Woman denies false rape claim against police recruit
There have been heated exchanges at a rape trial at the High Court in Wellington, where police recruit Mark James Tulloch, 31, is accused of raping a woman he met on an internet dating site.
A lot is riding on getting to the truth now a days with the push from feminists to find more men guilty of rape charges and men who are innocent and not wanting to go to prison for around 8 years on a false allegation.
This case is really juicy.
A single mother has been on dating websites writing sexual, talking sex over the phone and having text sex including pictures of herself naked to other men.
She meets up with a man, invites him back to her house for a shag, gives oral sex, drinks more with the neighbour and then accuses the man of rape after they have sex.
But this is not the only man she has accused of rape. Another man is waiting trial for an accusation from her also.
The defence lawyer has accused her of being a dangerous woman who has made false complaints in the past. But she says the rape did happen, and she has gone through a huge amount of suffering.
Read full story HERE
I perceive an even more dangerous possibility, setting men up as victims. Remember “Sensitive Claims” $10K waiting here. A good return. I believe the accused is not allowed to produce this information in evidence. However females are allowed to breach suppression orders` with impunity. (The Louise Nicolas Mess)
To Paraphrase the Fems slogan. “We believe you Brad” “We believe you Bob”
Comment by Alastair — Tue 24th March 2009 @ 4:44 pm
That’s $10K per rape Alistair.
Comment by julie — Tue 24th March 2009 @ 5:19 pm
Yeah. What did mothers tell their daughters? “Lie on your back and think of England!”
Or a high paid “Lady”?
Comment by Alastair — Tue 24th March 2009 @ 5:28 pm
Notice how she mentions PTSD: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder an advice given by Women’s Refuge
when the case is empty. PTSD freezes judges on da spot.
Poor guy. He is lucky the children are not his, otherwise the family court will make sure he is out of his house, attends a violence program, gets supervised for many years.
It is interesting to know the fate of the father of her children.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Tue 24th March 2009 @ 5:51 pm
See my reservations about men involving themselves in “Big Brother” without the mother being checked out.
To be acused of rape you don’t have to do ANYTHING.
NO SEXUAL ACTIVITY is required, just a woman wanting to create harm.
ALL MOTHERS involved in Big Brother should undergo rigorous checks to establish if they have a record of this type of behavour. (apologies to all the great mums out there- us guys have to be checked out as possible rapists or kiddy fiddlers too
Comment by John Brett — Tue 24th March 2009 @ 10:04 pm
This kind of thing is becoming epidemic.
Pierce Harlan at The False Rape Society is doing a splendid job of documenting it and exposing the extent of it in the United States.
Comment by Rob Case — Tue 24th March 2009 @ 11:26 pm
can a few lads not give this woman a visit and persuade her that she is doing bad things ?
Comment by supermanintights — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 8:33 am
Personally i think that cops need a waking up call or a 1000 to make them aware of all the shit that men are now taking
Comment by supermanintights — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 8:37 am
Hopefully now that it has happened to a policeman, this will start to wake people up, but I am not going to hold my breath.
Comment by Scott — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 8:40 am
A police recruit was today cleared of raping a woman he met online.
Justice Ronald Young in the High Court threw out a charge of sexual violation by rape against Mark James Tulloch, 31, telling the jury evidence given by the woman was not credible.
Defence lawyer Mike Antunovic said the solo mother of three had an extensive history of making false complaints.
They included one against her current partner of assaulting her and molesting her daughter, two other rape complaints and a $14,000 jewellery theft by a former flatmate.
She had also previously been committed to hospital for mental illness and had boasted to a flatmate she was going to be “bigger than Louise Nicholas” and would “have the jury eating out of the palm of her hand”.
Tulloch and the complainant met on the website http://www.NZDating.co.nz, moving from chatting online, to cellphone messages, finally having sex at at the woman’s house.
After being cleared Tulloch said he was now looking towards police to follow up on the “false” charge that turned the last year of his life into hell.
“Now I would like to see her…prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” he told NZPA.
He said the allegation had stained his reputation and would continue to affect his life and work.
Tulloch said having to repeatedly explain he didn’t do it to friends and family was “absolutely shocking”.
He said he was not given name suppression, was suspended from police college after the allegation was made.
He was also suspended from the territorial army.
Though the case was thrown out, Justice Young told jurors their time had not been wasted.
“Unless we had all come here to hold this case we would not have found this out,” he said.
Comment by Dave — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 3:05 pm
Her name and face should be plastered all across the tv and newspapers.
