Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 06-12-2016, 09:37 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
ETA: I also think that judge was payed off somehow. He should be disbarred.


Do you have any basis for making such an assertion?
  #252  
Old 06-12-2016, 09:50 AM
Dangerosa Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 21,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
That has to be the most awful, disgusting people collected together that I've ever had the displeasure of reading about. I feel dirty after all that. And you know, low income trashy people really get their share of vitriol aimed at them, but who knew it could really be a bunch of soulless, rich assholes that were the true despicable scum? I'd rather hang out with the Springer types any day than these vipers-in-hiding, delusional, entitled fuckers any day.
I think they are upper middle class assholes according to Mom's letter.
  #253  
Old 06-12-2016, 09:56 AM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
They're working on that.

Thank God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
I think they are upper middle class assholes according to Mom's letter.

Now days, doesn't that qualify them for a rich designation?
  #254  
Old 06-12-2016, 10:24 AM
Dangerosa Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 21,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post


Now days, doesn't that qualify them for a rich designation?

Well, I'm an upper middle class asshole and I see the difference between me and rich. But I don't seem to be as upper middle class or as much of an ass hat.

And I'm perfectly willing to admit my kids can be fuck ups - my son BARELY passed Spanish and only though the good graces of his teacher who let him turn in his final project after school ended so he could squeak by with a D-. My daughter is going through a severe cycle of teenage selfish angst along with inheriting my depression and anxiety - making her appear to be a true pain in the ass.
  #255  
Old 06-12-2016, 09:55 PM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Je suis Ikea.
Posts: 25,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper
They're working on that.
Thank God.
Personally, I don't agree with recall of a judge over a particular decision. It undercuts the independence of the judiciary, by making them more likely to consider harsher sentences, to preserve their own jobs, not because they think the convicted person deserves it, as argued by a former prosecutor in the article linked up-thread: Judicial Recall Will Inevitably Lead to Harsher Sentences

I would argue that the answer is in broad appeal rights on sentence, so that if the trial judge makes an error, based on the applicable law and the facts of the case, the prosecutor can appeal it and have another court take a look at it. The overall goal is to have the convicted person receive a fair and just sentence, based on the applicable legal principles.

Going after the judge here just seems a proxy for outrage over the sentence, because there's apparently no way to appeal the sentence and have it corrected on appeal.

Recall or impeachment of a judge should be limited to clear misconduct in office (taking a bribe, diddling expense accounts, etc), not an error in judgment in a particular case.

Last edited by Northern Piper; 06-12-2016 at 09:57 PM.
  #256  
Old 06-12-2016, 10:08 PM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
Recall or impeachment of a judge should be limited to clear misconduct in office (taking a bribe, diddling expense accounts, etc), not an error in judgment in a particular case.

This is the important part. For my WAG, I do believe money (or something equivalent) changed hands. Because I simply cannot fathom a judge having all that damning information at their fingers tips and then sentencing that prick the way he did, all the while knowing the results would end up vilified on the national stage. The man is a Stanford alumni, so my hunch is that the connection begins there. And if the cumulative effect somehow doesn't reach the level of misconduct, I fear more for our society facing this sort of Kangaroo Kourt and they're contempt for the victims, than I do for a possible nebulous "harsher sentencing."
  #257  
Old 06-12-2016, 10:20 PM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Je suis Ikea.
Posts: 25,298
Well, I'm not prepared to assume a judge committed a criminal offence without seeing strong evidence of it.

And, broader rights of appeal would achieve the goal you seek: establishing uniform standards for sentencing, based on legal rulings from the appellate courts, rather than each judge assessing whether a particular sentence will cause outrage in the court of public opinion.
  #258  
Old 06-12-2016, 10:23 PM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
I understand and I applaud you being a lot more level-headed on this issue than I am, because the very emotional nature can indeed have too much impact. However, I'll concede that broader rights of appeal does sound more promising. Unfortunately, I bet the wait for that to be put into place and be useful, will take a very long time indeed.
  #259  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:05 AM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Je suis Ikea.
Posts: 25,298
Well, if those political operatives mentioned in the article I linked to would take a long view of it and take the view that changing the system may be more effective for their goals than getting one judge kicked off the bench, then maybe change could happen. But they seem focussed on disciplining this one judge rather than making systemic change.
  #260  
Old 06-13-2016, 07:12 AM
elbows elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 12,916
I agree, but, not by accident, changing the system is complicated and not widely understood.

