False accusations, myth or reality?

The issue of false accusations raises many fears, prejudices… and fantasies. People often say that “frustrated or angry women accuse men of rape to get revenge.” This cliché fuels the idea that such allegations are common. In reality, these situations are rare. But when they do occur, they can have serious consequences for the people concerned. Because being falsely accused is also a form of violence. So how can they be identified? What do the authorities do? And what are the consequences for a person who makes a false accusation? François Nanchen, Deputy Chief Inspector and Crime Prevention Officer with the Police cantonale vaudoise, as well as eCop, sheds some light on the matter.

When someone files a complaint about sexual or domestic violence, how do the police receive and record their account?

When someone comes to file a complaint, they are welcomed with care and respect. We listen to them describe what happened, and even though this can be distressing, we need to gather as many details as possible. This is often what surprises or unsettles victims: the interviews are long and sometimes difficult because we ask them to go back over intimate or violent events in detail.

For adults, statements are taken down in writing at the time, so interviews can last a long time. Our role is to obtain the most precise information possible. For minors, the interviews are video-recorded in a protected setting to avoid making the child repeat their story multiple times.

Depending on the situation, the person may be heard straight away or by appointment. If the events took place recently – within the previous hours or days – we first direct the victim to a hospital for medical care. This also allows any injuries to be documented and evidence to be preserved. We then schedule an appointment to take the complaint. If the events happened longer ago, the interview is arranged directly by appointment.

Sometimes people come spontaneously to a police or gendarmerie station, but they cannot always be interviewed immediately. It is specialised investigators in the morality unit who must handle this type of complaint. So an appointment must be arranged, as these specialists are not necessarily available straight away.

When someone files a complaint, we start from the assumption that they are telling the truth. The police officer records their statement thoroughly and precisely. The alleged perpetrator also has the right to be heard. We always investigate both incriminating and exculpatory elements, without preconceived ideas. We do not believe blindly, but we do not systematically doubt either. And in any case, that is not our role: our mission is to investigate, to collect witness statements, and to gather material evidence.

The police can never refuse to take a complaint or attempt to dissuade someone from filing one. However, it is important to inform the person about the possible consequences – not to discourage them, but to enable them to make an informed decision. For example, if the facts described do not fall under criminal law, we explain this. But if the person still wishes to file a complaint, we take it. It will then be for the Public Prosecutor’s Office to decide whether to dismiss the case.

It sometimes happens that a person later comes back and says: “If I had known everything this would involve, I might not have done it.” That is why we always try to explain clearly from the outset what filing a complaint means, so people are not taken by surprise.

In cases of domestic violence, the police can also immediately order the alleged perpetrator to leave the home. This exclusion order usually lasts for 30 days. The aim is to protect the victim and any children who may be involved.

One situation we unfortunately encounter quite frequently is that of children being manipulated, especially in the context of divorce or conflictual separations.

From what elements do you start to doubt the truthfulness of a statement? How do you react in such cases?

It can happen that the facts recounted seem implausible or materially impossible. In these situations, we ask for clarifications. Sometimes, this leads to changes in the version of events, which prompts us to probe further. We continue the investigation just as we would in any other case, using the same means: collecting traces, checking CCTV footage, conducting technical checks… Whether or not we have doubts, our role is to explore all possible avenues and to gradually close off possibilities in order to get as close to the truth as we can.

Even when an account appears highly implausible or fanciful, we do our work with the same care. Sometimes we think, “This is really strange…”, but as long as there are elements to examine, we proceed.

One situation we unfortunately encounter quite frequently is that of children being manipulated, especially in the context of divorce or conflictual separations. Sometimes, the mother manipulates the child into accusing the father, with the aim of securing custody. For the entire duration of the investigation, the father may be removed from the home: he no longer has access to his child or only under supervision, for example in designated contact centres. Sometimes, it is a form of parental alienation, where the mother – often in a very enmeshed relationship with the child – questions them after every weekend spent with the father and interprets entirely innocuous behaviours (such as hygiene-related gestures) as abuse. It is almost a form of psychological disturbance.

In these situations, the questions asked by the mother are often leading, and the child, out of loyalty or the desire to please the adult, will answer in the expected way. This is precisely why interviews with minors are video-recorded and conducted using entirely open-ended questions. We talk with the child: if they do not spontaneously raise the subject, we do not bring it up.

