The dog who wasn’t there

Caption: In an unusual case, a missing black labrador was key to overturning a rape conviction.

It’s commonly argued that rape convictions are extraordinarily low. This is true. But it’s also true that false rape claims are disturbingly common: probably around one in four.

That may seem counter-intuitive, but it’s really quite simple: rape is by its nature a relatively difficult crime to solve, so many actual rapes don’t secure a conviction. But, that inherent difficulty means that it is also relatively easy to falsely accuse someone. Feminists argue that rape is a crime which uniquely debilitates the victim. This is true. It is also true that being falsely accused of, and imprisoned for, such an abhorrent crime is also uniquely debilitating.

Feminists fulminate about the former, but almost never mention the latter. Except to dismiss it out of hand. Feminists celebrated false accusations, including Emma “Mattress Girl” Sulkowicz. Even today, though, Sulkowicz has never faced any censure, while the innocent accused is still paying the price. Quote:

The discovery of a black Lab named Lucy led to the unravelling of a criminal case Monday against an Oregon man who had begun serving a 50-year prison sentence.

Joshua Horner, a plumber from the central Oregon town of Redmond, was convicted on April 12, 2017, of sexual abuse of a minor.

In the trial, the complainant testified Horner had threatened to shoot her animals if she went to the police about the alleged molestation, and said she saw him shoot her dog, killing it, to make his point. End of quote.

While DNA forensics now enables prosecutors to prove sexual activity, still the biggest problem in rape convictions is proving non-consent. But, again, that same problem makes it easier to make false accusations. Proving either can be difficult. A false accusation is as hard to prove as a genuine one, but when activists argue for overturning the fundamental human right of presumption of innocence, it becomes even harder. Proof positive that an alleged victim is lying about the case is invaluable to a defence. Quote:

Horner had insisted he never shot the dog. Finding the dog would show the complainant had lied under oath. But if it was alive, where was it?

An Oregon Innocence Project volunteer and an official from Hummel’s office searched for it…in the town of Gearhart northwest of Portland, that the pair finally found Lucy after her owners agreed to rendezvous at a golf course…Lucy was identified by an undisputed chain of custody and her looks.

“She’s a very distinctive-looking black Lab; not purebred. She’s got this adorable shaped head and really long ears,” Christon said. End of quote.

What does this prove? Well, it proves that a key part of the complainant’s testimony was a lie. Quote:

That key evidence showed the complainant had not been truthful when testifying, the district attorney said. End of quote.

Of course, this doesn’t disprove the actual complaint itself. Quote:

[Deschutes County District Attorney] Hummel told the court Monday he’s not certain that Horner did not sexually abuse the complainant, but that he’s now not convinced he did. The Associated Press is not naming her because it doesn’t identify alleged victims of sexual abuse.

Deschutes County Judge Michael Adler dismissed the case…the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed [Horner’s] conviction and ordered a new trial. The appeals court said the defense had not been allowed to present certain evidence that was unrelated to the dog.

Now, Horner no longer faces that second trial. End of quote.

As we have seen with famous cases of false rape accusations, sometimes when key parts of the alleged victim’s testimony are called into question, the whole case soon collapses. Quote:

After Lucy was found, the complainant failed to attend a meeting in August to discuss her testimony, Hummel said. Last Wednesday, one of his investigators heard she was at a home near Redmond. When he pulled up to the driveway, she ran away. End of quote.

While cases like these show the often extraordinary double-standards of misandrist modern feminism, they are also a testament to the stellar work of “Innocence Project” groups, as well as ruthlessly honest legal officials. Quote:

It was the first exoneration for the Oregon Innocence Project, launched in 2014 to exonerate the wrongfully convicted and promote legal reforms.

Wax praised Hummel for his willingness to re-examine the case.

“Nationwide, what Mr. Hummel did was unusual,” Wax said. “It is to be commended. It should be the model.” End of quote.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

Who is Lushington D. Brady?

Well, a pseudonym. Obviously.

But the name Lushington Dalrymple Brady has been chosen carefully. Not only for the sum of its overall mien of seedy gentility, reminiscent perhaps of a slightly disreputable gentlemen of letters, but also for its parts, each of which borrows from the name of a Vandemonian of more-or-less fame (or notoriety) who represents some admirable quality which will hopefully animate the persona of Lushington D. Brady.

To read my previous articles click on my name in blue.

Listen to this post:
Voiced by Amazon Polly
52%