And this reaction DOES send a message, though I doubt they'll get the judge removed.
  #261  
Old 06-13-2016, 08:03 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
This is the important part. For my WAG, I do believe money (or something equivalent) changed hands. Because I simply cannot fathom a judge having all that damning information at their fingers tips and then sentencing that prick the way he did, all the while knowing the results would end up vilified on the national stage.
First of all, the judge would not necessarily known in advance that he would be "vilified on the national stage." There are hundreds of criminal sentencing hearings every day. How many of them are vilified on the national stage? Internet outrage tends to be random.

Second, by insisting that this must be caused by some sort of individual corruption completely lets off the hook the actually societal problem that this illustrates—that we live in a culture that goes easy on rapists and we live in a culture that goes easy on white people and we live in a culture that goes easy on rich people.

That's the problem here and that's what people are justifiably outraged about. Insisting that it has to have happened because the judge took a bribe is basically dismissing the actual social context of this whole incident.
  #262  
Old 06-13-2016, 10:14 AM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Je suis Ikea.
Posts: 25,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
First of all, the judge would not necessarily known in advance that he would be "vilified on the national stage." There are hundreds of criminal sentencing hearings every day. How many of them are vilified on the national stage? Internet outrage tends to be random.
Which again supports the argument for broader appeal rights for the prosecutor on sentences. Relying on random, arbitrary internet outrage as a way to send a message about a sentence is not particularly effective to change the system.

Giving the prosecutor a broad power to appeal, so that there can be regular review of sentences that don't fit sentencing guidelines whether or not there is internet outrage, is a more effective systemic response.
  #263  
Old 06-13-2016, 10:51 AM
elbows elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 12,916
Why are they not attempting to appeal the sentence? It seems like the kid lied about some stuff. Plus it's clear he didn't own his actions, or save the state the cost of a trial, which revictimized the victim in court, etc. Isn't there even a little wiggle room there?
  #264  
Old 06-13-2016, 10:58 AM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
First of all, the judge would not necessarily known in advance that he would be "vilified on the national stage." There are hundreds of criminal sentencing hearings every day. How many of them are vilified on the national stage? Internet outrage tends to be random.
Who said anything about "in advance"? Hell, if I'd had all the evidence that he had, before I'd made the same ruling, I'd have realized my batshit crazy sentencing was going to make people want to come after me with tar and pitchforks. It ain't rocket science.

Quote:
Second, by insisting that this must be caused by some sort of individual corruption completely lets off the hook the actually societal problem that this illustrates—that we live in a culture that goes easy on rapists and we live in a culture that goes easy on white people and we live in a culture that goes easy on rich people.
Why? Being corrupt and playing into rape culture isn't mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact, I'd almost guess there's bound to be almost a majority overlap. Apparently, YMV.

Quote:
That's the problem here and that's what people are justifiably outraged about. Insisting that it has to have happened because the judge took a bribe is basically dismissing the actual social context of this whole incident.

It doesn't matter a damn but what I personally "insist" on. It's just speculation on my part because I understand that I'm 100% powerless to effect any change in this particular instance. But I feel I'd be playing the fool if I ignored certain connections and the evidence that has come to light. You feel otherwise.
  #265  
Old 06-13-2016, 11:24 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
But I feel I'd be playing the fool if I ignored certain connections and the evidence that has come to light. You feel otherwise.

You are playing the fool now by leaping to an unfounded suspicion of individual corruption with no evidence based on nothing other than disagreeing with a ruling.

Your evidence of "connections" is nothing more than evidence of favoritism that is endemic in our society, not evidence of bribery.
  #266  
Old 06-13-2016, 11:48 AM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
You are playing the fool now by leaping to an unfounded suspicion of individual corruption with no evidence based on nothing other than disagreeing with a ruling.

Your evidence of "connections" is nothing more than evidence of favoritism that is endemic in our society, not evidence of bribery.