There are also particular cases, such as querulous individuals (people who obsessively and often groundlessly file complaints or appeals, convinced that they are the victims of injustice). These are people who come to the police very regularly to report various alleged offences against them, often without naming any perpetrator. This can be linked to a need for recognition or attention, or sometimes to psychological disorders. Even in these situations, we receive them, we listen, and if the reported event is recent, we refer them to the hospital for an examination, just as we would for anyone else.

Credibility assessments are sometimes requested. In which cases does this occur, and what does it involve for the victim?

In certain proceedings – especially when minors are involved – it happens that the lawyers of the opposing party request a credibility assessment. This means that the child must be interviewed again, which is always delicate, because the video interviews are specifically designed so that the victim does not have to relive the events repeatedly.

These new interviews can take place if the lawyers have very specific questions or if psychological assessments are requested to evaluate the credibility of the account. These assessments are not always carried out on police premises.

What are the steps if the justice system suspects a false accusation?

When the justice system suspects that a complaint is false, it can decide not to proceed and to dismiss the case. In that situation, there is no judgement, neither against the accused person nor against the complainant. This can happen when the Public Prosecutor’s Office considers that the reported facts are not credible, or that certain elements suggest it could be a malicious accusation. In any case, these decisions are not taken lightly: the Criminal Appeals Chamber, a supervisory authority, systematically reviews each dismissal or decision not to proceed.

But if there is clear evidence that the person has knowingly and deliberately filed a false complaint, the Public Prosecutor can also open proceedings against them for malicious accusation – and this can happen even without a complaint by the person who was falsely accused.

In some cases, proceedings for misleading the justice system can also be considered, especially if the false statements have led to unnecessary investigations and wrongly mobilised judicial resources.

Regarding situations of parental alienation, administrative measures may apply. If a child is instrumentalised or exposed to a harmful environment, the General Directorate for Children and Youth (DGEJ, in the canton of Vaud) can be called upon. It can intervene by ordering, for example, a family assessment, mediation, or even temporary placement if the environment is deemed too toxic for the child. These decisions are not criminal in nature, but aim to protect the child while assessing the parents’ behaviour.

Furthermore, the person who was falsely accused can themselves file a complaint, notably for defamation or slander, if they feel they have been unjustly targeted.

What is the difference between calumny, defamation and false testimony?

Malicious accusation (or calumny) is when someone falsely accuses another person, knowingly and with the intention of harming them.

Defamation is a bit different: it involves making statements that damage someone’s reputation, but without necessarily knowing they are false. Sometimes the person believes they are telling the truth, but their statements are unfounded or unverifiable, and they cause harm.

A false testimony, on the other hand, concerns a witness who deliberately lies during judicial proceedings. It is a separate offence. 

In practice, even when fully cleared, a person who has been falsely accused remains permanently marked. They are a victim in their own right, sometimes left with profound trauma, especially if the accusations were made public on social media. A simple Google search can be enough to bring the case back to the surface. The consequences can be devastating – and lifelong.

Socially, professionally and legally: what are the concrete consequences for a person who has been falsely accused?

Each situation is different, but the consequences can be very severe. If the evidence collected appears credible – which is often the case, even when the accusation is false – the person concerned can be placed in pre-trial detention. This often results in losing their job and becoming socially isolated. And even if the proceedings end with a dismissal of the case, a decision not to prosecute or an acquittal, there is almost always a lingering doubt or suspicion: “the justice system just couldn’t prove it.” It is very difficult to recover from this kind of accusation.

When it involves a person who works with children – for example, a teacher or a professional in the social sector – a preventive suspension can be decided as early as the first stages of the investigation. Even if the person is subsequently reinstated after a decision in their favour, suspicion often remains in people’s minds.

There is no official mechanism for “rehabilitation,” apart from the court decision itself (a well-reasoned dismissal or non-prosecution order). And if the person who filed the complaint is ultimately convicted of defamation or malicious accusation, the person who was falsely accused receives a conviction order that they can show to their employer.

