From edwardbartlett@comcast.net

To info@endtodv.org

Date 11/07/2025 10:35:19 PM

Subject Latest Developments With False Allegations

We are very aware how the media tends to distort the domestic violence issue. This is one of the most blatant examples that I recently came across:

CELL PHONE DESTROYED

Ocean City police were alerted on June 25 around 9pm to assist with a domestic dispute at a Baltimore Avenue hotel.

A male told police he was sharing a room with his wife and young son when Cassandra J. Leonhart, 45, of McLean, Va. Began assaulting him. Police observed the man to have fresh bruises and scratches….

Compare the headline with the actual content of the article. Apparently, the destruction of a cell phone was seen as more newsworthy than the domestic assault on the man. ☹

Also, see the recent commentary on False Allegations, below.

Best, Edward E. Bartlett, PhD

President

++++++++++++++++++
Subject: Latest Developments With False Allegations — Serial False Accuser Deemed “Vexatious Litigant”

One of the more troubling things that we’ve seen in the recent epidemic of false allegations is the tendency of some women to repeatedly make false allegations.  We saw this in the recent paternity fraud case involving Laura Owens who falsely claimed to be pregnant by former “Bachelor” star Clayton Echard.  She made similar false pregnancy claims in two previous unrelated cases.  (Owens last month pled not guilty to seven criminal charges, including forgery, perjury and evidence tampering.)

We also saw this with the female Air Force officer who falsely accused US Strategic Command Commander Gen. John Hyten of sexual misconduct.  According to a WSJ column, before falsely accusing Gen. Hyten of sexual misconduct, she: launched a dizzying avalanche of charges against her superiors, including Gen. Hyten, his chief of staff, and officers who investigated her. Gen. Hyten told the Armed Services Committee that she made 34 different accusations against the Strategic Command hierarchy: 24 against the chief of staff, six against Gen. Hyten, two against his deputy commander, and two against the officer who investigated her. Charges ranged from conduct unbecoming an officer to misuse of a government cellphone. None of these accusations involved sexual misconduct. None were substantiated by the Army’s Inspector General Office, and the Pentagon’s Inspector General Office validated that conclusion.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-truth-about-gen-john-hyten-11565214500

Here’s a recent example from California where a woman made so many false sexual assault allegations that she’s been deemed a “vexatious litigant,” which means she can’t “litigate future cases unless there’s a preliminary showing that the cases are likely to be meritorious.”  Here are two articles about the case:

Court Dismisses Vexatious Litigant’s Sexual Assault Lawsuit, Noting Inconsistencies with Evidence, Claims in Other Cases

https://reason.com/volokh/2025/06/24/court-dismisses-vexatious-litigants-sexual-assault-lawsuit-noting-inconsistencies-with-evidence-claims-in-other-cases/

When plaintiffs file enough cases that courts view as frivolous, the courts can generally declare the plaintiffs to be “vexatious litigants,” and thus limit their ability to litigate future cases unless there’s a preliminary showing that the cases are likely to be meritorious. The rules vary from state to state, but California has a pretty well worked out system for dealing with such matters, and a list of thousands of vexatious litigants.

The March 6, 2025 decision by Judge Sarah Heidel in Doe v. Suarez (appeal pending) illustrates how this system can work in getting vexatious litigants’ cases dismissed. And the case also shows the value to opposing parties of being able to find a vexatious litigant’s past cases—and therefore one reason to forbid pseudonymous litigation by litigants who appear likely to be potentially vexatious.

No Pseudonymity for Vexatious Litigant, Even When She Is Alleging Sexual Assault

“[A]llowing plaintiff to proceed under a pseudonym could enable her to evade judicial oversight under the vexatious litigant rules by obscuring her litigation history and identity across multiple cases.”

https://reason.com/volokh/2025/06/24/no-pseudonymity-for-vexatious-litigant-even-when-she-is-alleging-sexual-assault/

Numerous studies have examined the motives of false accusers.  According to a 2018 article in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, these are the most common motives:

As you can see from this list, “attention” is the second most common motive and “sympathy” is the fourth most common.  (This sample involves criminal cases in which women falsely claimed to have been victims of forcible rape.  Cases that arise in other settings, such as employment or family law, are more likely to be motivated by material gain.)

