“In some locales, the rate of unfounded sex assault is low; in others, it’s an astonishing 40 per cent.”  Why is that?  Are all police departments classifying cases similarly or might there be discrepancies?  Are the definitions of “unfounded”, “unsubstantiated”, and “baseless” the same everywhere and are they being interpreted and understood by all in the exact same way?  These questions are important for context, and considering the possibility that the original complainant may not necessarily always be the victim and/or when the victim is uncooperative with the police investigation.  How do these facts factor in to the Globe and Mail “unfounded probe”?   Also, uniting in defence of a common interest (circling the wagons) is not always a bad idea.  Police have an interest in adopting best investigative practices from everywhere and from ensuring common understandings of definitions and classifications?  I'm just saying, assumptions can lead to erroneous conclusions.