Talk:False accusation of rape

Requested move 21 December 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

False accusation of rape → False allegation of rape – (was False allegations of rape) – This article is really about allegations not accusations. Looking through the text, "allegation" or "allegations" appears 62 times, "accusation" or "accusations" only appears 30 times (including the title and leading definition). The list of references, further reading, and external links include 3 instances of "accusations" (and those are only from news media sources), but 20 instances of "allegation" or "allegations". Most of the instances of "allegation(s)" are from peer reviewed sources. The two most cited articles barely use the term "accusation", it shows up 6 times in Rumney (2006) and once in Lisak (2010), but they use the term "allegation" 171 times and 50 times respectively.

References

Ian m (talk) 00:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC) ; edited 08:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

• Why switch from WP:SINGULAR to plural? Otherwise, the two forms seem pretty synonymous in common usage. — BarrelProof (talk) 16:31, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • I agree that it should be singular, especially because the article is currently written in a way which defines and clarifies the idea of a "false accusation", not highlighting or listing particular examples. I don't see a substantial difference in the two meanings, except that accusation implies more agency and certainty on the part of the accuser, while allegation faintly implies that an assertion is being made passively and without facts to support it. When we switch to the singular form, "False allegation"" sounds worse to my ear than "False accusation", but I'm not enough of a linguist to say exactly why. I think the title should stay how it is. RoxySaunders (talk) 01:44, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about plural vs singular. I was mostly going with references which nearly all use the plural. But the singular form makes sense.

I looked a bit more into the distinction between "allegation" and "accusation". I think the difference comes down to the the legal definitions of the two words. An accusation is a formal charge made by a prosecuting attorney or by a grand jury indictment, while an allegation is a statement that hasn't been proven yet. Since this article describes individuals making statements to the police or other authorities, then the term allegation would apply, but accusation wouldn't. Ian m (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

• Leaning oppose; our article on the concept of Accusation (which, I will disclose, I substantially wrote), cites sources broadly defining the term in both legal and non-legal terms; our article on the concept of Allegation (on which I have worked very little) provides an entirely legal reading of the term. BD2412 T 05:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
• Also leaning oppose per comments from RoxySaunders and BD2412. The terms seem synonymous in common usage, and the current form seems a little less artificial or stilted. — BarrelProof (talk) 17:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

References

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reporting rates

@Bilorv: the article cited specifically says that the 10% metric for Canada is inaccurate, can we remove that line or use a different source? —blindlynx (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

How about this edit? Removes the sentence as the other two say similar things, and are reasonable summary statistics for most of the current body of the article. Also reorders since the sentence on methodologically uncertainty seems like it should be presented after the stats. — Bilorv (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

that works—blindlynx (talk) 21:39, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Rolled back some changes + scope question

I've reverted some changes made to the lede in the past few weeks, including the removal of "men" from the paragraph about privileged people making false accusations, the more confusing wording in the first sentence, and the elaboration on the consequences of false accusation in eg. the Jim Crow South.

At what point did we decide that incorrect IDs of perpetrators of real rapes fell into this article? That is not consistent with what the sources say. The Central Park jogger case obviously relates heavily to some of the cases we discuss in this article that are straight-up false, but sources that talk about false accusation generally use it to refer to fictitious crimes. [Edit: Oh, welp, I see I mentioned this a year ago...] –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello I’m the one who originally added the paragraph about race and privileged people making false accusations under an IP. I tweaked it because it was inaccurate to the sources I pulled to support it. All the sources go in detail about incidents of white women in the United States making false accusations against black men which led to the mass murder/rape of innocent black men and women, and an explanation on how it was/is a prevalent problem.

Also my second bit on the first paragraph isn’t referencing an incorrect identification of a rapist. Saying that you have been raped (Without specifying a perpetrator( and claiming someone did a rape should be distinguished as they’re both statements used in false accusations June Parker (talk) 06:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't follow your second point. What I am pointing out is that while sources often note that wrongful conviction of innocent people for the perpetration of a real crime committed by someone else is a racialized issue that bears similarities to false accusations of a crime that did not occur, they are not the same thing. Sources talk about false accusations of rape as accusations of crimes that did not occur.