Attention seeking as a motive for false allegations has received greater attention in recent years, especially in the aftermath of the #MeToo movement, when we saw how false allegations could be contagious.  Here’s a new article on the topic that was published last week:

12 Things Everyone Should Know About the Psychology of Victimhood

The strange allure of being wronged

June 21, 2025

https://www.stevestewartwilliams.com/p/12-things-everyone-should-know-about-a31

Victimhood has always had a certain moral cachet. In recent years, however, it’s become one of the most powerful currencies in the social marketplace. Whereas people once sought status through highlighting their achievements, today they often do so by broadcasting their wounds.

The philosopher Bertrand Russell saw it coming. In a 1943 essay titled The Superior Virtue of the Oppressed, he warned of a growing tendency to see victimhood not just as a reason for sympathy, but as a badge of moral superiority. Since then, the trend has only accelerated.

Take Rachel Dolezal, the White woman who presented herself as Black and rose to a leadership position in the NAACP before her true ancestry was revealed. Or recall the actor Jussie Smollett, who staged a hate crime against himself by hiring two acquaintances to beat him up. These are baffling cases – until we recognize the powerful incentive, in today’s culture, of being a victim.

This isn’t to deny, of course, the reality of suffering or oppression. There are genuine victims in the world, and they deserve our compassion and support. However, when victim status becomes a path to prestige or power, it creates an unfortunate incentive for people to take on the victim role – sometimes unwittingly, sometimes strategically.

In this installment of the “12 Things Everyone Should Know” series, we’ll explore what the latest psychological research reveals about victimhood: how it distorts perception, encourages bad behavior, and poisons intergroup relations.

1. Victimhood as a Personality Trait

 Psychologists have identified a personality trait they call the Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV). It reflects a chronic sense of being wronged, and includes four key components:

1. Need for recognition– the desire to have one’s suffering acknowledged, validated, and empathized with
2. Moral elitism– a belief in one’s moral superiority, and the moral depravity of one’s opponents
3. Lack of empathy– obliviousness to other people’s suffering
4. Rumination– a tendency to obsess over problems, unpleasant experiences, and perceived slights
5. Victim Signaling as a Manipulation Tactic

Not every claim of victimhood is genuine. People with manipulative, narcissistic, or psychopathic tendencies sometimes weaponize victimhood: They exaggerate harm, fabricate grievances, and leverage sympathy to exploit others’ better nature. As psychologist Adam Grant put it: “Constantly claiming to be a victim is not a sign of virtue. It’s a strategy for narcissists and psychopaths to get ahead.”

[continues]

Here’s another good article on the topic:

COMMENTARY: Incentivizing false allegations promotes victimhood

Nafees Alam, Professor of Social Work, Boise State University

February 1, 2025

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/commentary-incentivizing-false-allegations-promotes-victimhood-3273922/

The late Charlie Munger famously said, “Show me the incentive, and I’ll show you the outcome.” Today, this rings true in a world where victimhood often translates into social currency and financial gain. The rewards for being perceived as a victim are so enticing that false accusations are increasingly common. For those willing to take the gamble, the potential payoff is immense. A successful, false claim could lead to monetary settlements, media attention or career advancement. Even when allegations fail to reach court, public opinion often rallies around accusers, granting them social validation and status.

This dynamic creates a risk-reward scenario that some find worth exploiting. Jussie Smollett, for example, staged a hate crime against himself and faced legal repercussions after being exposed. Smollett’s case raises an ethical question: Can individuals such as him bear all the blame when society has created a system that incentivizes victimhood? In many ways, the root of the problem lies in a culture that elevates victim narratives while failing to hold false accusers accountable.

Crystal Mangum falsely accused members of the Duke University lacrosse team of sexual assault, causing severe harm to the accused. The Title IX case involving Virginia Tech revealed how gender bias can influence investigations. Amber Heard’s defamation trial with Johnny Depp demonstrated the consequences of false or exaggerated allegations. Aziz Ansari faced backlash after being accused of misconduct stemming from post-intimacy regret. Each case underscores how modern culture amplifies accusations, often without sufficient scrutiny.

These examples reveal a societal pattern. When victims are celebrated and victors vilified, the allure of victimhood becomes hard to resist. The incentives attached to being perceived as a victim are so pervasive that even highly successful individuals may feel tempted to adopt the role, regardless of its authenticity. In this environment, it is unsurprising that some resort to false accusations to gain social or economic advantage.