Why? You do realize (I hope) that nothing we say on one message board out of the entirety of the Internet has absolutely zero influence, right? No one is listening to me, you or anyone else on here. Or are you one if those who truly does fall for the "hippest and brightest" moniker? I'm not debating this anywhere else, I'm not so wedded to my world view over that I give a damn and, no matter what, my unsubstantiated opinion (as that's all this is) are not nuggets of gold dropping from my ass for everyone to savor and consider gospel. But you keep tilting at windmills, Quixote, and I'm backing away. Because as stated, I really don't care, nor feel the need to 'win an argument' over this.
  #267  
Old 06-13-2016, 01:07 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by RivkahChaya View Post
It was such a stupid letter. Of all the things his father could have said-- what volunteer work he has done, what contributions he has made, what his plans were for the future, and how they demonstrated substance of character, what he did that demonstrated strong family ties, he writes about how his son no longer relishes steak, and no longer steals his father's snack food. The letter that was supposed to argue for mitigation actually painted a picture of a pretty selfish and immature person, whose parents weren't helping the matter by thinking things he did like filching snack food, were cute and funny. I mean, it's not grand larceny, but it's hardly something to mention when you are trying to argue that someone's rule-breaking was an aberration. The father was giving an example of his son taking what he wants regardless of whom it actually belongs to, and completely unaware of the irony.

The son's letter wasn't much better, although it was a bit better. His side of the story was unsupported, but at least it seems he didn't drag an already-unconscious woman outside and behind a dumpster. His writing was so bad, it was distracting. It read like something a middle schooler would write. Cross Stanford off potential schools for my son.
I'm just responding to the notion that it is immoral and indefensible to try and get a lighter sentence for your son regardless of whether he is a rapist or a murderer... by writing a letter.

Why would you cross Stanford off the list? Are you under the impression that Stanford condones or ignores rape on camps?
  #268  
Old 06-13-2016, 01:14 PM
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 20,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I'm just responding to the notion that it is immoral and indefensible to try and get a lighter sentence for your son regardless of whether he is a rapist or a murderer... by writing a letter.
A notion, it should be noted, promoted by no one in this thread. So, good job refuting that straw man, DA! You sure showed 'em!

  #269  
Old 06-13-2016, 01:14 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post
Damuri Ajashi - you should read the whole letter. It's quite powerful. They're arranging for it to be read into the Congressional Record next week, as a statement about the impact of rape on American women.

Here's the letter -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nford-swimmer/


And here, about the Congressional reading -
http://abc7news.com/news/congress-to...ictim/1378269/
She's a good writer. She does a very good job of humanizing the victims of rape. If this is the letter she wrote to the judge when he handed down that 6 month sentence, it should be exhibit 1 on any attempt to recall him.
  #270  
Old 06-13-2016, 01:16 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 53,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Why would you cross Stanford off the list? Are you under the impression that Stanford condones or ignores rape on camps?
Your answer lies in the two sentences written just previous to "Cross Stanford off potential schools for my son."
Quote:
His writing was so bad, it was distracting. It read like something a middle schooler would write.
  #271  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:12 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
It doesn't really matter that he was the kid's parent; IMO, the friend who wrote a letter is exhibiting equally indefensible behavior. What's unethical about it is that it minimizes and tries to blame the victim and does not acknowledge the seriousness of the crime. Do you think Dan Turner would be okay with a sentence of 6 months in county for the guy who raped his wife? Do you think he would accept the same arguments he proffered?
Of course it matters that he is the father. He is myopic and focused only on the impact this has on his son but his letter is hardly unethical or immoral. You think the father's letter was bad, you shoud read the moms letter. It gives you an insight into why their son might have turned out the way he did. Tiger moms ain't got NOTHING on white parents like this, and there are a lot more of them than you think.

Quote:
Lawyers operate under a different set of ethics that we as a society have agreed upon; were you unaware of this?
First of all, society hasn't agreed on legal ethics, the legal profession has agreed on legal ethics.

Second of all, in what way is a father less obligated to his son than his attorney?

[quote]It is possible to plea for mercy without denigrating the person your loved one has already victimized. By dragging this thru the court for a year, where was the entire Turner family's consideration for the victim? Brock Turner was guilty; instead of accepting his guilt, they've done nothing but deflect and deny. /QUOTE]

I don't see the denigration in the letter unless you are saying that almost ignoring her completely is a form of denigration. What moral or ethical obligation does the Turner family have to consider the welfare of the victim during the sentencing phase of the trial? Do they have to bury their loved one under the prison?