I also wouldn't say "justification for prejudice"? Surely it is more appropriate to say "malicious intent" given that the accusations described in that section would not be made if prejudice were not already present. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@June Parker: Wait, I just realized, is the distinction you're making that you think it's a "false accusation of rape" if someone says they were raped but doesn't accuse anybody? That is also not consonant with the sources. A false accusation of rape occurs when someone accuses a person of a rape that never happened. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Roscelese: Specifically to your second reply, I'm afraid your stuffing words in my mouth. But this can be solved if we fix the introductory sentence since it's creating too much confusion. The initial definition before I came in was "Woman claiming she was raped when she was not" which like you said is not consitent with the rest of the article. I changed it to include "Person A claims person B raped" which can also be read as "Person A claims person B raped Person C" or "Person A claims person B raped them", all situations concerning a blatant lie. I think we can exclude the initial definition. June Parker (talk) 20:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@June Parker: Sources indicate that a false accusation of rape is one where no crime has occurred, not one where a crime occurred and the wrong person was identified. What is your reason for changing the article to say the latter? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Roscelese: Because I was mistaken and thought that's what the sources indicated, but I looked into it and realized it is not. Which is why I removed that statement ages ago. June Parker (talk) 21:50, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Regarding "prejudice" inserted into the lead section, the idea is unreferenced, and is not a summary of existing article prose. We need to have a cited source discussing the concept of prejudice. Also, let's see whether the literature characterizes false accusations as "malicious". Binksternet (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Binksternet: Hello, I had been asked you to come to the talk page already to discuss this. You are repeatedly reverting the page's contents to a version that is not backed up by the sources used. For one false accusations are defined in this article as when a specific perpetrator is named for a rape case when they are not guilty and when there was no rape, not when a person claims to be a victim when they are not without naming a perp, which is what I was discussing with @Roscelese: already. Secondly the "Analysis" you removed is also referenced by the sources used. Again i asked you to come here and discuss why you felt the need to remove it but instead you attempted to edit war. June Parker (talk) 22:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Can you supply a citation for the bit mentioning prejudice? Binksternet (talk) 22:09, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Binksternet: The existing citations (That I pulled from lower down in the article in the "Historical racism" area) go into detail about how racism and hatred of black people allowed American society to pereptrate ridiculous false accusations against black men and turn a blind eye to the violence it results in.

I also do not appreciate how you are changing the first sentence into something that does not represent the contents of the sources without going to the talk page first, and still trying to ream me in about properly cited material. June Parker (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The part I'm concerned about is you shoehorning "prejudice" and "malicious" in the lead section. This is a violation of the guideline WP:LEAD which says we should not introduce new ideas in the lead section, and that the lead section must be a summary of the article body. Your very first effort at this article introduced the idea of privilege in the lead section, without any mention of privilege in the article body. Please take a good look at the WP:LEAD guideline to see why this cannot continue.

Regarding "prejudice", the word racism is far more appropriate here. In any case, these ideas must be fleshed out in the article body before they appear in the lead section. Binksternet (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@June Parker: (edit conflict) Your edits are making the article more confusing. If you agree with me that wrongful conviction/misidentification of the perpetrator of a real crime does not belong in this article, there is no need for the rambly "particular person, particular person" in the lede. I do not feel that the previous version - "A false accusation of rape happens when a person says they have been raped, but in fact no rape has occurred" - was unclear. Do you believe that it gives the mistaken impression that someone simply saying they were raped, without naming a perpetrator, constitutes a "false accusation"? @Binksternet: I guess I see where you're coming from about "malicious intent," but it seems relevant (and very sourceable) that cases like the Emmett Till case or the Scottsboro Boys case are not the typical false accusation case that the criminology literature is talking about. Even if, say, the purported white victims in the Scottsboro Boys case may have been chiefly motivated by their desire to escape suspicion as prostitutes rather than to hurt and target the boys specifically, they still chose to falsely accuse them of a crime that carried a death sentence, to accuse them rather than any of the white men present, and to play on the public's racism in pursuit of a conviction. Cases like these are a distinct subset of the general topic. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Regarding malice, the criminal law textbook Practical Aspects of Rape Investigation says there are three motives for false accusations of rape, only one of which is malicious. The listed motives are: "providing an alibi, seeking revenge, and obtaining sympathy and attention." It is not accurate to characterize all of the false accusations as malicious. Binksternet (talk) 00:26, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

