339
submitted 2 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Summary

Anjela Borisova Urumova, 20, received a 23-month prison sentence for falsely accusing Daniel Pierson of attempted rape and kidnapping in Pennsylvania, leading to his wrongful month-long incarceration.

Urumova pled guilty to seven misdemeanors, including filing false reports and fabricating evidence.

Investigators uncovered her lie after finding inconsistencies in surveillance footage. She admitted she targeted Pierson because she had seen him before.

Alongside jail time, she must pay $3,600 in restitution, undergo a mental health evaluation, and serve probation. Prosecutors warned the false claim damaged public trust and harmed real victims.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 134 points 2 weeks ago

Not long enough. That's not what he would have gotten.

[-] b3an@lemmy.world 84 points 2 weeks ago

This kind of stuff boils my blood. Some asshole drags innocent people through some horrible shit for NO REASON.

It would take years to shake that out of you after it was over and done with. Also imagine what family, friends, employers, would say and think or do because of accusations like this.

This is so fucked up.

[-] tangonaf@feddit.nl 9 points 2 weeks ago

So slander is as bad as rape?

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 79 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Slander that implicates an innocent of a crime should carry the sentence of that crime. His life is forever changed, and is forever linked with that accusation, regardless of his innocence.

[-] Catoblepas 6 points 2 weeks ago

Slander that implicates an innocent of a crime should carry the sentence of that crime

Why should someone be sentenced to death for falsely accusing someone of murder?

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 44 points 2 weeks ago

Whatever the sentence would be for the false accusation, yes.

These situations where people are being convicted for these false accusations don't come from simple misunderstandings or poor testimony, they come from people purposefully making false accusations and even fabricating evidence. It's effectively conspiracy to defraud the government and waste resources as well.

If anything I'd say the sentences for these should even be higher than the accusation punishment, since these people are purposefully trying to ruin the life of the accused and abusing the justice system to try and do it for them.

load more comments (33 replies)
[-] neons@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 2 weeks ago

So murdering someone by falsely getting him the death penalty is somehow better than murder by poisoning?

[-] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

If someone tries to get a death sentence for an innocent person, that is attempted murder. If the punishment for attempted murder in your country is the death penalty, the false accuser should be charged with the death penalty.

Note that this is all assuming that it's proven the accuser did a false claim. The accused being found not guilty is not enough to say that it was a false accusation. Due to the different standards of proof.

[-] ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago

I shall answer, because I am a firm believer in capital punishment.

Death should be given because death should be the punishment for all crime. The white blood cells inside your body agree with me - they are eager to give the death penalty to any criminals infesting your body. There's no pardons or rehabilitation or anything like that; your white blood cells know that there can be no tolerance for crime.

[-] Catoblepas 5 points 2 weeks ago

More blood for the blood god is an acceptable answer, thank you for your honesty 👍

[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Such a bad faith line that tries to down play the damage this did. Do better.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Could not agree more. Not only that, but the kind of damage this does to people with legitimate claims is hard to calculate...

I think she should have gotten what he would have gotten for punishment.

[-] Catoblepas 11 points 2 weeks ago

You mean rape and falsely reporting a crime are two different crimes?

[-] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 weeks ago

In this house, we believe in false equivalences and appeals to pathos!

[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

You mean false equivalencies and reality are two different things?

[-] solrize@lemmy.world 56 points 2 weeks ago

The court press release said she was sentenced to "45 days to 23 months" and the linked news article garbled that to "23 months and 45 days" which they somehow added up to "nearly 2 years". No idea why the sentence itself has such a wide range.

[-] socphoenix@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago

Usually ours to account for things like good behavior/parole I think? I always assumed they used that upper range as the stick part of the incentive to not fuck up again once you’re out of prison since getting sent back would make you serve the longest possible sentence.

[-] Willy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago

could be, or more likely in my mind it's just an ai fuckup.

[-] secret300@lemmy.sdf.org 35 points 2 weeks ago

Nearly two years in prison for falsely accusing someone but if that innocent man got a sentence it would have been 20 plus years...

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Yes. It should have been at least a few more years in prison and a felony rap too.

[-] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago

And if a non-innocent rape the man would get community service.

[-] 2ugly2live@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago

I'm glad she got charged at all, but what a weak sentence.

[-] khannie@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago

No mention of motivation. I don't understand why anyone would choose a random person to just utterly destroy like that. Like even though he's been found innocent can you imagine the horror of being told you were accused of that?

Anyone read more elsewhere?

[-] teamevil@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago

Those are some dead/crazy eyes...yikes

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 20 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

How the hell do you get from "I saw his truck" to "he tried to kidnap and rape me"

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Ugh, not nearly enough of a sentence.

[-] npcknapsack@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago

The motivation is what I really want to know. Given that it was just some random person, I can only hope she figured they'd never find him? So many crimes go unsolved, it's surprising they found this random man with a truck— unless she actually remembered his license plate or something, but that would indicate it was a lot less random. Maybe this wasn't as random as she's saying, maybe she got in a road rage incident with him...

I guess it's because I'm not the kind of person who'd do this, but I just don't understand why someone would. If you want the social media "clout," presumably for a gofundme or something, you don't need to go to the police about it. Even if you thought you had to, a super vague report would probably lead to a cold case that would waste everyone's time, but at least no one would go to jail. If you were truly mentally ill and delusional, you probably wouldn't admit even to yourself that it didn't happen.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

People like this should get the sentence of what they wrongly accused somebody for.

[-] angrystego@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Good news. Terrible emotional comment section.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2025
339 points (100.0% liked)

News

28879 readers
3662 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS