Brock Turner’s friend blames “political correctness” for Turner’s conviction.
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
At least this time the flurry of “you shouldn’t have raised a criminal” cries from the Interneterati was aimed at a white parent. Equality!
20 minutes of inaction?
If prison doesn’t adversely affect prisoners, what’s the fucking point?
His life all but ruined? Are you joking?
He’s got money and connections, sufficient to get him probation for rape, and you think he’ll suffer for being put off the team and out of the Ivy League school?
Before the week is through, he’ll be on another swim team, admitted to another Ivy League school, and graduate to a life of connections and ease.
How many object lessons in “the law doesn’t apply the same for the wealthy and connected!” does America need exactly?
Nitpick: Stanford’s not an Ivy League school (although it is probably more highly ranked than many of the actual Ivy League schools).
Also, aside from the racial question (i.e., would a black man have received a similar sentence?), there’s the fact that the judge is a Stanford alumnus, and he played lacrosse as a student there. Did his status as a former student-athlete at Stanford affect his decision making in any way?
Yes. Although the money may not be worth the additional trauma to her, given her description of the effect of the criminal trial on her.
Says this charming young woman:
"Rape on campuses isn’t always because people are rapists.”
I can’t think of anything to add to that.
That the law doesn’t apply equally to the wealthy and connected is true in the US, the UK, Soviet Russia, Communist China, socialist European states, 3rd world, 1st world, everywhere, and for all history. It’s one of the few universal truths of the human condition - the wealthy and powerful who break the law are very often afforded much greater leniency by the wealthy and powerful who create and apply the law. It should be pointed out when it comes to light and corrected where possible but, IMHO, it will never cease to be.
The judge tempered justice with mercy and I have no doubt skin color had nothing to do with it. He has an excellent reputation as a firm but fair jurist and the sentencing was within California guidelines for the offense, which was attempted rape rather than rape.
Sure, the sentencing was within the guidelines for the offense, and Judge Persky was within his legal rights to decide as he did. As soon as anyone argues otherwise, your post will immediately become relevant.
But here’s the thing: as an elected official, Judge Persky is also subject to feedback from the electorate regarding his job performance. If a sufficient number of people feel his judgment was sufficiently poor - poor enough that he should no longer be entrusted with the right to make such decisions - then they are also within their legal rights to call for or contribute to his removal from office. In my opinion, he shouldn’t be imprisoned, injured, attacked, or harassed; he should be fired, for egregiously poor judgment.
And his past record and reputation are - while not irrelevant - also not adequate defense. I have a good record and reputation at my job, but if I were to demonstrate sufficiently poor judgment I’d be fired in spite of both.
FTR he was only charged (& convicted of) attempted rape because there was no ejaculate. There was no ejaculate because the rape was interrupted by the Swedish bikers.
Or he might have been found not guilty; have we forgotten OJ so quickly? I know it was double murder, and not rape. But still, I’m not sure too many white men could’ve pulled off what OJ did and gotten away with it.
Right. It would also depend on how rich and famous the black rapist is.
I’m still wondering how someone who is found guilty of committing the act of rape is not a rapist.
Sorry! I guess “never” would have been too soon.
Not just convicted, but quite literally caught in the act by eyewitnesses. It doesn’t get any more “rapist” than that.
Highly unlikely, but point taken.
I confess I haven’t read the article, but I’m quite sure ejaculation is completely irrelevant to a rape charge. The charge was probably reduced (or originally charged) to attempted rape because there was some “question” about consent sufficient to allow a plea bargain. First offenders, even for serious crime, are often given a bit of a break. I would agree that this particular sentence seems quite low.
As to whether a black rapist would have gotten such a lenient sentence: a story today in the local paper involves a black man charged in rapes of four women (and suspected in attacks on up to ten), who just got off with probation (no jail time), after entering an Alford plea to lesser charges of abduction:
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/06/06/rape-case.html
http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2014/05/30/columbus-serial-rapist-investigation.html
His case (if you believe the defense attorney) was complicated by a lack of physical evidence, and the judge (despite the Alford plea, which means that while you don’t admit guilty you acknowledge they have enough to put you away) evidently agreed.
Still - the idea of an accused serial rapist getting only probation sits even more poorly than a six-month term in the college rape case. And I can’t tell if the guy charged with multiple rapes will even go on the sex offender registry.
I find this statement to be very interesting. The details are sketchy yet “Turner moves in” is given as a fact. It speaks to the assumption that most of us have that it’s the man who initiates sexual encounters. In this way, Turner’s guilty until proven innocent. Society has assumed he is a predator but I haven’t seen a lot of facts to support that.
Now, I have no idea of what happened. The only two facts I see reported are that they were both drunk and she was unconscious when the bikers stumbled upon them. The “evil” extreme is that he found her drunk and raped her. The “good” extreme is that two drunk people had consensual sex and one of them passed out in the middle. I’d like to know where this fell before deciding if 6 months is appropriate.
That’s what they said on Nancy Grace, but I can’t find a reference online. Maybe a prosecutor will chime in here.
SHE does not remember but there were plenty of witnesses at the party. Apparently Turner was making advances on many women at the party. I’m guessing that at some point they will release the trial transcripts. Allegedly the Swedish cyclists who came upon the scene were horrified & thought he was raping a dead woman.
ETA treis, you do realize that he was convicted by a jury of his peers who DID see all the evidence?