British student Natasha Uttamsingh, 22, has been found guilty of lying about being raped by her boyfriend and sentenced to jail for 15 months. We have previously discussed how false rape accounts are often not punished (as in the case of the infamous Duke Lacrosse rape case) or lightly punished. There has been a variation of sentences for false rape charges but they vary greatly, including just a few weekends in jail. (here; here; here; here; here; here; here; here; and here).
Uttamsingh, 22, falsely claimed that she was beaten and strangled by her ex-boyfriend Aakash Andrews after he broke up with her. She reportedly first told him that she was pregnant but then created an elaborate lie that he had raped her, including false text messages. She also made a false call to the police under an assumed name.
Her lies resulted in the granting of a non-molestation order against him. However, her undoing proved to be a text purportedly from Andrews where he admitted to raping her. The police determined that the text was sent when he could not have had possession of the phone and that she had sent the message to herself to create incriminating evidence. She also altered medical evidence to support her claims.
Her lawyer claimed that the actress had a personality disorder and that any jail time would interfere with her plans to become a midwife — a somewhat conflicted argument that the court should not convict her because she is not responsible while arguing that she is on a career track to help deliver babies.
Given the effort to send away Andrews as a rapist and particularly the detailed and premeditated effort to frame him, a year in prison may be viewed as a bit light. This was not a single police call but an effort involving falsified evidence over a significant period of time.
34 thoughts on “English Student Given 15 Months For False Rape Claim”
@Karen the person who commits a crime is still responsible, but you can’t argue that a person’s behavior/actions can lead to them being victims. No one has a right to enter my home and steal my stuff so does that mean I should leave my doors unlocked when I leave or better yet leave my doors and windows open? The thief would still be charged and jailed, but the Judge would have a right to call me stupid for doing what I did. Remember Karen the law can’t undo something it can only punish so it’s in a person(men or women) to not get so drunk that they are completely helpless
Also Karen men have been raped by women while they were passed drunk out so this isn’t just a woman issue.
For the judge who thought she contributed to her rape:
If you walk into a bar and deliberately sit down in the seat of a Hells Angel, who breaks your jaw, should his sentence be reduced because you contributed by pissing him off?
We parents teach our kids all the safety measures we can think of, not because if the worst happens we’ll say it’s all their fault, but to help minimize risk. When you go to a party, don’t drink too much. Never drink and drive. Always have a friend or significant other with you and keep each other in sight. Should you fail to follow any or all of these safety measures, yes, you have increased your risk, but that does not allow someone to rape you. Minimizing risk is to reduce your exposure to bad people like rapists, murderers, and gang members. Not reducing your risk profile is NOT an unspoken consent to your attacker.
This young lady used to have a higher tolerance for alcohol. She drank within her limits for when she was in college and partying. Her limits were much lower, which she discovered when she passed out. The sentence for that is not rape. She had her sister with her to help look out for her, but these parties get crowded and loud, and it’s easy to lose someone. The sentence for that was not rape. She was helpless when a bad person crossed her path. The silver lining of her remarkably well written victim impact letter is that this will start a conversation about helping people who have drunk too much, being aware of your surroundings, the risks of drinking too much, and all the other ways we can reduce our exposure to jerks like this guy.
A good man does not have sex with a stranger who is passed out and helpless. Most people understand that the person is incapable of consent. We need to raise our young men better, and apparently we need to go over these scenarios with them. This lady was around a lot of people while inebriated. And yet, hundreds of people did not rape her. Only one did. The rest of them had enough character to realize it was wrong.
I recall years ago I fell asleep on the shoulder of a friend in a water taxi going back to our boat after a big island party. I was sleeping, not passed out, because it was really late and I’d been dancing all night. A man on the boat grabbed me, shoved his tongue in my mouth, and grabbed my boobs. I woke up in a panic and fought him so hard my friend stopped me moments before I threw him off the boat into the ocean. And then when she calmed down she went after him, too. And then the entire boat including the captain was pissed at him. He was very subdued for the rest of the ride. It was a really horrible way to wake out of a sound sleep. My dozing off right next to my friend did not give him the right to do that.
