“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Mark Twain
In May of 2015 Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) came out with a report to persuade lawmakers that the military still was not doing enough to curb sexual assault.
“Snapshot review of sexual assault report files at the 4 largest military bases in 2013.” (1)
This report supposedly reaches a “groundbreaking” discovery.
Here it is…
In over half the cases this report analyzes, the alleged victim is a civilian. The federal government’s annual report on sexual assault in the military does not include civilians.
Why is this important?
Because if you include these civilian “victims” into annual reporting it shows the current estimate of sexual assaults is off by 22,000 and the real number could be as high as 42,000. (by dividing the number of civilian victims contained in this report as a percentage of 20,000, the number of annual sexual assaults in the military estimated by the DoD)
These numbers are based on two things.
Misleading statistics and flawed assumptions
Misleading statistics
Only 11 cases out of the 107 shown in this report ended in a sexual assault conviction.
This means 90% of the allegations presented are unfounded.
The vast majority “almost 75%!” did not even go to trial.
Yet these numbers are held out as evidence that…
“The true scope of violence in military communities is vastly under reported.” (2)
But does it make sense to use cases where the accused was found not guilty to show an increase in the number of actual sexual assaults?
Flawed assumptions
The only way Gillibrand’s math works is if you assume that all of the defendants in these cases are guilty regardless of what the court ruled.
For example…
Of the 22 cases she uses to show an increase in civilian spouse victims, not a single one was given a guilty verdict.
Gillibrand’s conclusion is formed on the basis that these soldiers are guilty anyway.
“The military justice system is clearly failing these spouses.” (3)
If somebody that makes our laws is just going to assume that you are automatically guilty no matter what a jury decides, then why even bother going to trial?
Here’s the case she should be making…
An honest look at the numbers
If Kirsten Gillibrand was actually interested in the truth, she would only use cases where the service member was found guilty of sexually assaulting a civilian to show an increase of sexual assaults against civilians.
Then she would have some credible data showing the number of sexual assaults on military posts might be higher than was first thought.
So why doesn’t she?
Because if she used these numbers honestly, it would show that sexual assaults on military posts are NOT under reported by 22,000 as she presents in this report.
Instead, the estimate would be more in the ballpark of 2,000, which is a far cry from the “crisis” levels presented here.
Fake numbers damage real lives
Underhanded lawmakers have used misleading statistics to drive policy change for a long time.
It needs to stop.
Twisting numbers to fit an agenda has consequences.
Real people with real lives are being destroyed. (Click here to hear from the families)
These lies need to end.
Anthony Santucci
P.S. Please donate today to help free our warriors
1-3 “Snapshot review of sexual assault report filed at the 4 largest military bases in 2013, office of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand May 2015.”
Comments