But in practice, even when fully cleared, a person who has been falsely accused remains permanently marked. They are a victim in their own right, sometimes left with profound trauma, especially if the accusations were made public on social media. A simple Google search can be enough to bring the case back to the surface. The consequences can be devastating – and lifelong.

Are there any support services for people in this situation?

Yes, in certain cases, people who have been falsely accused can receive support from a LAVI centre, especially if the situation causes serious psychological harm (for example, emotional breakdown, inability to work or suicidal thoughts). The distress must be considered a significant harm. The person can contact a LAVI centre to explain their situation: if the assistance falls within the scope of the law, it will be provided; if not, the centre can help redirect them to other appropriate services.

There are also support associations, particularly for men facing family conflicts or false accusations, such as MPEJ or CROP, which offer advice, guidance and information sessions.

Do you have any statistics in Switzerland on proven cases of false accusations? Is it common?

Deliberate false accusations – that is, those made with the conscious intent to harm or seek revenge – are extremely rare. It is important to emphasise that while this phenomenon does exist, it remains very marginal.

Cases of parental alienation, however, are more common. This is not always a conscious or intentional act: sometimes the mother (or more rarely the father) acts under the influence of their own wounds, anger or a fusion-like relationship with the child, without fully perceiving the consequences.

Do you feel that this topic is overrepresented in public discourse compared to the reality of the facts?

I don’t get the sense that people talk about it that much, at least not in public debate. But on the ground, I do notice that it is a significant concern, especially among men. A frequent worry, for example, is the fear of having a sexual encounter after a party or when drinking, and then the partner later filing a complaint, even though the man genuinely thought everything was fine. Some joke that soon you’ll have to get a consent form signed. This remark, often made half-jokingly, actually reflects a real anxiety and a sense of powerlessness.

These situations are difficult for everyone. When both people have been drinking, judgment is impaired on both sides. Because of the imbalance in physical power, the woman may feel that she did not consent to something or that she let it happen out of fear of a violent reaction from her partner. The man may not realise this at all. In some cases, a complaint is filed and an investigation is launched, but the case is eventually closed due to lack of evidence. This is not necessarily a false accusation in the legal sense but rather a mutual misunderstanding of the situation.

This is also why I do prevention work, especially with young people. I tell them: “Before doing anything, ask! Make sure the other person is willing! Stay attentive to your partner and don’t act in ambiguity! And just because your partner consented to one act doesn’t mean they’ll be OK with others.” It might seem obvious, but it’s not always integrated into people’s behaviour.

I think it is important to stress the need to remain vigilant about your own alcohol consumption. Exercising moderation – both for yourself and those around you – helps maintain a safer environment. Excessive drinking can impair perception, weaken judgment, and make it harder to recognise a risky situation.

More generally, can the presumption of innocence be seen as an obstacle to recognising victims’ accounts? How can this be avoided?

The presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle of our legal system: any doubt benefits the accused. But in some cases, this principle can be perceived negatively by victims, especially when they feel it makes their voices unheard, particularly in the absence of material evidence – as is often the case for assaults committed behind closed doors.

Some victims therefore give up on filing a complaint, convinced it will be pointless. That’s why the way the Police welcome them is crucial: kindness, listening, empathy, and explaining the legal framework. These are the elements that help lay the foundation for respectful and constructive support.

The message we try to convey is clear: even if the judicial outcome is not always a conviction, simply being heard as a victim and recognised as such within an official setting can already be an important first step on the path to recovery.

What would you say to someone who has been falsely accused and feels destroyed by what they’ve been through?

These are extremely painful situations, and I have a lot of compassion for people who experience them. Being falsely accused can have profound consequences on a personal, professional and psychological level. You should not face this alone: seeking support, turning to associations, talking with others who have been through similar ordeals can help untangle your emotions, make sense of what has happened, and find a path forward.

To conclude, what message would you like to share with those reading this?

I’d like to remind everyone that in many cases of drug-facilitated sexual assault, alcohol is actually the most frequently involved substance. Without downplaying the seriousness of the acts committed or blaming victims, I think it is important to stress the need to remain vigilant about your own alcohol consumption. Exercising moderation – both for yourself and those around you – helps maintain a safer environment. Excessive drinking can impair perception, weaken judgment, and make it harder to recognise a risky situation.

Illustration Malombra76 | iStockPhoto