First off, Binksternet, privilege and prejudice are not new ideas because it is explained (In detail) in the sources used when the article shifts to the topic of Jim Crow and historical racism. I yanked those sources from the bottom to the top when I added that paragraph. Prejudice is a parent term to racism, (The way it's used in english today) and I don't see a reason to not say it if it's already in the article.

I won't be doing this any time soon, but consider I plan to pull some sources from another page to bring up how aristocrates in Ancient Rome would dub consensual relationships between their daughters and men they did not like as "Rape", and considered them eloping as rapture. If anyone does something similar, drawing attention to an era in history where disatantaged men were victim of false accusations made by powerful women, it would most likely have nothing to do with race but class or faith. The Jim Crow section would have to evolve and it would no longer just be about race. Prejudice is a parent term to racism (The way it's used today) so it allows the article to include such stuff should that happen. But concerning the content we have now, the reason I said "Malicious" is because if the accusation is being made out of spite for the accused and their race or social status, how could that not be malicious? That would make it fall under something akin to "Seekign revenge", like how Carolyn Bryant claimed Emmett Till raped her out of vengence for him being black, and existing near her.

Secondly, Roscelese, I do agree with you and I do agree some of my edits may have causes needless confusion. I do believe the original statement creates that impression, I thought you were challenging me because you thought I was trying to keep that. I don't believe that statment is accurate to the sources but we can hammer out what should exist now, or tell me if I'm wrong. June Parker (talk) 00:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I got to jump in here. @Roscelese:, you keep insisting that a false accusation of rape is "false accusation of rape occurs when someone accuses a person of a rape that never happened". That is not the only definition. In Saunders 2012, the author describes how that definition is not so clear cut, and that false allegations can be lumped into two categories--the false complaint and the false account. The false complaint matching your definition, and the false account being an account that has varying levels of truth which may include rape. While the false complaint is quite rare, the false account is much more common. The author cites a case where a young woman was raped but deliberately misidentified the assailant because they were afraid of the actual rapist. This was a false allegation even though the rape actually happened and the police believed the victim. Saunders goes on the state that it's important to describe and distinguish between false complaints and false accounts because law enforcement lump the two together which leads to higher estimates of false allegations, even though everyone agrees that the cases of false accounts are fairly rare.

In Rumney & McCartan 2017, they describe seven different categories of false allegations, which includes "mistaken identification by witnesses. In this category of case, a rape has occurred but the wrong person is identified as the perpetrator." See the Central Park Five case. They cite data in that show that mistaken identity contributed to roughly 67% of the false convictions of sexual assault, while perjury or false accusation contributed to only 45% of false convictions. Ian m (talk) 05:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ian m: This is just a conversation about defining the terms and scope of the article. I can see how the (even) rare(r) case of "real crime, deliberate misidentification" would fall into this bucket, but I still don't agree that literally any wrongful conviction is a "false accusation of rape" and the sources do not generally back that up. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Is the part about USA racism in the summary warranted?

This article is about an international issue, I'm not sure this special case should figure in the article summary. What do you think ? MonsieurD (talk) 12:50, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

The Jim Crow laws and lynching of black people in the U.S. are a significant historical topic; to give an example, To Kill a Mockingbird surely has to be one of the most famous English-language literary works there are. If there's other moral outrages predicated around false rape accusations on this scale then I'm sure we'd like them to be covered in the article. Incidentally, it's an oversight, in my view, that To Kill a Mockingbird is not currently mentioned in the article. — Bilorv (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah it doesn;t make much sense. Obviously black men being falsely accused is the most recent example, but "Rape" has always been subjective in the way its defined legally. Often rape laws permit actual (Moral) rape to be commited by powerful men or against oppressed women, while (Legally) it's solely defined as any interaction between powerful women and oppressed men.

