Woman who falsely claimed she was raped by three men ... jailed for two years


Woman who falsely claimed she was raped by three men because she regretted having sex with them jailed for two years
By Neil Sears
PUBLISHED: 15:45 EST, 17 September 2012 | UPDATED: 03:22 EST, 19 September 2012

A woman who cried rape because she regretted having sex with three men at a drunken orgy has been jailed for two years for her ‘wicked’ lies.

Rosie Dodd, 20, had been out drinking when she met the men, aged 25, 23, and 21, and started groping one of them on a bus on the way home.

She had sex with them one after the other, but after telling a friend she felt ‘dirty’ she lied to police that she had been raped.

The men, two of them students, then suffered a ‘nightmare’ involving intimate examinations and being locked up in cells.

But after police became concerned about inconsistencies in Dodd’s account, she admitted the encounters had been consensual.

This happened in the UK, so I’ll leave to any UK resident/citizen who cares to the task of explaining what would have happened to the men, under UK law, had they been charged and convicted. In at least some US states, the punishment would be 5-10 years in prison (maybe more), having a felony criminal record and being registered for life as a sex offender. Those latter statuses impose long-term and a lifelong inabilities and restrictions on getting jobs and places to live. This woman got two years in prison and (I assume) a felony record. That is not a wrist-slap, but, if the UK punishes rapists even close to the same degree as many US states, her punishment is far from proportional to what her false accusation could have done to those three (using the term loosely) men. The quote below in my signature states my views about false accusations reasonably succinctly.


In the US, even after being exhonerated, the accused would still have the ordeal of being completely removed from the sex offender registery. I have read reports where some states will simply post their status as no longer required to register and removes the criminal code for which they were convicted. Their names are still on the list which implies that their registration period has expired but mentions nothing about being exhoherated. The reader most likely assumes that the sentence and registration period has been served.


I guess this would not be a case of a “legitimate rape”, that seems odd since all the Extreme Left were saying that “All rape is legitimate” just a few weeks ago…


Well, it served their purpose, then, so it must have been true. Now it doesn’t, so it isn’t. Jeez, it isn’t hard to understand: the truth is whatever serves the current lefty narrative. And if you don’t believe that, the MSM will cheerfully educate you otherwise…


I’m pretty sure the argument was that all rape was legitimate, in the sense there is no such thing as an “illegitimate rape” where a woman cannot get pregnant…or did we forget about Mr. Akin’s statements?

This was not rape at all. All of the sex was consensual, as admitted by her, and she lied about it. It isn’t that it’s an illegitimate rape, it’s not rape at all.

Anyway, the common argument for lax sentencing for people who lie about rape is that harsher punishments for lying about rape discourages women who have actually been raped from coming forward. I think that’s bull, but that’s the argument.


One of the biggest problems with “relative” truth.


Either MSM or Trekky, (see above.) Take your pick!