Quote:
To me, that alone is unethical behavior but perhaps to you, anything at all is fine if it's done in defense of a loved one, even when that loved one has committed a heinous act
No, not "anything at all is fine if it's done in defense of a loved one" (I don't recall saying that it was, or were you just beating the shit out of straw men?) but writing a letter (no matter how bad) is almost certainly OK. There are two or three sentences in his letter that offend me but I don't think that the letter or the act of trying to get your son a lighter sentence is immoral or unethical.
  #272  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:13 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
A notion, it should be noted, promoted by no one in this thread. So, good job refuting that straw man, DA! You sure showed 'em!

No straw. Just some weird outrage at a father trying to get a lighter sentence for his son. Some of the stuff he says offends my sensibilities but nothing immoral or unethical about it.
  #273  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:15 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
That has to be the most awful, disgusting people collected together that I've ever had the displeasure of reading about. I feel dirty after all that. And you know, low income trashy people really get their share of vitriol aimed at them, but who knew it could really be a bunch of soulless, rich assholes that were the true despicable scum? I'd rather hang out with the Springer types any day than these vipers-in-hiding, delusional, entitled fuckers any day.
I don't think the parents are rich. The dad works on a military base and the mom seems to be a stay at home mom.

This is not the result of having rich parents. This is the result of having white parents. This is an expression of white privilege not an expression of the privilege of wealth. A wealthy black student would be spending years in jail because the judge would only see a defendant rather than someone that they can relate to.
  #274  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:17 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Your answer lies in the two sentences written just previous to "Cross Stanford off potential schools for my son."
So wait, you would cross Stanford off your list because of the writing ability of a Freshman that was recruited for their swimming team? What next? Cross off the entire Pac 10 and Big 10 and SEC conference because some of their football players can barely spell their names when they are admitted to the school?
  #275  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:19 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
Do you have any basis for making such an assertion?
My guess is that some people don't fully understand how much of an advantage whites have in our system. No corruption necessary, just bias.
  #276  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:28 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 53,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
So wait, you would cross Stanford off your list because of the writing ability of a Freshman that was recruited for their swimming team? What next? Cross off the entire Pac 10 and Big 10 and SEC conference because some of their football players can barely spell their names when they are admitted to the school?
Not a bad idea!
  #277  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:35 PM
Merneith Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 6,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
She's a good writer. She does a very good job of humanizing the victims of rape. If this is the letter she wrote to the judge when he handed down that 6 month sentence, it should be exhibit 1 on any attempt to recall him.
Indeed. But also, it emphasizes the facts of what was done to her: That she was manhandled in a way that left her bruised, filthy and vulnerable. That she continues to be haunted by the pain of that night. That the victim's insistence that she consented to her injuries contributes to her trauma.

The victims are not the ones who need humanizing. Typically, it's the defense who tries to humanize the defendent, by giving the jury some way to sympathize with the guilty party. It's only in rape trials that the victim has to work to earn the jury's sympathy.

As we see here - the judge had no interest in her suffering, even though the jury was unimpressed by Brock Turner's swim times or Stanford connections.
  #278  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:36 PM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Je suis Ikea.
Posts: 25,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
Why are they not attempting to appeal the sentence? It seems like the kid lied about some stuff. Plus it's clear he didn't own his actions, or save the state the cost of a trial, which revictimized the victim in court, etc. Isn't there even a little wiggle room there?
Rights of appeal are created by statute. I asked in a different thread whether prosecutors in the US can appeal against sentence. The answer I got was that the appellate rules for sentence appeals vary from state to state, and that in California, the only right to appeal in a sentencing matter is "imposition of an unlawful sentence." Here, the sentence was apparently in the range, although at the low end, and therefore would not qualify as an "unlawful sentence."

Can the District Attorney appeal against sentence in the US?
  #279  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:38 PM
Dangerosa Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 21,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
My guess is that some people don't fully understand how much of an advantage whites have in our system. No corruption necessary, just bias.
It isn't just being white. Its being white - which does get you more points than the rest - from a well off family, being a "good kid" who gets good grades, being an athlete, being famous, being good looking. All of those things add advantage points - and this kid hit most of the buttons (he's kind of funny looking and his parents are REALLY wealthy, just well off, nor was he famous - but he gets lots of points for white Stanford athlete.)

