Articles say that she has to undergo psychiatric treatment as well as what one article labeled as “extensive community service.”

Is that enough? I don’t know.

Is it more than she would have gotten if she had gone to trial? I don’t know that either.

But it seems clear that this will follow her around for a long time, as well it should.

Now if we could only get into Mr Peabody’s Way Back Machine and restore the lives of the falsely accused men, that would be great.

This vicious perjurer deserved indictment. The prisons have far, far too many innocent “sex offender” male inmates, often of minority and poor backgrounds. Visit the website of The Innocence Project if you have any doubt.

It does, however, have a strong connection to encouraging false accusations,

I am surprised/disappointed/curious as to why no one ever looks at the problem of false accusations and the argument that we want to encourage women to report their rapes in terms of statistical Type I and Type II errors.

Type I errors are false positives, of which false accusations are a subset. Type II errors are false negatives which includes women who were raped but do not report it.

When I learned about this stuff, I learned that reducing one type of error almost certainly increases the other type of error. Reducing false positives of say, a pregnancy test, increases false negatives, saying you were pregnant when you are not. Reducing false negatives, releasing killers from jail will increase false positives, killing innocents on death row.

I would hope that if that analysis is accurate, that it would be easier to convince the lawyers and academics behind various rape advocacy groups that it is morally, ethically, and legally important for them to concern themselves with false positives.

Not punishing this woman will in the absolute scientific statistical sense increase the numbers of false positives, and do little to reduce the number of false negatives.