I see in an original edit someone said something like "False accusations of rape can be used as a weapon by priviledged women against unpriviledged men" then cited white women and black men as an example. Can we go back to that? 2603:8080:F600:27A2:2CF7:CC46:22BE:190D (talk) 19:36, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Can you give other significant historical examples (with references) of false accusations of rape being "used as a weapon by privileged women against unprivileged men"? — Bilorv (talk) 21:21, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

I can come back and commit to finding sources later, but for starters:

1. When India was colonized by the British, they used the same arguement. It ranged from "The big scary indians are going to rape all the white women if we don't put them in their place" to "The evil uncivilized indians are raping and abusing their own women, we should replace them, because it's automatically better if we're the ones doing it". The stereotype is exploited in bad faith by racist people even today.

2. Alot of African countries that were invaded by Europeans, as well as the South African Apartheid, ran under the same ideas. Falsely perpetuated fear about Africans raping european women when it often occured the other way around, europeans women more likely to abuse the African men, and African women being victims.

3. In Roman times sex between a slave male and a free woman was forbidden, and written off as rape. It was only until late in Rome's life that they discovered some free women were in consensual relationships, thus they wrote a law to allow a free woman to write a contract with the owner of her desired partner to avoid the normal legal consequences of sex, on the grounds any kid she births become a slave to the slave owner.

4. Also in rome, rape was seen as a private matter and thus laws were written in reference to abduction and seduction. Thus, a free woman eloping to marry boyrfriend whom her (Very rich) father did not approve of is considered being "Raped" and thus the boyfriend is falsely accused. Likewise in later times when someone is executed for rape, the victim can also be executed if she

consented to the "Rape", which would mean, if she genuinely did consent, then it wasn't actually rape in the first place, merely sex society didn't approve of.

5. Genghis Khan was a known mass rapist, but that's only a label we're giving him *now*. The Mongols themselves, legally, may have not seen it that way. To boot he created many laws to protect "Women" that generally only applied to women in his harem or ethnic Mongol women that weren't associated with enemy tribes and countries. (This is a bit more flimsy than the others but if anyone can clarify in the future I would greatly appreciate it)

2603:8080:F600:27A2:2CF7:CC46:22BE:190D (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

These are some really interesting historical examples; however, I'm not convinced any match the scope of the article here. The lead sentence reads: A false accusation of rape happens when a person says they have been raped when no rape has occurred. (1) and (2) are not examples where named people were falsely accused of specific rapes that had not occurred, but generalised racist moral panics. In (3), (4) and (5), I have to ask: what are we taking rape to mean here? If rape is a legal term, then by definition these cases of "rape" in Rome were legally rape. If it's a sociological term, then maybe we have something to work with. But the best way to understand other cultures' legal and moral systems is likely not to say that they "falsely accused" people of crimes; rather, it might be that they criminalised things that we would not considered unethical in our society.

In any case, we would need references that specifically say that something was a "false accusation of rape" e.g. "In Rome, false accusation of rape was a regular practice used to oppress the slave class ..." Then we'd have something worth incorporating into the body of the article, and if it reached a substantial size then we could summarise it in the lead. But if such sources don't explicitly call something a "false accusation" then it's synthesis. — Bilorv (talk) 18:37, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

There shouldn't be any historical examples given in the lead, as it is meant solely to introduce people to the topic, not the specific politics of one country. It should be removed or placed somewhere else in the article, as it's unnecessary and irrelevant to the concept of it, seeing as it is a specific circumstance.Crun31 (talk) 05:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Which is why, in my opinion, the original was better. "FRAs are often used by women positions of power to oppress men who are below them, such as white women and black men in the united states" and/or "In some cases false accusations often lead to violence such as murder and actual rape of the accusation victim and their commmunity/families if they are seen as defending the accused". This summarizes the situation African-Americans suffeed through without making it about them specifically, and justifies the section about them as well as opening the door for other users to feel comfortable including other historical instances of FRAs outside of American context. 2603:8080:F600:27A2:803D:AF8F:6EDB:5159 (talk) 13:41, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

