Janet Higginbottom, 36, got drunk and dialled 999 at 2am falsely claiming she had been stalked and then raped in the street after being followed home.
Manchester Crown Court heard how Higginbottom of Broadbottom, Hyde, then identified her ex as the culprit, wrongly claiming he had fled in a car after the incident even though he was at home all the time.
Higginbottom’s unnamed former boyfriend was later arrested in a 4am raid in front of his current girlfriend and held for 11 hours.But don't worry! After they'd secured their man (and his fingerprints and DNA) our sluething wunderkinds decided to actually do some invesitgating.
And guess what!?
He was eventually freed without charge after Higginbottom broke down and confessed she had fabricated her story after detectives uncovered inconsistencies in her evidence.There's a shocker, eh?
Today Detective Constable Ian McNabb, of Greater Manchester Police said: 'Higginbottom falsely accused a man of raping her, when in reality he was at home when the alleged offence took place.
'Due to her lies, not only did this man have to endure the shame of being arrested in front of his partner, but he also spent 11 hours in a police cell and had to deal with the associated stigma of being accused of such a grave offence.'Strange use of the passive voice here. It's almost as if he's speaking about some sort of natural event, like the weather, not something which he and his colleagues decided on, isn't it?
'Thankfully though, our thorough inquiries were quickly able to establish the truth.'What a pity it wasn't before you'd sprung the dawn raid, eh?
'But a lot of police time, effort and money was wasted on this false rape investigation when it could have been better spent helping genuine victims of crime.'Yeah, yeah. I'd have a lot more sympathy for your lack of time and money here if you hadn't been the ones to waste it so incompetently yourselves...
H/T: Mark Wadsworth via email
I refer you to my earlier remark about being in possession of a crystal ball when on duty.
ReplyDeleteJaded
Counting the passives:
ReplyDeletefalsely claiming she had been stalked and then raped in the street after being followed home. (that makes 3)
Higginbottom’s unnamed former boyfriend was later arrested in a 4am raid in front of his current girlfriend and held for 11 hours.
(up to 5 now)
6/ He was eventually freed without charge
7/ the shame of being arrested in front of his partner,
8/ the associated stigma of being accused of such a grave offence.'
9 and 10/ 'But a lot of police time, effort and money was wasted on this false rape investigation when it could have been better spent helping genuine victims of crime.'
I am not sure why examples 7 and 8 - the examples you single out -are so much worse than any of the others. Every incident could have been made active but the use of the passive seems to be more concise in most of these cases.
Could the "ex" sue Ms Higginbottom?
ReplyDeletePrompt arrest to secure evidence (forensic) appears quite proper to me. The subsequent enquiries exonerated him. The offender is who you should be seeking to pillory in this case not the police. As somone has already pointed out crystal balls have yet to be entrusted to police officers.
ReplyDeleteTo those officers and their supporters who claim that. arresting someone on the say so of a drunk with zero corroborating evidence whatsoever is the best way to go about things, I have one question:
ReplyDeleteWhat did the police do before they started arresting people willy nilly, around 15 years or so ago?
There has been a definite shift in attitude and policy from the police in recent years. It is not necessary to arrest before enquiries are made, it is not even necessary to arrest the accused in order to question him, and this was the case until fairly recently. One had to be either caught red handed or an utter scally to be arrested prior to investigation.
The consequences of an arrest, for rape, are so damaging to a pesron's reputation, profession, social standing, etc, etc, and their hopes of a visa to the US or Austraila, that such an arrest should be made only AFTER investigation and with corroborating evidence.
The fact that Jaded admits that he absolutely no idea what has happened in these situations, hence the need for a crystal ball, is ample reason to abandon the policy of arresting people on the off chance that they might have done something wrong.
"it is not even necessary to arrest the accused in order to question him."
ReplyDeleteYes but it does stop people scrubbing away evidence in the shower. Or running off never to be seen again. Or going round and attacking witnesses.
Yes minor matters, where there is no loss of evidence and people are cooperative can be dealt with in other ways but that is not a viable option in a rape reported straight after the offence.
Bill you are absolutely correct.However on this blog we will soon be outnumbered by the hindsight gang.
