The paper detailed that an extensive study into rape case attrition undertaken by Kelly et al in 2005 found that the rate of false allegations stood at 3%.
A study produced by the Crown Prosecution Service in England & Wales in March 2013 revealed that over a 17-month period between January 2011 and May 2012 – when all false allegation cases were referred to the DPP – there were 5,651 prosecutions for rape, but only 35 for making false allegations of rape.
Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4% of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2% and 6%.
Channel 4’s 2018 FactCheck reinforced the fact that false allegations of rape are rare, concluding that ‘Men are more likely to be raped than be falsely accused of rape’.
Another 2018 check, by Full Fact, concluded that as a figure for the number of reported rapes based on false allegations: ‘Evidence from England and Wales suggests that 3-4% is a reasonable estimate.’
False rape allegations are rare. Incredibly rare. But you know what isn’t rare? Rape. Especially women being raped by men.
Statistics show that in England and Wales, 1 in 4 women have been raped or sexually assaulted as an adult; 1 in 18 men have been raped or sexually assaulted as an adult. 98% of adults prosecuted for sexual offences are men. Less than 2 in 100 rapes recorded by police in England and Wales in 2022 resulted in a charge that same year, let alone a conviction. We see these statistics play out in the public eye, from the #MeToo movement to cases like that of Danny Masterson, just last week.
It is therefore fair to assume the following: you will personally know a woman who has been raped, probably multiple women. You will personally know a man who has committed rape, maybe multiple men. It is unlikely that you know anyone who has been convicted of rape. It is very unlikely that you will know someone who has falsely accused someone of rape. But, much of our societies’ default is to assume and believe the complete opposite.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is used with an incorrect righteousness – as if on a personal level we are expected to be litigious. The state has to presume your innocence, in court, the average person does not. I do not have to presume Brand’s innocence, on a personal level, until a jury finds him to not be. I have every right to, and do, believe victims of sexual assault as my default. It is a default that is supported by statistics, personal experience, and evidence. The other option – to believe in an accused rapist’s innocence – is not.
One of the women who is accusing Brand of raping her went to a rape crisis centre immediately after the incident. She put evidence in writing, and went to therapy for the trauma. She has text messages from Brand all-but admitting that he raped her. She did everything you are ‘supposed’ to do, in order to be believed. And yet, many still do not.
There is not some complex or academic reason to this illogical position many take; there is no morality to be found when interrogating the language or reasoning behind rape apologists. It is, really, very simple: people do not want to believe rape victims. People want to uphold violence against women, patriarchy and misogyny. They do not want perpetrators, especially if they are men, to be held accountable. They want our systems to remain distrusting of survivors, they want it to remain unjust, they want to believe a man like Brand is somehow the one to feel sympathy for in all this.
For more from GLAMOUR’s Contributing Editor, Chloe Laws, follow her @chloegracelaws.
For information or support regarding rape and sexual abuse, contact Rape Crisis on 0808 500 2222.