Charlie Rogers, the alleged victim of a brutal anti-gay hate crime attack, reportedly faked the entire thing. The former University of Nebraska basketball star alleged that three masked men entered her home to assault her -- stripping her down and carving obscenities and gay slurs into her naked flesh. In the video at the bottom of this article, you will witness the very convincing interview given by the so-called victim, as her voice rattles with the painful "memories" of the attack.
A police investigation ensued shortly after Charlie was put in a safe house to recover from the traumatic event she claimed to have suffered. While many news stories, this one included, laid into the cops in Nebraska for not finding the men who attacked her, there was a reason for their slow pace. They were investigating her. Investigators pointed out a Facebook post she had made shortly before her so-called "attack":
"So maybe I am too idealistic, but I believe way deep inside me that we can make things better for everyone. I will be a catalyst. I will do what it takes. I will. Watch me."
It should also be pointed out that forensic testing of her home revealed that nobody had entered the premises; no struggle between the woman and other persons could be confirmed. Anyone who is involved in forensic investigations, or even studies it, knows that this is virtually impossible to pull off unless it is faked. Science doesn't lie, folks.
Charlie pleaded "not guilty" in court on Tuesday to filing false police reports, but it seems as though she should be facing other charges. She made tons of money off donations made to her by kindhearted individuals who believed her bullsh*t story. She still maintains that she was attacked, but again, science just does not lie -- attention seeking nutjobs do, though.
What's sad about this is that there are actually members of the LGBTQ community who suffer bullying and hate crime attacks all over the globe, and there are probably a few stories that were overshadowed by this false one.
Shame on you, Charlie Rogers!
Crime analyst and profiler Chelsea Hoffman can be found on The Huffington Post, Chelsea Hoffman: Case to Case and many other outlets. Follow @TheRealChelseaH on Twitter or click here to contact Chelsea directly.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 7
I understand she was trying to make people take these kind of things seriously, but she must know now that all she did was make it worse, right?
The least she can do right now is admit up to her mistakes and make it up to the LGBTQ community. I think admitting to her mistakes and explaining to people why she did it would be a better solution to her problem, take the charges she is facing, but do not lie and keep it going, shes making herself look like an idiot.
She doesn't even call it an attack; she just speaks vaguely of "events," "story". Someone who is the actual victim of violent attack does not "understand" that some people might not believe her story, which she finds hard to believe herself - they would be angry, and point to the wounds on their body as proof, and call for the criminals to be captured. Instead, she talks only about a political agenda, of advancing GLBT civil rights.
It is even more bizarre that she came forward to do this interview because, interestingly, no official media outlet wrote critically about the details of the attack - only bloggers and "commenters," like me, did. Therefore, she had to have been googling her name and reading blogs and news sites comments to know her story was being questioned.
She says she does not fear, though she does not specify what. However, if her story was true, 3 violent maniacs targeting lesbians in her community are still at large! She says we all know someone who this has happened to, and she hopes other victims will come forward. What? So everyone knows someone who has mutilated by knife by 3 masked Christian men, whose houses are set on fire? Or that people who have mutilated by knife by 3 masked Christian men, whose houses are set on fire, have not reported these crimes to the police? Clearly she is referring to something more abstract.
Maybe she thought she could get away with it because there are ideologically driven people who never question whether "hate crimes" are real or not. Her sympathizers will continue to believe her, or else will attempt to exonerate her by claiming she needs counseling. She is not insane. She may have been emotionally distraught by unemployment at the time, but she planned this carefully over several days, and did so with a clear political agenda.
At any rate, I don't think she should only be charged with filing false reports.
Investigators say it is impossible to have thoughts of terrifying experiences of painful physical harm, and not have it turn up in what you are actually saying. Victims are overwhelmed by their memories and can talk of nothing else; there is no disconnect. She is making an open statement. The fact that she only barely refers to the alleged attack in the most general terms is in itself a large red flag for detectives investigating the reported crime.
It will be interesting to see what she will be charged with. Since the Feds were brought in because it was a "hate crime", this false report goes from misdemeanor to felony status.
In 2004, Professor Kerri Dunst of Lincoln Nebraska vandalized her own car with racist, homophobic, and religious slurs, and reported it as a hate crime. Even after multiple eye witnesses came forth testifying they saw her committing this act, she continued to deny it, and does to this day. She was charged with not only a false report but with insurance fraud, and sentenced to 2 years in prison.
Roger's lawyer spared her from financial fraud charges by not allowing her to access funds that had been raised on her behalf as the result of this alleged crime.
Investigators say it is impossible to have thoughts of terrifying experiences of painful physical harm, and not have it turn up in what you are actually saying. Victims are overwhelmed by their memories and can talk of nothing else; there is no disconnect. She is making an open statement. The fact that she only barely refers to the alleged attack in the most general terms is in itself a large red flag for detectives investigating the reported crime.
Eh, psychology is tricky. Investigators aren't psychologists. Otherwise, there'd be more serial killers caught and more hoaxes debunked more quickly. (There are plenty of abduction hoaxes that have left investigators stumped)
I personally felt that her interview was convincing in its own way. But studying it after the fact, there are tells that indicate she's full of sh*t. The reasons being given here, though, aren't what's led me to this. She is expressing obvious emotional pain -- even if it's not from the attack she pretended to be a victim of.
I know people who are victims who never shut up about it -- and I know victims of pretty horrific stuff that you'd never, EVER know because they just don't talk about it.
Everyone's diff.
At any rate, we agree as far as that this woman faked her attack and is a disgrace. It's good she was blocked from accessing that money she raised. Because that is extremely frustrating. All of that money should be donated to real victims of hate crimes.