I have zero patience or sympathy with jerks like that Stanford swimmer.
Karen – I have zero patience or sympathy for people who pass out drunk behind the dumpster.
Again with the pretzel logic. That’s not even contrarian. You’ve got to be able to string at least two relevant thoughts together involving one issue. Perhaps not.
issac – you have got to learn to think outside the box.
IMO accusers of false claims need punishment equal if the claims were true. In this case, Uttamsingh should receive punishment equal to that for the rape and assault she claimed was committed upon her. A judicial slap on the wrist for making false accusations is insufficient punishment.
Your convoluted contrarian approach, whether it be to amuse yourself, or to set yourself apart and perhaps above the pedestrian issues of the rest of the world, or whether you truly believe your statements, is nothing short of pathetic in this or other cases where someone uses force, however it is applied, to sexually violate another. You are better suited for one of those societies where women wear sheets and are routinely set on fire because they ‘place themselves in a position of risk’.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and place you in the category of fool. However, there is enough in what you say, from time to time, to indicate that you might just have a brain in there. Why not hone your skills and give up the idiot/contrarian approach. You just might achieve some credibility. With your post here you have all but lost any you might have had.
issac – with the multiple rapes and molestations in Europe this year, the excuse given by the perpetrators were “They were asking for it!”
As usual Paul zeros right in on the problem – the Stanford law professor was without a shred of dignity dressed as she was. Good lord, what was she thinking? Black jacket and black and white print blouse – is it any wonder that Paul was unable to get past such an offensive (perhaps rape permitting?) outfit?
I hope Paul is able to recover soon.
Regarding the Stanford case, I agree 6-month jail sentence looks appallingly lenient. What I’ve not seen discussed is whether or not the sentence is atypical for the circumstances. The fact that this hasn’t been raised by advocates or the media suggests to me that the lightness of the sentence might actually be more common than we think or want. If this sentence is in line with precedents, would a more severe sentence be upheld on appeal?
And if the sentence is in line with similar situations, we have a bigger problem (I’m in CA) than this one judge.
Wonderer: Good point, but even if it were typical, there’s no excuse good enough to impose a six-month sentence for such a heinous crime. The father’s comments to the effect of “what ruin my son’s life for 20 minutes of action?” seems to have been the judge’s perspective as well. A WTF moment.
Steve – ordinarily I am anti-rapist, however this was an interesting case. The girl was passed out (on her own volition) and he took advantage of the situation (or not, depending on how drunk he was). I heard that the judge thought the girl contributed to the situation and thus shared some of the blame.
Ah, yes, like those women in the Cosby criminal trial. She put herself in the situation. Sure, the old, you-walked- down-the-dark-alley-at-night-and-you-contributed-to-your-murder theory.
Here’s the position of the Stanford law professor who started the petition:
Steve – I could not get past the picture of the law professor. Evidently there is no dress code for professors at her school.
That being said, I do think that some women place themselves in a position of risk for rape.
Paul: Yes, women should know they can’t be lying passed out behind a dumpster. Some Stanford athlete might try and take advantage for 20 minutes, and then she’ll get some other former Stanford athlete as a judge in the perp’s criminal trial.
Steve – much as we must admit it, being passed out behind a dumpster puts you at risk whether you are male or female.
More appropriately, her sentence should be equal to what his would have been for ‘attempted rape’. She attempted to have him punished. Had she succeeded and he had suffered time in jail, then match the sentence. She should be sentenced for attempting to destroy someone.
‘Section 37(3) of, and paragraph 1(b) of the Second Schedule to, the Sexual Offences Act 1956 provided that a person guilty of an attempt to commit rape was liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years. Attempted rape became a statutory offence under section 1(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981. But the maximum penalty was not affected by this. The maximum penalty for attempted rape was increased to imprisonment for life by sections 3(1) and (2) of the Sexual Offences Act 1985.’
