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 learned that my ass and vagina were completely exposed outside, my breasts had been groped, fingers had been jabbed inside me along with pine needles and debris, my bare skin and head had been rubbing against the ground behind a dumpster, while an erect freshman was humping my half naked, unconscious body. "
If my son were in this position I too would write to the judge asking for justice to be tempered with mercy. Yes, he did a terrible thing, but what sort of father would turn his back on his son at such a moment? Should he have asked them to throw away the key, let the guy rot?
He’s a father, the guy is his fucking son. Unload on the perp as you please but give the father a fucking break. He has done nothing wrong although from some of the comments you’d be forgiven for thinking he was there behind his son cheering him on.
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.
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? :dubious: Do you think he would accept the same arguments he proffered? :dubious:
Lawyers operate under a different set of ethics that we as a society have agreed upon; were you unaware of this?
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. 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.
I didn’t say he did anything criminal; I do think he did something unethical with his letter. His son was clearly guilty. He had already been found guilty. Yet his father sought to minimize the serious nature of the crime in order to spare his son tim win prison, right?
Let me put that in other words: this man sought to put a dangerous, violent individual back in public with little to no supervision, placing untold numbers of people at risk because he really likes the dangerous, violent individual a lot.
And you want to say that’s a normal, acceptable thing for someone to do? :dubious: I strongly disagree.
I was serious. What you wrote does not describe the events under discussion and could be said to reasonably appear to be an attempt to shift blame to the victim. From what you wrote, you appear to have recognized this.
Exactly. The way to write a letter like this is to emphasize what he was like before the crime. Hard worker at his sport and school, community service, all stuff like that. Delicately put how the crime itself was so at odds with his previous character, without in any way denying he committed it. But making it into “He lost his appetite, that’s punishment enough” and “Besides, both of them were drunk” is completely the wrong way to plead for leniency.
Or maybe not, since apparently Judge Pricksy took all the letters he received at face value, even when they claimed things that were clearly untrue.
His life is over. There is absolutely nothing he can ever do in this life to redeem himself in the face of society. Question. If he had been convicted of murder, would anyone have even noticed?
Who’s life is over? After a hockey season in the pen, he’ll walk around free as a bird. Daddy may send him to live in Europe for a couple of years. Then his looks will have changed a bit, the media uproar will have died, he can come back and do just about anything that doesn’t splash his face over the internet. There’s already plenty of folks who think he’s the victim here.
And he can redeem himself. The first step would be to fess up, which he hasn’t done yet.
Attempting to finish college will result in attention from the campus women’s center, for those campuses who will accept him
Any company that runs a background check will quietly find a way not to hire him
Anyone searching his name will find the case
So he would need to move to Europe, join the Foreign Legion, get a new name (if they still do that). Of course, if he changes his name he has to notify his parole officer (per an article I read). So it will take awhile for him to break free of this.
Such as? The Internet is all-pervasive these days. It’s not simply a case of not “splashing his face over the internet”; unless he becomes a hermit interested parties will track him down even if it is only as a way of spreading juicy gossip.
What? I’m supposed to feel sorry for him? Cry for his troubles? Lament the terrible tragedy that will be his life? All the hardship HE will have to overcome?
The asshole is appealing the conviction. There is still the chance that he doesn’t do time at all and won’t have to register as a sex offender.
Not if he lives in Europe, or Mexico. Canada is still on the table. The stain is unlikely to follow him there.
And our attention span grows shorter every day. Should he keep out of the public eye, he will be forgotten.
Is there chance that could backfire, and he end’s up getting a harsher sentence after a retrial?
I’m not a fan of tattoos, especially facial ones. Maybe just give the kid a choice between full castration or life on the sex offender registry?
As disgusting as I find this I can’t get behind a recall effort. I don’t even think the judiciary should be elected in the first place.
Is it only women who are incapable of giving consent while drunk, or does that apply to men to? Because the latter would mean men who commit sex offenses while intoxicated shouldn’t be held responsible (or at least get a lighter punishment), and the former is just plain ridiculous. What when both parties are male (or female)? Does whoever was drunker automatically get designated the victim while the less drunk one get designated the perpetrator?
Betcha those visas are going to cost a pretty penny.
My Dad, before he died lived all his life on the internet. He oddly became a bit of an internet junkie… I guess I am too, but it’s part of my job.
Anywho, my Dad wanted to write a book about the internet, and the information it reveals. His title was going to be - More and More about Less and Less I thought that title was brilliant.