Comment by Scott — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 3:44 pm
I agree with Scott. Not only that reparation to her victim to cover all his out of pocket expenses, Compensation for him for his hurt feelings, and finally his name permanently suppressed, her name and photo posted in every newspaper.
Comment by Alastair — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 4:08 pm
Here is the problem, The man could have been sent to jail for years given and what the woman gets
for false accusation???
Comment by tren Christchurch — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 5:25 pm
When a man is seen as a danger the community is warned about this and rightly so because he might damage people’s lives. When a woman is a danger her name is not released and she is let free to damage people’s lives. Go figure.
Comment by Hans Laven — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 6:55 pm
exactly what I was thinking.
Comment by Scott — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 7:52 pm
Our community believes “all men are rapists”. So if her name was published she might recieve a steady stream of men at her door. Unfortunately men are dammed if the do and dammed if we don’t.
Comment by He Drove Me Mad dot com — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 9:44 pm
Well that would save the tax payer a benefit payment – That is if she declared it 🙂
Comment by Alastair — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 10:21 pm
There is another man facing trial based on this woman’s similar allegations. One might expect this to be dropped immediately, but then that might be expecting too much sense from the system. It will be interesting to see what happens there.
Comment by Hans Laven — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 11:11 pm
Where abouts Hans? Support?
Comment by Alastair — Wed 25th March 2009 @ 11:14 pm
She should have to pay the legal fees for the guy at the very least!
Comment by Scott — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 7:37 am
“The National Centre for Victims of Crime has this report on “Male Rape” that gives these shocking statistics:
– About 3% of American men — a total of 2.78 million men — have experienced a rape at some point in their lifetime (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006).
– In 2003, one in every ten rape victims was male. While there are no reliable annual surveys of sexual assaults on children, the Justice Department has estimated that one of six victims are under age 12 (National Crime Victimization Study, 2003).
– 71% of male victims were first raped before their 18th birthday; 16.6% were 18-24 years old, and 12.3% were 25 or older (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006).
– Males are the least likely to report a sexual assault, though it is estimated that they make up 10% of all victims (RAINN, 2006).
– 22% of male inmates have been raped at least once during their incarceration; roughly 420,000 prisoners each year (Human Rights Watch, 2001).”
Male on male rape is something you’ve obviously overlooked here. Do you think men who are raped by men are making it up because they are feminists?
Comment by achurch001 — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 8:11 am
Women rape men too, not just other men.
Comment by Scott — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 8:41 am
“Do you think men who are raped by men are making it up because they are feminists?”
If there was a reasonable suggestion that they had a motive for lying,
then of course we would suspect them of making it up.
Motives some women may have for lying are:
1) to have the justice system set on someone they want revenge on (for a jilting, say)
2) to cover for sexual activity that they don’t want exposed
3) to get attention/sympathy
4) to get paid (from the state)
5) to bolster their chances of gaining child custody
We are less inclined to believe that the very few men who claim to have been raped/sexually assaulted are lying because the above motivating factors do not operate the same for men as they do for women. What’s more, a man’s claim would be vigorously punished should he later be found to have lied.
The campaign against false rape accusation isn’t about feminists – it’s about the miscarriages of justice that occur when we insist on the fiction that ‘a woman wouldn’t lie about a thing like that’.
Comment by Rob Case — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 10:15 am
Couldn’t have said it better Rob.
Comment by Scott — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 10:21 am
Rape is not only physical, the deepest scars are always emotional. This women obviously deliberately targeted her victim via the internet and other means with direct intent to victimize her target in a most insidious way. IMO she is a disgusting degenerate and deserves to be locked up. But alas, she is a solo mum with three children, so she will get heaps of support and is most likely a hero in some eyes, merely for trying it on. Dykeshit, definitely.
Comment by genderformity — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 11:14 am
I would call her a sex offender. Also call women who get pregnant deliberatly without telling the man that that is her agenda sex offenders too.
Comment by Scott — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 11:52 am
Reply #25 (Scott): Good idea. Such miscreants should be placed on public sex offender lists.
Comment by Hans Laven — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 3:09 pm
The Police should be forced to cover the victims costs and compensation.
They clearly did not investigate the case properly. This case should not
have proceeded to court.
The Police should have prosecuted the lying troll instead of choosing sides
based on gender rather than EVIDENCE.
Incompetence personified!..and to a work colleague!
Comment by SickOFnz — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 8:19 pm
What about the fact (according to the article) that she had previously been committed to hospital for a mental illness? Perhaps the biggest lesson here is the need to be a little careful about who you’re chatting up online. (Like the fox on the railway tracks – never lose your head over a little piece of tail.)
