "safe" topics or those that tend to engender sympathy.
One of the up and coming allegations to make is “my mother or father married again so I split them up by making a false allegation”.
And more recently with a case we recently dealt with where the complainant made the allegations up because of pure jealously.
How we deal with false accusation case

Obviously, confronting the accusation/s with "validity concerns" should take place only when there are serious questions concerning the truth of the accusation/s.

Confronting a person suspected of making a false complaint is always a difficult matter. The critical issue is that if the doubts are incorrect, this would greatly compound the victim’s trauma, and could have very serious implications for the suspect.

Such a confrontation will also undoubtedly destroy any relationship that may have been developed between the complainant and the investigator (if any). One way to handle this challenge to the complainant’s credibility without sacrificing the investigator’s rapport with the complainant is to introduce a second party, a person who can act as a buffer so to speak. The principal investigator needs to be available to the person alleging rape and should maintain a non judgmental, supportive, and sympathetic relationship with her/him.
It would be counter productive for this person to voice any doubts as to the veracity of her/his accusations.

Issues regarding unresolved inconsistencies, conflicts, or the lack of supporting data should be made by another investigator. In this way, the vital relationship between the complainant and the principal investigator may be maintained and perhaps even improved.

The other investigators style of confrontation should also be supportive, however, since false allegations are usually desperate attempts to protect self-esteem. Any harsh challenges to the person’s credibility will increase her/his defensiveness. It is often effective to simply present doubts to the complainant in a way that makes it clear they are based on the information she/he themselves has provided. This decreases personal conflict while conveying an impression that investigators have been thorough and objective. It also allows for adjusting investigative hypotheses and gives the complainant an opportunity to provide additional information without having to place her / him in a psychologically threatening position.

Yet, you must be aware that only a seasoned investigator should consider approaching a victim. However, it is law in England and Wales that the victim may only be approached after one year of the last day of a trial. This does not mean to say that if convicted the defendant can not undertake a lawful investigation using only seasoned professional investigators prior to the completion of the year rule.

The reaction of fictitious victims to this approach varies. At the low end of the adaptation continuum there is usually an emotional confession, mixed with both despair and relief. The amount of energy required to maintain her/his story is exhausting, and this becomes a time for her/him to cooperate and seek solace.

Exaggerators and malingerers often provide great detail as to how and why they masqueraded as a rape victim.

At the extreme upper end of the adaptation continuum, the complainant’s distortions will have been internalised and for her / his own well-being she / he will need to believe what she / he is saying because she / he is unconsciously terrified of losing control. Consequently, her / his denial will be intensified no matter how the confrontation is handled. Predictably, she / he will react with outrage. If the family is advised of the findings they may be of great assistance to her him eventual recovery.

Unfortunately, because of the disordered life of such individuals, they are often estranged from their families.

This Page Was Last Updated

Tuesday 13 March, 2007 18:56

Disclaimer