When our son was in middle school he got caught - with four other boys - with weed. He's Asian, the other boys were white. He was the only one suspended.
  #280  
Old 06-13-2016, 03:25 PM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
My guess is that some people don't fully understand how much of an advantage whites have in our system. No corruption necessary, just bias.

I understand quite well, especially since it would undoubtably result in a black defendant having the book at him. But just because it's privilege and bias, doesn't also mean it can't be corruption too. One doesn't preclude the other.

And as far as writing that letter goes, perhaps I grew up with a different class of people. No one I know would've written a letter that 1) absconds the guilty of responsibility, 2) lies like a dog, and 3) shows no concern whatsoever for the victim.

As a white woman's from a previously lower-middle class life, I definitely would've submitted something to a judge on the behalf of my much step-son if he'd have gotten himself in trouble and was facing serious jail time. However, I'd have wanted to make it absolutely clear that he should pay his debt to society, make amends if at all possible and focus on how gravely sorry he would and should be. I'd actually want my kid to take a lesson or four away from his crimes, not just blow the consequences off. My late husband felt the same way, as evidenced by many a teacher-parent conference.
  #281  
Old 06-13-2016, 04:21 PM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 36,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
being a "good kid" who gets good grades, being an athlete
Sadly, in the US "being a student athlete" and "good grades" too often go hand in hand in a way that's got very little to do with the "student" part, to the point where in a lot of schools the second will produce the first.
  #282  
Old 06-13-2016, 04:27 PM
Typo Negative Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 16,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
No corruption necessary, just bias.
Could be right. Could be that the judge feels that a fine young man shouldn't have to suffer because a tramp got liquored up and passed out. He may have just been looking for any excuse to be lenient. He wouldn't be the first backward-ass misogynist in a black robe.
  #283  
Old 06-13-2016, 05:49 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Not a bad idea!
Yeah, well.. I stepped into that one.

But to be fair, every college gives preferences to recruited athletes.

Also, he was a freshman so his writing is not really a reflection on Stanford, he hadn't really been there long enough for them to fix a lifetime of suck.
  #284  
Old 06-13-2016, 06:17 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post
Indeed. But also, it emphasizes the facts of what was done to her: That she was manhandled in a way that left her bruised, filthy and vulnerable. That she continues to be haunted by the pain of that night. That the victim's insistence that she consented to her injuries contributes to her trauma.

The victims are not the ones who need humanizing. Typically, it's the defense who tries to humanize the defendent, by giving the jury some way to sympathize with the guilty party. It's only in rape trials that the victim has to work to earn the jury's sympathy.

As we see here - the judge had no interest in her suffering, even though the jury was unimpressed by Brock Turner's swim times or Stanford connections.
I don't know the whole story but I don't think I need to know every last detail once you have established that he was trying to fuck an unconscious girl behind a dumpster.

Sure, sometimes good people do evil things but the way this boy is acting doesn't make me think he is a good person who did a bad thing. It makes me think he's a bad guy that finally got caught. And judging from his parents, I think some of it was the result of nurture rather than nature.

The reason we end up crucifying rape victims is because one of the primary defenses against rape is consent. When a woman says she did not consent and the man says she did, they can't just take the woman's word for it and lock the guy in jail, they look at the woman (and man) under a microscope and let the jury decide if they think there was consent or not, this is particularly harrowing in the case of first time offenders from good backgrounds (not poor or black). In THIS case however, there is no question of consent (the girl was unconscious), so I am not sure what the purpose of the trial was other than to try and get a better plea bargain. But when you try that tactic and lose the trial, you also usually get the book thrown at you rather than get a relative slap on the wrist.

I understand giving a reduced sentence to a young first time offender who was drunk and had displayed remorse but if you are going to go light on the jail time, you frequently make the probation for more than the minimum term. I wonder if he would have been given such a light sentence if he was a black basketball player on the Stanford team.
  #285  
Old 06-13-2016, 06:24 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
It isn't just being white. Its being white - which does get you more points than the rest - from a well off family, being a "good kid" who gets good grades, being an athlete, being famous, being good looking. All of those things add advantage points - and this kid hit most of the buttons (he's kind of funny looking and his parents are REALLY wealthy, just well off, nor was he famous - but he gets lots of points for white Stanford athlete.)

