"Allegation" or "Accusation"?
- CW
- Jun 5, 2016
- 5 min read
These two words are often used as if they mean the same thing, but there is actually a distinct and very important difference. Although I felt I had a good understanding I did have to look up the definitions and I've tried to summarise them here as best I can. (However, if there are any legally trained people who wish to correct specifics, please do comment below).
Accusation
This is made when a person is accused of committing a crime and there is some evidence to support (or prove) the validity of that accusation.
For example, there's a dead body in the living room with a candlestick lying next to it and a footprint in a pool of blood. Finger prints and foot print analysis shows that the prints belong to a suspect, and the footprint has been matched to a pair of his shoes.
Based on this evidence, the suspect has been arrested and is accused of committing the crime.
(Note: the suspect is only "accused" at this stage, and the word "proof" must not be used. The finger prints merely prove that he held the candlestick and the footprint proves that he stood in the blood. No matter how persuasive that might seem, since both of those pieces of evidence could have occurred "after the fact" we cannot yet say that it have been "proven" that the suspect committed the crime.)
Allegation
A woman has made a complaint that a man sexually assaulted her when she was younger. She has given a detailed statement to the police of the alleged incident from five years ago.
This is an "allegation" because not only is there no proof from the statement alone that the alleged crime even occurred (a statement is evidence of a crime, but is not the same as a "proof"), there is no proof or evidence that the suspect committed the offence.
The woman, who is legally a "claimant" and not a "victim" (unless "proof" of the crime is ascertained) has named an individual - the suspect. This suspect is arrested based on the "allegation" of the the offence for which there is not yet proof of its occurrence, or any evidence of his involvement.
So the "allegation" is on two levels:
1) did it even happen? and
2) is the suspect the one who committed it?
My original intention was just to write about the main two terms...but then I had a few more musings to go over...
Should we say "Victim" or "Claimant"?
Bear in mind that the poor dead chap in the first example is at first only a dead body. It will require a formal declaration that he died as a result of the act of another person (a homicide) in order to formally call him a "victim". At first the Police would state that the death is "suspicious" but they will be careful not to state it as a "fact" that he was murdered (and therefore a "victim" of murder) until the post-mortem and coroner state that was the cause of death.
Similarly, if someone had their bag stolen (let's say it is recorded on CCTV that a hooded person snatched it) they would indeed be a "victim".
However, when there is no evidence that "proves" a crime, thus leaving it as an "allegation" of an offence, the person making the claim is, therefore, a "claimant."
"False" allegation or "Wrongful allegation"?
This is where we start to enter a grey area, so we like to carefully make a distinction of our own, that may or may not have legal grounding, but it helps us.
False
We use this word to specifically refer to where the information being given is known not to be true by whoever is making the claim. In short: it is a LIE.
Wrong
We use this to cover information or allegations that are made incorrectly, but without motive or intention. This includes where action (or inaction) is mistaken as abusive, or some kind of misunderstand or misinterpretation has occurred. It often happens when the reporting party airs on the side of caution, which is exactly what teachers, carers, doctors and so on are always trained to do.
PCJ firmly believes that everyone has a duty to report any concerns they have for the safety of a child, and even if they are uncertain about the facts, it is better to report and be safe than it is to risk the safety of a child.
However, PCJ also believes that in balance to this, a false allegation - a "malicious falsehood" - should always be challenged and should be subject to serious consequences. We have laws in this country such as the criminal offences of "Wasting Police Time" and "Perverting the Course of Justice", or the civil offences of defamation we should be used far more often, and at the expense of the party making the false allegation.
So who is the "victim" in a false allegation?
The victim is the suspect who is subjected to a very invasive, abusive allegation that usually has profound and far-reaching consequences even when the case does not result in a conviction. However, there are secondary victims, such as the family and friends who may have also suffered during an investigation. There is a financial cost to these cases and often the defendant ends up with debts amounting to tens of thousands of pounds. Unless the "victim" is very wealthy this could mean severe debt, possible re-mortgage (or loss) of their house, and frequently the suspension from, or loss of their job (yes, some employers don't want an employee who as even been suspected).
Also, depending on how the case ended, and because it is rare for a case to ever be cited as the result of lie and recorded that way, the consequences can continue long after the case has ended. Enhanced DBS checks often have information about the case, which worries future employers who may decide not to "to take the risk" because "there's no smoke without fire." In some cases, applications for Visas to countries like America can be turned down on the basis that although there are no conviction there is a record of potential sexual crimes.
But perhaps more worrying...
When false allegations are made by children (and they are actually rare to be made solely by children) this can be a very serious warning sign that something else is very wrong in that child's life. It could be that they have been abused but made the allegation of someone other than the abuser. Another example can be found in Parent Alienation Syndrome (PAS) cases where one parent is specifically getting a child to tell such lies. That in itself is emotionally abusive.
Isn't this all just semantics?
No. It matters, and it is important to know what these words are, to use them correctly, and to be ready to wade through their use should you ever find yourself embroiled in these cases yourself.
CW
Comments