Comment by achurch001 — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 9:41 pm
Have any of you ever attempted to obtain ANY prior of any person (Female and male) The medical, and mental health in particular is virtually impossible. It’s called the privacy act.
Its getting to the point of a written permission for a shag. And even then I suppose it will be assumed that the signiture was obtained by coercion!
Comment by Alastair — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 9:51 pm
Well said Alastair.
As for the comment be careful who you’re chatting up online, its the same as the ignorant and patronising comment that I hear/read often… Be more careful who you sleep with! Or something along similar lines! My ex was my best friend and had been for years, but then she decided she wanted a baby and not to work! Why didn’t I see it coming????
Comment by Scott — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 10:17 pm
He, he, he … have I hit a nerve boys? Maybe that’s why Helen legalized prostitution?? And Scott, trust me “wanted a baby and not to work” is a performative contradiction.
Comment by achurch001 — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 8:57 am
Not if you raise children like my ex does!
Why are you on this site achurch001?
Comment by Scott — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 9:23 am
I suppose this depends entirely on which option is more lucrative to the legal profession.
Comment by Pete — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 1:03 pm
Get off this site achurch001
Comment by supermanintights — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 2:54 pm
Only if John Potter agrees with you.
If you think about it rationally, hiring a prostitute, in Alastair’s words “for a shag”, is probably good insurance against the risk of paying child support or legal fees to defend a false rape claim. I probably wouldn’t recommend it if you were looking for a truly loving relationship. What was that Meatloaf song …
[Girl:]
Will you love me forever
[Boy:]
I couldn’t take it any longer
Lord I was crazed
And when the feeling came upon me
Like a tidal wave
I started swearing to my god
And on my mother’s grave
That I would love you to the end of time
I swore I would love you to the end of time
So now I’m praying for the end of time
To hurry up and arrive
‘Cause if I gotta spend another minute with you
I don’t think that I can really survive
I’ll never break my promise or forget my vow
But God only knows what I can do right now
I’m praying for the end of time
So I can end my time with you
Comment by achurch001 — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 4:01 pm
Achurch we come to this site, cause it is one of the only places we can go to share experiences and learn and support each other, we don’t need you laughing at us and the rubbish you write.
Comment by Scott — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 4:28 pm
The words “Only for a Shag” were not mine. I quoted from the original incident.
Incidentally when are you going to have your first!
Comment by Alastair — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 5:02 pm
My husband’s ex wife always refers to making love as ‘having a shag’
And according to her whatever she says or does is always right
Comment by Rosie — Fri 27th March 2009 @ 8:58 pm
Hey achurch001, Please try to be respectful with your comments. 8 years in prison is not something to be taken lightly. 2 cases so far I have been involved in where one man served 4 months in prison until a good lawyer said, “I am getting you out of here”. He wasn’t even in the place at the time the alleged harm was done let alone do it.
Another came home to an overstay woman and lost everything including his home and he was disabled.
This is unbelievable stuff and the word on the street is that our men’s prisons are busting at the seams with men on false rape charges.
Comment by julie — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 12:09 pm
I can back you Julie. Many of you will be aware of the veracity of my comments. It’s not only Rape, its Breaching PO’s after being stalked then ganged up on by women. In one case I witnessed an inadvertent meeting. The woman couldn’t keep her hands off the male. Being aware of the situation I stopped & watched. I saw no violence nor any body language suggesting the female wanted him to leave. He was charged with breaching the PO. The prosecution attacked me on the grounds 1) I wasn’t there and had colluded with the male. One of their own witnesses had seen me! Then as a male I was biased and my statement had no credibility. He got convicted. 150 hours!
Comment by Alastair — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 2:31 pm
Sorry Forgot, I see victims of both. There stories are to similar to be made up. They (The men) are all very embittered with females. I dread the thought of the vengence they could take either against the complainent ot any other female they run into.
Comment by Alastair — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 2:34 pm
You’re telling ME to be respectful with my comments? That’s the pot calling the kettle black.
“Word on the street” = gossip.
Comment by achurch001 — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 6:44 pm
You’re on to it, achurch001. Good on you.
Comment by julie — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 6:56 pm
Unfortunately prejudice works that way. Fortunately new school thought overtakes such old school fears and produces more lateral, insightful thinkers.
Comment by achurch001 — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 9:29 pm
Pardon? Could you repeat that in English.