When our son was in middle school he got caught - with four other boys - with weed. He's Asian, the other boys were white. He was the only one suspended.
There is a subconscious effort on the part of white authority figures to spare white children from the consequences of their youthful indiscretions. They are much more neutral and objective with Asian kids and they generally don't give a shit what happens with black and Hispanic kids (its not like they have a future anyway amirite?). Being particularly good looking, athletic, academically successful or wealthy helps a lot but if I had to choose just one of those things, the min/maxxer in me would want to be white. All of those tings are helpful in different situations but being white helps in almost every situation.
  #286  
Old 06-13-2016, 06:36 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
I understand quite well, especially since it would undoubtably result in a black defendant having the book at him. But just because it's privilege and bias, doesn't also mean it can't be corruption too. One doesn't preclude the other.
Of course but using Occam's razor, why attribute to malice what can easily be explained by bias. I mean bias is fucking everywhere, corruption is actually pretty rare and the family is not really very wealthy.

Quote:
And as far as writing that letter goes, perhaps I grew up with a different class of people. No one I know would've written a letter that 1) absconds the guilty of responsibility, 2) lies like a dog, and 3) shows no concern whatsoever for the victim.
Character statements like that generally don't usually spend a lot of time showing concern for the victim. That's the defendant's job, not his character witness. The defendant apparently showed plenty of remorse to the probation officer who recommended the light sentence. So that's another guy that needs to be put under the microscope.

Quote:
As a white woman's from a previously lower-middle class life, I definitely would've submitted something to a judge on the behalf of my much step-son if he'd have gotten himself in trouble and was facing serious jail time. However, I'd have wanted to make it absolutely clear that he should pay his debt to society, make amends if at all possible and focus on how gravely sorry he would and should be. I'd actually want my kid to take a lesson or four away from his crimes, not just blow the consequences off. My late husband felt the same way, as evidenced by many a teacher-parent conference.
This is not the letter I would have written either, I find parts of it offensive and myopic but I think it is within the bounds of morality and ethical conduct during the sentencing phase when guilt has already been established. You're basically just begging the judge for mercy at this point, not contesting the verdict itself. Just FYI, the father was not talking about how horrible the 6 month sentence was, he was talking about the 6 year sentence recommended by the prosecutor (the prosecutor was recommending a sentence based on the premise that the defendant was a sexual predator because he displayed predatory behavior by taking the victim behind the dumpster).
  #287  
Old 06-13-2016, 06:47 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
Could be right. Could be that the judge feels that a fine young man shouldn't have to suffer because a tramp got liquored up and passed out. He may have just been looking for any excuse to be lenient. He wouldn't be the first backward-ass misogynist in a black robe.
His "excuse" was the probation report. They recommended the light sentence and the judge followed the probation report rather than the prosecutor's recommendation.
  #288  
Old 06-13-2016, 10:41 PM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Okay, then here's a question...... you say [paraphrasing] that your basically just throwing yourself at the mercy of the judge hoping for any leniency and because of being in that position, someone would basically be forced to forgo any focus on the victim and solely sing the praises of the defendant, yes?

But what if, unbeknownst to you, the judge favors those who they think will be properly contrite for their actions and attempt a true turn around, resulting in no recidivism.

Wouldn't you be playing Russian roulette by not saying the perp would ever take responsibility? And the frightening thing here was, apparently not a single person who wrote on his behalf took that approach. I find that incredibly telling.

That's where I'm coming from. I would hope not many parents (and other loved ones) would come off this poorly while hoping to help.
  #289  
Old 06-14-2016, 12:47 AM
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 20,479
At least one of the jurors is not happy with the judge so he called the judge out publicly in an interview and a letter:
Quote:
During the sentencing, you said, "The trial is a search for the truth. It's an imperfect process. But after the trial all sides should accept the jury's findings." It seems to me that you really did not accept the jury's findings. We were unanimous in our finding of the defendant's guilt and our verdicts were marginalized based on your own personal opinion.