No, this proposed passage does not summarise the situation of African-American lynchings, but generalises the situation to the point where it provides much less useful information. It is unsourced, unclear and does not summarise the body of the article: what does "often used" (present tense) mean if the article has no content about it being used today in the way described? And of your 5 examples above, none are present in the article (nor am I convinced that there is scope for them to). — Bilorv (talk) 09:24, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Section with examples of time spent in jail by persons falsely accused of rape

Should false accusations of rape have an example false accusation section? The article gives statistics on the percent of false accusation of rape but does not give a real life example.

The example shows the serious damage a false accusation of rape and that there are people that repeatedly falsely accuse men of rape and that the men suffer dire consequences of the false accusation.

The example shows that the false accuser was arrested and released on bail without being held for trial like one of the men was held (3 months) before his trial where he was found not guilty.

The one here has the following societal costs (cited as noted):

1. Multiple men were seriously affected
   1. Public reputation damaged, economic damage (job loss loss of business income from local store owner), family damage
   2. 4 men were named in the referenced news articles, allegations were made against other men, the men unnamed in the news articles
   3. Arrested and held in jail
      1. One man held for 3 months before trial and was never convicted
      2. One man was accused multiple times, arrested multiple times and spent time in jail for each and was never convicted
   4. Prevented from seeing his sisters while awaiting trial
   5. Family affected, one's mom had a miscarriage due to the stress
   6. Harassed publicly as a rapist, house defaced, safety threatened
   7. Man's mental health seriously damaged by the arrest, jail time, police investigation and judicial process
2. The false accuser repeatedly accused men even after the police found the accusations to be fabricated
3. The accuser repeatedly self-harm herself to get victim services at hospitals, railway stations and police
4. Wasted police time and money and took away police from investigating other rape investigations
5. Wasted judicial and court time
6. The repeated false accuser was charged with 7 counts of perverting the course of justice (false police reports) and released on bail

Elanor Wiliams falsely accused multiple persons of rape, sex trafficking and physical abuse.