ReplyDeleteMTG and Broxted (the king of pseudonyms) will be along soon to tell us we are wrong.MTG will use the word "radiator" and Broxted etc will say "mendacious".
As for NTN-15 years? Where did you pluck that number out of? I think you watch too many Yank programmes where the DA looks through the one-way window into the interrogation room and orders the detectives to arrest the not under arrest suspect.
I hold no torch for idiots that make false allegations.They make it harder for genuine victims to get justice.I think they should be prosecuted and get the equivalent sentence the falsely accused person would have got had he/she been convicted.
Jaded
Just remember, if you're ever arrested, to say NOTHING, NOTHING without legal representation present (except to confirm your particulars to the custody sergeant.) You're probably best off with the duty solicitor than your own unless he handles a lot of criminal cases. Yes, there's that disgusting clause due to PACE that not speaking up while you're in custody might hurt your defence later. It's bollocks. Keeping schtum will 99 times out of a hundred mean they'll have fuck all to go on. You gain nothing by cooperating with the police and potentially lose everything.
ReplyDeleteAnyone arrested and then freed without charge should have the record expunged so completely that it is risk-free to lie on immigration forms (assuming the countries asking this stupid question can't be persuaded to drop it.)
Bill,
ReplyDeleteGood point about the shower. I hadn't thought of that.
Jaded,
I dislike most TV nowadays, but particularly American twaddle, so wrong again.
The number of 15 years comes solely from personal observation.
"if you're ever arrested, to say NOTHING, NOTHING without legal representation present"
ReplyDeleteGood advice but as stated above you can be formally spoken to with out being arrested.
"disgusting clause"
It's hardly unfair when someone raises a defence well down the line to ask why they didn't do so when first asked.
"Keeping schtum will 99 times out of a hundred mean they'll have fuck all to go on."
Disclosure means you will have a good idea how much they know. Also you know if your guilty!
"You gain nothing by cooperating with the police"
Cautioned instead of charged? Reduced sentence for an early guilty plea? A clear conscience? (I was kidding about the last one)
Did anybody actually see the woman first? Dear God she's bloody ugly.
ReplyDeleteBunny
i arests evribody now cos i got tolled by the sarge it wos too help sumwun bone us
ReplyDelete"I am not sure why examples 7 and 8 - the examples you single out -are so much worse than any of the others."
ReplyDeleteBecause they are direct quotes, while the others are mainly summaries of the case, or the sort of thing we're used to hearing from them.
"Prompt arrest to secure evidence (forensic) appears quite proper to me. "
And once, long ago, it probably did to most people. But the creeping DNA database, the visa problems and the enhanced CRB check difficulties have all made it untenable.
Should this be happening to anyone other than alleged rapists, the civil liberties people would be squealing like stuck pigs.
"There has been a definite shift in attitude and policy from the police in recent years."
Spot on!
"I hold no torch for idiots that make false allegations.They make it harder for genuine victims to get justice."
Why do you, like so many, concentrate of the theoretical injustice done to them, and not the actual injustice done to the victim, the man?
"Just remember, if you're ever arrested, to say NOTHING, NOTHING without legal representation present (except to confirm your particulars to the custody sergeant.) "
ReplyDeleteIndeed!
Advice given by none other than blogging policeman Nightjack, Bill. I'm assuming you agree he knows what he's talking about?
"Did anybody actually see the woman first? Dear God she's bloody ugly."
They are in most of these cases.
"I'm assuming you agree he knows what he's talking about? "
ReplyDeleteYes, I was being perfectly serious when I said it was good advice. ( not that I knew it was his advice at the time)
Because the feminists would scream the place down that a woman was 'raped' and the police did not even bother to arrest...they just asked him in for a chat!!! That's why they are arrested.
ReplyDeleteWomen never lie about rape and when they do it's because a man made her do it....that's their twisted logic. But they are vocal and probaby pissed off that this 'rare' event of a woman lying has caused SSOOOO much attention. Do you hate rape victims???? Do you???/
So now you know why there is a positive arrest policy for rape allegations......it is an absolute tragedy when innocent men are found innocent. Radical feminists regard innocent men in jail as nothing of consequence.