Despite the lack of success Facebook has recently experienced with its IPO, there is a chance that its stock might rise in the next week as a result of the recent overturning of the 2003 rape conviction of Brian Banks. The ruling was dismissed as a result of a confession that was presented stemming from a Facebook friend request and subsequent online messaging.

The initial case, presented in 2003, proceeded as follows. Brian Banks was a prominent football player at his school, Long Beach Polytechnic High School. Soaring at 6’4” he was already being recruited by USC, offering him a full scholarship to attend their institution. Banks had ambitions to one day enter the NFL. However, one school day he met Wanetta Gibson in the school hall and they proceeded to the stairwell, the local ‘make-out spot,’ and Banks claims they departed on bad terms, though without having any sexual relations. Soon after, Ms. Gibson, 15 at the time, accused Mr Banks, who was 16, of kidnapping her and raping her.

There was no physical evidence supporting her claim, but Ms. Gibson maintained her story. As the jury was being chosen, Brian Banks’ defense lawyer told him that if the case went to trial, he would be playing roulette with his life. Essentially, if he was convicted he would face 41 years to life for a crime he didn’t commit. Considering that the jury was sure to be all white and would see him as a ‘big black teenager,’ the defense lawyer advised that he plead no contest, reassuring him that the maximum amount of time he would get in jail would be 18 months, and the best case scenario would be parole. However, the sentencing proceeded quite differently and Mr. Banks served a 5 year, 2 month term, after which he was a registered sex offender and found it difficult to find employment. What’s more, Wanetta Gibson and her family sued the Long Beach Unified School District, winning a payout of $1.5 million.

This unfortunate scenario changed recently when Ms. Gibson ‘friended’ Brian Banks on Facebook, stating that she wanted to talk in order to ‘let bygones be bygones.’ According to an interview Banks gave to BBC radio, he decided to hire a private investigator for the meeting to ensure he wasn’t placing himself in a compromising situation. Additionally, the meeting was being recorded. To his great relief, Wanetta Gibson confessed to making false claims, leading to his acquittal in mid-May.

Mr. Banks is currently in the process of seeking compensation for the time he wrongly served in prison, asking for $100 per day he spent in jail. This would lead to a total sum of $219,000. Nevertheless, he is not seeking legal action against Ms. Gibson for her false accusations.

If we turn to Wanetta Gibson, it is evident there are a number of crimes she has committed. Most obviously, she has put an innocent man in jail and destroyed what could have possibly been a very fruitful career with the NFL (and cheated him out of around $10 million). Furthermore, she should be persecuted for fraud considering the substantial amount of money she was unfairly awarded from the school district. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Wanetta Gibson has put the claims of women who have actually gone through rape, which is considered to be torture, in jeopardy. From all the rape cases brought to court, only about 2 to 8 percent are falsified, a very marginal statistic. After this high profile case however, public perception will be skewed in such a way as to bring doubt to the claims of many more women during a time of their lives when they are psychologically unstable and vulnerable.

How is Wanetta Gibson being punished for her actions? The answer to that question is an unfortunate one indeed, illustrating the flaws of the American legal system. There are a number of factors that make it difficult to persecute Ms. Gibson. For one thing, she was a juvenile when the false accusation was made. Another matter is that there is a four year statute of limitations on prosecuting false claims, although many legal professionals attest that the prosecution could claim that they only became aware of the crime of perjury recently and hence the statute would restart when the hidden crime was discovered. Still, it would be difficult for the school district to receive compensation for the settlement, especially considering that Wanetta Gibson refuses to testify in court. Finally, Ms. Gibson has somehow managed to squander her settlement, making her adamant denial of the truth an even greater priority in her life. According to court records, Wanetta Gibson even received public assistance for her and her two children for a time. Afterward she paid a $600 child support sum per month before officials deemed she didn’t have to pay anything because of her lack of employment and income.

When Long Beach police were asked to comment on the issue, they stated that there was no official investigation being conducted into Wanetta Gibson’s actions, but the matter was ‘being reviewed.’ What is certain is that some sort of action must be taken in order to show the public that falsifying information and putting an innocent man behind bars have negative repercussions, rather than rewarding an undeserving individual with millions of dollars. Maybe Brian Banks is willing to forgive Wanetta Gibson for her actions, or maybe he simply wants to forget that dark time of his life. What is certain however is that we, the general public, cannot ‘let bygones be bygones,’ because if we overlook such severe transgressions, we’ll be opening a Pandora’s Box of anarchy.

For the BBC radio interview with Brian Banks, visit http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18266118

California Courts page on the Statute of Limitation: http://www.courts.ca.gov/9618.htm