So, somewhere between seven years and life. Time off for good behavior and remorse and she could be out in a couple of years. Two to three years in the slammer seems appropriate.
Well, at least a witch’s coven just hexed the convicted rapist to a lifetime of impotency and nightmares. I think there’s a FB page with instructions for anyone who wants to join. All you need is a black candle and some menstrual blood.
The lengths the public has to go to when the judge won’t provide justice…
As for the English false accuser, I’m just glad she got some jail time. Most of the time false accusers don’t get punished at all. Oh, you tried to get a man thrown in prison and labeled a sex offender, life ruined forever (unless he’s a really good swimmer) because you were mad at him? Well, you must have been having a bad day.
As long as they can prove it was willfully fabricated, vs those cases that get thrown out due to lack of evidence, then they need to make an example of these people. Their intended victim deserves justice, and we need some kind of deterrent.
The lawyer’s argument is as close to without being, ‘Please judge, have mercy on me for killing my parents, I’m an orphan.’, as it can get.
This is a step in the right direction, but as someone posted, she will be out in less than six months. The sentence should be equal to what her victim would have received if he had so been falsely convicted and sentenced.
The guidelines should not be draconian like 3 strikes. But, they should not allow a 6 month sentence for 3 counts of felony rape.
But, this is just one bad judge. You need more stringent sentencing guidelines in Cali so this can’t occur.
Steve, i abide the recall petition. Here’s the shame, and it happens everywhere. The timing was perfect for this judge to be simply voted out of office a couple days ago. He was on the ballot. But like so many local elections, particularly for judges, he was unopposed. If he had an opponent, very good chance a recall would not be necessary.
Nick write, “Steve, i abide the recall petition. Here’s the shame, and it happens everywhere. The timing was perfect for this judge to be simply voted out of office a couple days ago. He was on the ballot. But like so many local elections, particularly for judges, he was unopposed. If he had an opponent, very good chance a recall would not be necessary.”
Great point. The cost to get on the ballot is pretty steep, too, although I’m not certain, I think it’s something like $8,000.00 – $10,000.00(?). And, the networking endorsements for an incumbent judge are very hard to overcome. And if that’s not enough, lots of attorneys who appear regularly before the incumbent are for the obvious reason contributing toward the campaign costs, although I’ve experienced judges appropriately disclosing on the record that an opposing counsel was a contributor.
Re the petition, apparently there are 800,000+ signatures nationwide. Hopefully, there will be a lot more. Judge Persky got lost in space somewhere, and that’s giving him the benefit of the doubt.
There’s not a good enough excuse for a six-month sentence to have been imposed by California Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky.
Please sign the recall petition: https://www.change.org/p/california-state-house-recall-judge-aaron-persky
Half her time is cut the moment she walked in the prison door, then she will get 2 for 1 for the rest of the sentence for good behavior. She will do 3-4 months max.
Myrtis, My thoughts as well. I worked for a prosecutors office as an investigator back in the 70’s. Back then, the pendulum was swung against rape victims. They were vilified on the stand and victimized again by the judicial system. That pendulum has swung, making men charged w/ rape often victimized by a politicization of our justice system, as JT mentioned in the Duke case.This Stanford case is not about the system. It is about the sentencing by a judge. When you give judges wide latitude in sentencing, this type of injustice will occur. Our Federal Sentencing Guidelines are more structured and less prone to this type of injustice.
Actually, my first sleepy glance at the headline gave me an impression that the case was about an alleged rape of a student in English class.
Gee, I thought her name would Elizabeth, or something like that. I had to go back quickly and reread the headline.
It may take penalties like this to protect innocent men. I tell my older son that it is risky, false rape charge wise, to have sex with a woman who is not ones wife. Too little proof of loyalty.
Could Mr Aakash Andrews sue for damages?
And now we have the young man sentenced to a mere 6 months (3 with good behavior) for raping an unconscious girl, getting caught at it, and arrested right there. I hope the judge who sentenced him has no job immediately.
Comments are closed.