A county in Kansas last year dropped charges against three women suspected of filing false rape accusations. The county’s response was not to make it less palatable for someone to file a false accusation, but to actually make it easier to file such a claim.
Douglas County law enforcement officials will be “updating” their training of attorneys and victim/witness coordinators to include radical new “trauma-informed” training material, which essentially teaches that any evidence of a false accusation is actually evidence of trauma caused by a real accusation. The Associated Press reported that Lawrence, Kansas, District Attorney Charles Branson announced last week that employees in his office, as well as police detectives in the county, would have to complete a five-hour training course on how to conduct “trauma-informed” sexual assault investigations. That’s right, such “training” only ever applies to sexual assault investigations, not murders or burglaries or any other type of crime, in which an accuser who appears to be lying will be regarded suspiciously while an investigation takes place.
As The Daily Wire previously reported, police dropped charges against women who appeared to have made false allegations:
The situation began in mid-September, when a female University of Kansas student told police she had been raped the night before. She said at the time she had been drunk and didn’t remember much of the encounter and didn’t want to press charges. She gave them access to her phone and her text messages suggested the encounter was consensual but a “mistake.”
It appeared to police that the woman was trying to get back at her ex-boyfriend by sleeping with his friend, and only claimed it was rape after an acquaintance threatened to tell people about the sexual encounter. The woman threatened this acquaintance by saying: “I’m pretty sure it was borderline rape and I have the bruises and statements to prove it so if you want to go there let’s do it.”
The woman’s text messages also showed she joked about the incident, later claiming she did that because she was “unable at the time to admit she had been raped.” Then she started “remembering” the incident and began claiming she kept telling her ex-boyfriend’s friend “no” and tried to leave.
The charges against her were dropped because prosecutors feared real victims would be afraid to come forward if possibly fake victims were held accountable. As I wrote in December:
A claim that has permeated throughout the culture and infected law enforcement is that prosecuting women who lie about being raped or sexually assaulted will hurt women who have actually been raped or sexually assaulted. The theory is that real victims won’t come forward for fear of being prosecuted even though there’s no evidence to suspect that real victims become fearful when fake victims are held accountable for their lies.
The prosecutor’s office then dropped charges against two more women who were suspected of lying about being raped. Under “trauma-informed” investigations, it’s unlikely any woman will ever be held accountable for lying about being raped. Such “training” teaches investigators that if a woman appears to be lying, she’s just traumatized from the encounter. There is literally no way to prove a woman is lying, because all evidence of lying is claimed to be evidence of the assault.