You had to justify that there were "unusual circumstances" to give Mr. Turner less than the two year minimum sentence for his crime. But the unfortunate fact is, these circumstances are not unusual. Women like Ms. Doe suffer daily from similar crimes and I fear your sentence will make these victims less willing to report their attacks.

This punishment does not fit the crime. Mr. Turner, convicted of 3 felony counts of sexual assault, will serve 3 months in county jail since he is scheduled to be released on September 2. And Mr. Turner is going to appeal the verdict, which not only is a complete waste of tax payers' money but could mean, if he gets off, that he will not even have to register as a sex offender. How unjust would that outcome be, the slate wiped clean for a 3-count convicted sex offender?!

Justice has not been served in this case. The jury's verdict of guilt on all three felony counts of sexual assault was completely disregarded in an effort to spare the perpetrator a 'hardship'. What message does this send to Emily Doe, and indeed all victims of sexual assault and rape, especially those on college campuses? Your concern was for the impact on the assailant. I vehemently disagree, our concern should be for the victim.

Shame on you.
  #290  
Old 06-14-2016, 01:57 AM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Wow. There was a two year minimum and he ignored it?? Yeah, I can't imagine where I got my idea that there was more to this than meets the eye.
  #291  
Old 06-14-2016, 05:57 AM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Also, he was a freshman so his writing is not really a reflection on Stanford, he hadn't really been there long enough for them to fix a lifetime of suck.
The fact that Stanford, one of the most competitive universities in the country with an applicant acceptance rate of under 5%, admitted this guy as a student in the first place is a reflection on them.

Of course, it's also a reflection on the alumni and other fans who prioritize sports success over academic achievement to the extent of incentivizing the admission of very mediocre students who happen to be good athletes.
  #292  
Old 06-14-2016, 06:11 AM
Kobal2 Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 16,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
Sadly, in the US "being a student athlete" and "good grades" too often go hand in hand in a way that's got very little to do with the "student" part, to the point where in a lot of schools the second will produce the first.
It's the same in France in some schools - my own highschool prided itself on its rugby tradition and team. The "Sport-Etudes" kids were some of the most obnoxious slabs of beef this side of mad cow disease, jock bullies to a man ; many were shit in class but never got held back or anything. Certainly none ever earned disciplinary punishments worse than detention over the shit they pulled.

I like to believe most of them ended up as phys. ed. teachers
  #293  
Old 06-14-2016, 06:29 AM
Kobal2 Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 16,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
There is a subconscious effort on the part of white authority figures to spare white children from the consequences of their youthful indiscretions. They are much more neutral and objective with Asian kids and they generally don't give a shit what happens with black and Hispanic kids (its not like they have a future anyway amirite?). Being particularly good looking, athletic, academically successful or wealthy helps a lot but if I had to choose just one of those things, the min/maxxer in me would want to be white. All of those tings are helpful in different situations but being white helps in almost every situation.
Yup. Only white guys can fuck with time travel, for one thing.
  #294  
Old 06-14-2016, 04:49 PM
ivylass ivylass is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Orlando(ish)
Posts: 21,293
Apparently he took pictures of her naked breast and shared them with his friends.
  #295  
Old 06-14-2016, 05:27 PM
Algher Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
The fact that Stanford, one of the most competitive universities in the country with an applicant acceptance rate of under 5%, admitted this guy as a student in the first place is a reflection on them.

Of course, it's also a reflection on the alumni and other fans who prioritize sports success over academic achievement to the extent of incentivizing the admission of very mediocre students who happen to be good athletes.
So you have seen his application? Know his SAT scores and GPA? Read his admissions essay? Seen a copy of his grades from his time as a Stanford student?
  #296  
Old 06-15-2016, 10:23 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
Okay, then here's a question...... you say [paraphrasing] that your basically just throwing yourself at the mercy of the judge hoping for any leniency and because of being in that position, someone would basically be forced to forgo any focus on the victim and solely sing the praises of the defendant, yes?

But what if, unbeknownst to you, the judge favors those who they think will be properly contrite for their actions and attempt a true turn around, resulting in no recidivism.

Wouldn't you be playing Russian roulette by not saying the perp would ever take responsibility? And the frightening thing here was, apparently not a single person who wrote on his behalf took that approach. I find that incredibly telling.

