News from RADAR  on False Accusations

R.A.D.A.R. – Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting – is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of the U.S. nation's approach to solving domestic violence. http://www.mediaradar.org.

Radar Alert for: False Accusations 08-Mar-24


RADAR ALERT:
On False Rape Allegations, A Judge's Pious Words Are Not Enough

On March 19, 2008, the Seattle Times reported on a story whose ending could have been much worse but should have been much better. (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004291649_false19e.html) The story is of a woman, Katherine M. Clifton, who manufactured false evidence to frame a man and then lodged a false rape charge against him. As a result of the allegation, the man spent nine days in jail and was placed on leave from his teaching job at a college.

A March 21, 2008 article in London's Daily Mail illustrates just how much worse the ending to this story could have been. It reports on another innocent man, but in that case, the false accusation of rape drove him to suicide. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=541189&in_page_id=1766&ito=1490)

In the Seattle case, when Judge Peter Nault accepted the woman's guilty plea to the charge of making a false rape accusation, he stated: "That we hurry to castigate a person who turns out to be entirely innocent ... I don't know how it could be worse."

So, what was wrong with the Seattle story's ending? Consider how Judge Nault chose to punish Clifton's opprobrious actions. According to the article, he sentenced her to 365 days BUT suspended 357 days and he ordered her to pay a $5,000 fine BUT suspended $4,750.

Thus, an innocent man ends up in jail for nine days and the woman who made the false accusation, and clearly spent a lot of effort fabricating false evidence, will only have to serve eight days. The innocent man was placed on leave from his job. The woman who planned and carried out the crime has to pay $250.

Please contact the Seattle Times and ask for a follow up story regarding why Clifton only received a slap on the wrist for a crime that, after murder and rape, is about as heinous as they come. Please emphasize the following points:

  1. The innocent man served nine days in jail and faced the loss of his teaching career;
  2. Judge Peter Nault (please mention him by name) knew that the accuser had gone to some effort to fabricate phony email and a phony court order implicating the innocent man;
  3. Considering the egregious circumstances surrounding the case, Judge Nault's decision – to require the villain to serve less time than the innocent man served and to require her to pay only $250 for her crimes – means that his statement "That we hurry to castigate a person who turns out to be entirely innocent ... I don't know how it could be worse" turns out to be nothing more than empty piety.

Here's the contact information:

  1. Suki Dardarian
    Managing Editor, News Coverage and Enterprise
    sdardarian@seattletimes.com
  2. Carole Carmichael
    Assistant Managing Editor, Features
    ccarmichael@seattletimes.com
  3. Letters to the Editor:
    Letters Editor
    The Seattle Times
    PO Box 70
    Seattle, WA 98111
    opinion@seattletimes.com
    (Include your full name (no initials), home address and daytime and evening telephone numbers for verification)

Again, please mention Judge Peter Nault by name. If judges realize that they're going to be remembered by name, they may start making their actions fit their pious words.

Radar Alert for: False Accusations 08-Feb-25

RADAR ALERT:
Call Your Senator Today, Spare the World of I-VAWA!

At a time when Violence against Women Act (VAWA) is increasingly criticized for its ineffectiveness and harmful effects on American families, Sen. Joseph Biden recently introduced International Violence against Women Act (I-VAWA).

RADAR's analysis of I-VAWA (Senate bill 2259) reveals it would:

  1. Harm the family.
  2. Impose ineffective and harmful programs on other countries.
  3. Create a new federal "super-agency" that would control many aspects of U.S. foreign policy.
  4. Ignore violence against men and other forms of violence.
  5. Funnel millions of taxpayer money to ideologically-driven organizations.

More information on the problems with I-VAWA can be found here: http://mediaradar.org/why_ivawa200801_campaign.php

I-VAWA is almost identical to VAWA, a law that has already contributed to the destabilization of American families and caused immense harm to children.

Before VAWA was introduced and American courts dealt with cases of real abuse and real justice was served. Then the definition of "violence" was expanded to encompass almost every aspect of human interaction between spouses, including raising one's voice or arguing.

VAWA harms children who need the love of both parents. With its creative definitions of "psychological abuse," VAWA has been widely used to cut off the natural bond between children and their fathers, to the detriment of both.

Is this what we want other countries in the world to adopt? Is this the best that America has to offer? Do we want to pay for this with nearly a quarter of a billion dollars our tax money?

The National Organization for Women recently sent out an Alert telling its members to contact the Senate to support I-VAWA. We must make it clear to our Senators that I-VAWA is bad for families and harmful to children.

Please telephone or fax your Senator today and tell that person to "Spare the world of I-VAWA, Say 'No' to S. 2259!" Your Senator's contact information can be found here: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

It's up to us to save the family and protect our children.