I came across this post over in the TwoX sub and I decided to read the linked article and the linked research paper that shows a 4% false accusation rate and a 16% conviction rate.

I've seen feminist claiming that the false accusation rate is tiny, it is so low enough that we can just assume that any accusation is extremely likely to be a legitimate one and so we can assume that the man is guilty. But looking at the research paper I noticed something - claiming that "the genuine accusation rate is 16%" is as valid as claiming that "the false accusation rate is 4%". For 80% of the accusations, there wasn't a guilty verdict and they didn't class it as a false accusation.

Feminism is teaching people that this 80% were genuine allegations. Personally, I think a better assumption would be that some of them are genuine and some of them are false allegations. When there is enough evidence, it looks like 20% of accusations are false (the 4% to 16% false allegation to conviction ratio).

In 10% of allegations the woman decided to withdraw the allegation early in the process. Surely this is a good indication that it might be a false accusation made rashly and the woman decided to stop it? 3% of cases had no evidence of sexual assault but these were not considered to be false allegations either.

Has anyone else found any other research that investigates the "unknown" cases, when there isn't a guilty verdict and they aren't counted as a false allegation? Do we have an actual figure for how many of these are genuine and how many are false?