Comment by Alastair — Sat 28th March 2009 @ 9:31 pm
This arrived in my inbox this morning. I somehow think it is quite apt:-
The quote of the decade!
Judge Judy to prostitute : “So when did you realize you were raped? ”
Prostitute, wiping away tears: “When the cheque bounced..”
Comment by Alastair — Sun 29th March 2009 @ 8:54 am
That’s funny.
Comment by julie — Sun 29th March 2009 @ 9:07 am
Judge Judy to Shop Keeper: “So when did you realize you were robbed?”
Shop Keeper: “When the cheque bounced.”
Same thing only the commodity has changed. Further, if a shopkeeper is giving away a product as a promo for a certain length of time, you can’t just go in and take one when the promo is no longer running.
Comment by achurch001 — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 5:48 pm
Actually no! In this case the possible crime is fraud, not theft.
BTW I agree with you though, even a prostitute has the right to say NO.
Yours is a mixed metaphore.
Comment by Alastair — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 5:59 pm
Almost out of topic.
I believe we need to publish the press articles about domestic violence and attempt analyzing
them with comment. This will allow us to establish a pattern about these articles and how they are spoon feed to the public. We will establish a pattern about their authors and from which angle they are where they are coming from. These articles would have meant nothing to me before i was served with a protection order
but now i read them in a different light and almost see them as a propaganda of a hidden lobby
They are meant to brainwash people and depict the kiwi male as inherently violent.
The comments and analysis will serve as an alternative reading to the general public: men and
women.
I wanted to start with my first Press article but did not know from where to send posts
I registered but did not see any menu for contributing. Any one can help?
Here is the link to the article in question:
Domestic violence:
CDHB focus on abuse of pregnant women
If someone could show me how to go about posting articles, it will be great. Thanks
Comment by gh — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 6:48 pm
oops Almost out of topic.
I believe we need to publish the press articles about domestic violence and make an attempt analyzing them using the commenting system. This will allow us to establish a pattern about these articles and how they are spoon feed to the general public. We will establish a pattern about their authors and from which angle they are coming from.
These articles would have meant nothing to me before i was served with a protection order.
Now I read them in a different light and almost see them as some sort of propaganda.
They are meant to brainwash people and depict the kiwi male as inherently violent.
The comments and analysis will serve as an alternative reading to the general public: men and
women.
I wanted to start with my first Press article but did not know from where to send posts from
I registered but did not see any menus for contributing.
Follows is a link to the article in question:
Domestic violence:
CDHB focus on abuse of pregnant women
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/2302648/CDHB-focus-on-abuse-of-pregnant-women
If someone could show me how to go about posting articles, it will be great. Thanks
Comment by gh — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 6:56 pm
Try 800 -900 words in the Hearld. They invite submissions for their “opinion section”.
Details in every Hearld on the opinion page.
Regards
Scrap.
Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 10:44 pm
Thats OK for the JAFFA’s scrap. The only NZ Herald I can access is electronically. Don’t tell me, stop living in a rural back water 🙂
Comment by Alastair — Wed 1st April 2009 @ 5:14 am
Just a couple of additions related to this original post and some of the earlier comments:
Firstly, the ACC payout for sexual abuse, and I assume this includes adult rape, is up to $120,000. Alternatively, ongoing payments of 80% of one’s pre-existing income and ongoing costs of “treatment” will be provided for many years.
Secondly, the news story conerning the outcome of this case reported evidence that this woman had been caught drunk driving on the way to visiting her children who had previously been removed from her. She then informed her flatmate that she had obtained the names of all the police involved in arresting her for the drunk driving, and indicated that she was going to lay false allegations of rape as her retribution against them.
Many men have experienced the threat or reality of women prepared to take advantage of our pro-woman, anti-male society and laws in attacking us with false or misrepresented allegations. Women know they can generally expect gullible government and social organisations to support them and to assume the men they accuse to be in the wrong. This case seems to be a particularly blatant example of just that. Although the police perhaps recognized the bulls**t in this particular case, I guess they found themselves in a difficult position. If they applied sensible consideration and concluded that the case did not merit prosecution, they will have been subject to allegations that they were protecting their own. They may have found themselves in the same position as officers in the Louise Nicholas case who had their actions scrutinized ad absurdum, and the officer who had not completed every formality to the letter ended up losing his career and being convicted of an offence. This was even though his initial judgement concerning Nicholas’ allegations had been well vindicated by the fact that the Courts did not uphold them.
Comment by Hans Laven — Sat 4th April 2009 @ 1:24 pm