1. Quotes from the Daily Mail, Oct 11, 2022:
   1. The jury was told her allegations were false and injuries she sustained were self-inflicted, in one case with a hammer which police later recovered.
   2. Jonathan Sandiford KC, prosecuting, said Williams was a 'serial liar' who made allegations on a number of occasions between October 2017 and May 2020.
   3. The court heard her allegations of rape against one man, Jordan Trengove, led to him being arrested, charged and kept in custody for three months before proceedings were discontinued.
   4. In 2019, Williams was arrested for perverting the course of justice and released pending further investigation, the jury was told.
   5. Mr Sandiford said: 'Unfortunately, the fact that her lies and false allegations had been exposed by the police in July 2019 did not cause her to stop. 'Instead, she continued to fabricate evidence to try and make it appear that her false claims of being the victim of trafficking and sexual exploitation were true.'
   6. she presented herself at railway stations, hospitals and to police in vulnerable and injured states and alleged she had been sexually assaulted or subjected to violence by her traffickers.
2. Quotes from NWE Mail Oct 12, 2022
   1. Williams, of Teasdale Road on Walney, is charged with seven counts of perverting the course of justice in relation to claims made to police. Prosecutor Jonathan Sandiford described Williams as a ‘serial liar’ who, on a number of occasions between October 2017 and May 2020, made false allegations that she had been victim of sexual offences and violence.
   2. Prosecutors said between October 24 and November 5 2017, Williams began to make screenshots of text messages which purported to suggest she had been drugged and raped by Cameron Bibby.
      1. Note: This is the second man falsely accused of rape
   3. On November 7 2017, Williams attended Furness General Hospital and told a nurse she had been raped.
   4. Williams told the police about confessional messages, alleging that Mr Bibby admitted to raping her. On November 27, 2017 he was arrested and interviewed and was on bail for six months before being informed no further action was going to be taken, the court heard.
   5. Williams made three allegations against Jordan Trengove in 2019.
   6. Williams claims in the early hours of May 6 2019 that Mr Trengove had a knife and threatened her with it, beat her, stripped her naked and had sex with her without her consent, Mr Sandiford told the court. Mr Trengove was arrested and interviewed on suspicion of assault. Later that day, Williams told a colleague that Mr Trengove had raped her again, the jury was told
   7. This was followed by another rape allegation against Mr Trengove which is purported to have taken place on May 18. She told officers that Mr Trengove had smacked her all over and then laid on top of her and had sex with her, despite her attempts to push him off. Mr Trengove was arrested on May 18 again on suspicion of rape.
   8. Mr Trengove was kept in custody for three months until proceedings against him were dropped in August 2019.
3. Quotes for NWE Mail Oct 11, 2022
   1. Police inquiries established that ‘none of what Williams had alleged was true’, Mr Sandiford said. The prosecution claims Williams' injuries were ‘self-inflicted with a hammer’ that the police recovered in a field near to where Williams was when she failed to return home.
4. Quotes from Manchester Evening News Oct 12, 2022
   1. On such occasions, police officers, medical staff and others appear to have taken her accounts of being the victim of sexual exploitation and violence at face value." But he said after an incident in May 2020, the police eventually established that Williams had in fact been injuring herself. On May 19, 2020, Williams was reported to the police when she did not return home, the jury was told. When police found her, a few miles from her home in Walney Island, part of her finger was almost severed off and she was covered in bruises, it was said. She told police she had been beaten, threatened with a knife and forced to have sex with three men - repeating the claims the following day on social media, said Mr Sandiford. But he said Williams caused the injuries to herself using a hammer, which was later found near her home. He said: "Police investigated Williams' claims she had been trafficked for sexual exploitation, looking for evidence to support them. Instead what the police found was evidence that her allegations were untrue and she had fabricated evidence.
   2. In 2017 a man called Cameron Bibby was arrested after Williams claimed he had raped her at a house party in Barrow when she was 16, the court heard. Williams allegedly faked Snapchat messages in which Mr Bibby appeared to confess to having sex with her - however he was later found to be innocent, it was said.
5. Quotes from Lancs Live news
   1. Williams also claimed to have been raped by two other men in her home town of Barrow-in-Furness
6. Quotes from NEW Mail news Aug 29, 2019 about one of the falsely accused men
   1. Jordan Lee Trengove, of Westway in Barrow, said he was ‘scared to leave the house’ after he was charged with three counts of serious sexual assault last May. However, the 19-year-old had his name cleared when he was acquitted of all charges at Preston Crown Court. He said: “Me and my whole family have lived through months of hell. “I’ve had the word rapist spray painted on my house, my mum has had a miscarriage due to the stress and I haven’t been allowed to see my little sisters. “It doesn’t seem fair when I’ve done absolutely nothing wrong.”
   2. Since the allegations, Mr Trengove said his mental health has ‘seriously suffered’. “My anxiety’s got a lot worse since this all began,” he said. “I haven’t been able to leave my house. “People have been calling me names down the street, we’ve all been living in fear. “My whole life has been turned upside down.”
7. Quotes from
   1. Jonathan Sandiford KC, prosecuting, said Williams also manipulated phone and social media contacts to make it look like she was being constantly contacted by men with Asian names about sexual matters. ‘Unfortunately, the fact that her lies and false allegations had been exposed by the police in July 2019 did not cause her to stop,’ he said. ‘Instead, she continued to fabricate evidence to try and make it appear that her false claims of being the victim of trafficking and sexual exploitation were true.’
8. Quotes from BBC Oct 12, 2022
   1. Jonathan Sandiford KC said the defendant claimed Mohammed Ramzan, a Barrow business owner known as Rammi, began a sexual relationship with her when she was 12 or 13 and groomed her to have sex with other men. She alleged in 2018 Mr Ramzan masterminded the trip to Amsterdam and then sold her at auction before she was allowed to return home when the buyer could not make the payment. The court heard when police made inquiries into Mr Ramzan's whereabouts at the time of the alleged trip, they discovered a "more mundane" story. Mr Sandiford said: "They found his phone did not leave Barrow on those few days. "They looked at his bank cards and in fact, instead of acting as an international human trafficker in Amsterdam, he was buying things in B&Q Barrow and filling his car with petrol in Asda."
   2. Mr Sandiford said: "What police found was the detailed account that the defendant had given was a pack of lies from first to last." He said she had travelled to Blackpool alone and stayed at a hotel, where she bought a Pot Noodle and chocolate from a nearby shop then stayed in her room watching YouTube on her phone.
9. Quotes from The Guardian Oct 11, 2022:
   1. It is alleged that she used numerous mobile phones to create false evidence, fabricating messages in which her alleged abusers, assailants and traffickers appeared to discuss or admit their supposed crimes
   2. The court heard that Williams made numerous false allegations to medical professionals, work colleagues and the police over a period of two and a half years up to May 2020.
   3. The first false allegation was made when she was 16 and at the house of a friend, Cameron Bibby, in October 2017, with two other male friends. The jury heard that she had had too much to drink, became unwell and vomited and the young men present contacted her family.
      1. Her mother came to collect her but as she helped her outside, she staggered and fell and one witness recalls her loudly screaming “Help” and “Rape”, the jury heard. Her mother was concerned and took her to Furness general hospital, where she accepted having taken alcohol and cannabis “but made no suggestion that she had been attacked or even sexually assaulted”, the court was told. ### However, a few days later Williams began to make screenshots of text messages that purported to suggest that she had been drugged and raped. Some of these appeared to have come from a Snapchat Account with the name CamBib158 that was clearly intended to appear to be Bibby, Sandiford said. Bibby was arrested and interviewed. He was on bail for about six months before being informed that no further action was going to be taken.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:d591:5f10:5ce:a9eb:7a8c:612c (talk) 16:33, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