That's where I'm coming from. I would hope not many parents (and other loved ones) would come off this poorly while hoping to help.
Sure maybe you are right. But this is not the perpetrator writing the letter, it is his parent.
  #297  
Old 06-15-2016, 10:25 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
Wow. There was a two year minimum and he ignored it?? Yeah, I can't imagine where I got my idea that there was more to this than meets the eye.
I think his sentence was three years but he only had to serve 3 months of it in jail, the rest of it was probation.
  #298  
Old 06-15-2016, 10:32 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
The fact that Stanford, one of the most competitive universities in the country with an applicant acceptance rate of under 5%, admitted this guy as a student in the first place is a reflection on them.
EVERY top school lowers their standards for athletes, legacies, and underrepresented minorities. Stanford might do it a little bit more than Yale but its a matter of degree.

Quote:
Of course, it's also a reflection on the alumni and other fans who prioritize sports success over academic achievement to the extent of incentivizing the admission of very mediocre students who happen to be good athletes.
Olympic level athletes generally get some consideration for that achievement. However much of a scumbag this guy may be, he is a highly accomplished scumbag.

Giving a preference to high achievers in any area is justifiable. giving preferences to people were born with a particular skin color but has no other socioeconomic disadvantage is a bit harder to justify. Giving preferences to people who chose their parents wisely is almost impossible to justify.
  #299  
Old 06-15-2016, 10:39 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 19,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobal2 View Post
Yup. Only white guys can fuck with time travel, for one thing.
I love that guy.
  #300  
Old 06-15-2016, 01:08 PM
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 20,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Of course it matters that he is the father. He is myopic and focused only on the impact this has on his son but his letter is hardly unethical or immoral. You think the father's letter was bad, you shoud read the moms letter. It gives you an insight into why their son might have turned out the way he did.
No, it doesn't matter that he's the father; that doesn't give him a valid excuse to ignore the crime that his son committed and to denigrate the victim. You're wrong here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Tiger moms ain't got NOTHING on white parents like this, and there are a lot more of them than you think.
I don't know what a "Tiger mom" is nor do I have any idea why you would need to note that the kid's parents are white and so compare the two, unless this was just your way of getting in a little racist commentary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
First of all, society hasn't agreed on legal ethics, the legal profession has agreed on legal ethics.
You're wrong again. If society didn't agree with them, we wouldn't allow the legal profession to have them. Are you under the impression that lawyers are not part of society?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Second of all, in what way is a father less obligated to his son than his attorney?
The father is not a paid shill operating under a specific set of ethics, rules and laws. He is not, in fact, obligated to his son at all. You do not appear to understand the meaning of many of the words that you write, since you think that parent's are "obligated" to their adult children, somehow. They are not. So his father is 100% less "obligated" to his son than the son's lawyer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I don't see the denigration in the letter unless you are saying that almost ignoring her completely is a form of denigration. What moral or ethical obligation does the Turner family have to consider the welfare of the victim during the sentencing phase of the trial? Do they have to bury their loved one under the prison?

No, not "anything at all is fine if it's done in defense of a loved one" (I don't recall saying that it was, or were you just beating the shit out of straw men?) but writing a letter (no matter how bad) is almost certainly OK. There are two or three sentences in his letter that offend me but I don't think that the letter or the act of trying to get your son a lighter sentence is immoral or unethical.
First, you're the one constructing straw men, not me. What I wrote there is in no way a straw man and what you wrote calls into question whether or not you understand the term you used. In fact, there's a lot of that kind of discrepancy in your writing.

So you wrote that "no, not anything at all is fine" but just before that you asked if the family has to bury their loved one beneath the prison... you contradict yourself and offer mutually exclusive extremes without noticing the excluded middle.

If there are things you think are out of bounds to do in defense of a loved one who has committed a heinous and violent crime, where is your line? Murder? Arson? Character assassination? Financial ruin? Kidnapping? You don't appear to have aline while claiming that you do, which only weakens your position and your arguments further (if that's possible).

Your position is indefensible by a civilized person. You should either rethink it or your commitment to living in a society because they are incompatible. Personally, I don't think society would suffer at all should you choose to remove yourself from it but I think you'll find it easier to change your thinking than to live in isolation, but YMMV.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 06-15-2016 at 01:09 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017