False claims - to the extreme

[Taramere]

Has anyone experienced being falsely accused of something so grave that it cost them something (i.e. their job, reputation, etc.).

 

Geesh, what's the matter with some people?

 

Not as grave as that. Oddly enough I've experienced problems at the hands of a guy who has a rape conviction in his past. Not criminal harassment, but basically as much harassment within the law (and pushing the boundaries there a bit) that he can get away with in an effort to push me into no longer acting for somebody he's using the legal process to harass. He's pretty much what I would expect a rapist of the more educated sort, who thinks he's smart enough to get away with it, to behave like.

 

As far as what's wrong with people like that goes...toxic control freaks, drama addicts....people with a huge hole in their lives that they're seeking to fill with endless conflict and drama. They're also prone to raising non-meritorious court actions, tribunal actions, grievances etc. I think it's best to just not respond to any of the crap somebody like that comes out with unless you absolutely have to. Even when they start with the "she's not even defending herself, so it must be true"...to continue to ignore it unless and until you are required to respond (and then, keep your response as minimal and unexciting as possible).

 

As to the whole "false rape allegations" thing....it's something you hear spoken about a lot, but more in the context of the occasional newspaper report (a woman going to prison for making a false allegation) rather than the kind of thing that you hear about happening to acquaintances. Or even a friend of a friend of a friend. I think the more common scenario, that gets wrongly defined as a false rape allegation, is where somebody makes an allegation that isn't backed up by sufficient evidence to bring the matter to trial. Where there's nothing beyond the "he said/she said" scenario (eg no witnesses hearing screaming, no medical report suggesting injuries consistent with forced sex etc). Lack of a trial or conviction due to evidential inadequacies in a "he said/she said" situation obviously isn't the same as a false rape allegation. Situations where the woman ends up dropping the complaint because she doesn't feel believed, or doesn't think she's likely to see justice - or has been advised that there probably isn't enough evidence.

 

Not that the situation you've described here doesn't seem to be the false allegation scenario. It sounds like the classic false complaint situation. But I do think it's a rare occurrence, rather than the regular thing some of the dodgier men's rights sites out there try to define it as. A bit like the scenario where a rapist hides in the bushes and grabs stranger being remarkably rare. Far more common is that date rape scenario where he says he thought she was consenting, she says that she was frozen with fear and shock. Or copious amounts of alcohol were involved.

 

And unfortunately, because rape is an extremely serious crime and the impact on victims is also tremendously serious, there seems to be little scope for those scenarios, how to avoid them - or how to handle them if you find yourself in one (eg "too frightened to say no" "not sure whether she's really up for it") - to be discussed with vulnerable young people (of both genders) in a fair and meaningful manner that encourages them to take personal responsibility without feeling attacked or demeaned in the process. The issue of rape gets politicised so much in this endless feminism-v-men's rights battle that any effort to advise young people on negotiating that difficult minefield of sexual consent, how to say no, staying alert and in control so that you're less of a target, checking for a partner's consent if you're not entirely sure etc...any effort to do that is likely to expose you to accusations of either man-shaming or victim-blaming.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Taramere

[Got it]

Very progressive. How do you handle he said / she said situations when there's little to no evidence backing up either side's story?

 

Unfortunately you can't always proof what has happened. You counsel the individuals, separate if desired by the complainant and know that at the end of the day everyone's true colors come out so if someone did it, they will do it again and catch them then.

 

Usually if there is enough smoke, even if we can't prove it, we usually will make the business decision to terminate. But this is not done on a one time event, but a pattern of accusations.

 

We have had managers set up by subordinates trying to take them out, so we are conservative in our due diligence, make sure that HR has talked to everyone involved or a potential witness, and make the best business decision we can. Everything is documented and decisions are recapped in writing so we have a paper trail (if a verbal is only given. If its a move or termination there is appropriate paperwork tied to this).

[Gloria25]

Unfortunately you can't always proof what has happened. You counsel the individuals, separate if desired by the complainant and know that at the end of the day everyone's true colors come out so if someone did it, they will do it again and catch them then.

 

Usually if there is enough smoke, even if we can't prove it, we usually will make the business decision to terminate. But this is not done on a one time event, but a pattern of accusations.

 

We have had managers set up by subordinates trying to take them out, so we are conservative in our due diligence, make sure that HR has talked to everyone involved or a potential witness, and make the best business decision we can. Everything is documented and decisions are recapped in writing so we have a paper trail (if a verbal is only given. If its a move or termination there is appropriate paperwork tied to this).

 

Well, not all managers/companies/etc. are out to find the truth. Sometimes they wanna get rid of a particular employee and are more than happy that this employee is a victim of a complaint....So, they do whatever it takes to get stuff they can use on the accused - even if it requires pressuring or manipulating the accuser into inflating the accusations (i.e. by telling the accuser that the accused denied what the accuser said, so accuser panics and starts dishing out more dirt out of fear that accused is trying to deep six them - when all it is, is the company digging for reasons to fire the accused).

 

And, since the company is controlling the investigation (i.e. by telling the accuser and accused to not speak, drafting of the paperwork used and/or concealing what wasn't used), the company can drive the investigation where they want it to go.

 

Sad how some accusations can be spun into something to destroy a person's reputation, career, etc. And, sad how the accuser doesn't have the courage to stand up and put a stop to the madness. I mean, no one is saying to retract what you said or not cooperate, but if you know it was a misunderstanding or you made your accusations for ulterior motives (like my soldier who slept with someone besides her bf), then simply say that it was a misunderstanding and now that the accused has been formally informed, that you'd like to move on. But no, the accuser just sits there and watches it spiral out of control and the accused lose his/her livelihood and reputation. What kind of person can sit by and do that to someone - who they know - didn't do any harm to them?