References

I've removed the mention of "RFC" (requests for comment) from this section, as you have not started the technical process of an RfC, nor do we use RfCs except when there has been protracted discussion already.

Wikipedia encourages you to be bold and add content directly rather than asking permission. However, in this case, any edits you make would certainly be reverted. Other than the Daily Mail being a deprecated source, Wikipedia is not a news website and a page on the phenomenon of false rape accusations should not be bolstered with anecdotes rather than more reputable information from journals and experts. News media report sensational crimes and scandals, not the typical experience of most people, which is what we attempt to document here with statistics on the rarity of false rape accusations with named perpetrators. — Bilorv (talk) 18:54, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

The false accusation page is lacking detail on the effects of being falsely accused. Academic sources do not have that other than high level abstractions: waste police resources, men arrested. An example, based on RS sourced police statements would benefit the false accusation page. The above quotes could be stated: "Police, in 2022, found one woman falsely accused four men of rape over a 2 1/2 year period. Multiple men were arrested, with one accused an arrested multiple times, and another spending three months in jail before trial. She was charged with seven counts of perverting the course of justice.[1][2][3][4]". Supporting quotes from this talk page would be used in the article, other quotes here would not be included.

No motion to include all of the quotes was intended and they are a starting point to include a sentence or two in the false accusation page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:D591:5F10:15BD:DD54:83D6:F054 (talk) 12:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Bilov, a three sentence example has been added with citations based on the police statements in the cited articles. It adds an import point lacking in the false accusations of rape page, that false accusations have a consequence of significant jail time, 3 months in this example, multiple accused persons, multiple arrests and more than a trivial cost to police time, money and resources. 2600:1700:D591:5F10:2CD4:2467:CAAB:1383 (talk) 20:16, 14 October 2022 (UTC)