Poor guy!
I would venture a guess that its because you have not bothered reading the actual article beyond the headlines; he was not convicted of rape as is defined by the laws of that jurisdiction, which is Ss261 California Penal Code..
The prosecution did not seek the maximum penalty. Do you think they were also lenient? A cite on the previous page said the average sentence is 11.8 years with 5.4 years actually served. So most don’t get the maximum. I’m curious what the average is for first time offenders with a totally clean record.
No doubt, the kid is getting off light. I just wonder how light in relation to the most similar cases.
I’m sure you never will see them.
Wow, that was a rabbit hole I’m sorry to have traveled down.
No one will know exactly what happened, but I’m willing to apply a reasonable woman standard here.
Reasonable women, with boyfriends, do not have pick up sex BEHIND A DUMPSTER with a stranger.
Sure, unreasonable women probably do. But if she were an unreasonable woman, her boyfriend probably wouldn’t be standing with her. Her parents would probably not be standing with her. Her sister…her friends. When people are reckless enough to consent to drunken casual sex behind dumpsters - their friends and family usually give off plenty of signals that maybe they aren’t reasonable.
Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to re-Pit it.
And sentenced by a Judge who presumably saw the same.
Ultimately my point is that these accusations of white male privilege rest on their own biases and assumptions. We hear man having sex with unconscious woman and fill in the blanks. We assume that he is the one that pursued her because that’s what men do. We assume that he lured her because no woman would ever want to have sex behind a dumpster. Then we assume that the Judge didn’t give him an appropriate sentence because the justice system doesn’t take rape seriously.
Maybe there is evidence to back up everything in the paragraph above, but I don’t get the sense that people even care to look. It’s not about the facts in this case. It’s about what role he fits into in the narrative in their minds.
She wasn’t reasonable; she was falling-down drunk.
If a man had posted this, it would be called slut-shaming.
If a woman alleges rape, we should check with her boyfriend and parents and friends to see if she is recklessly promiscuous before we believe her? :rolleyes:
Regards,
Shodan
I could write the exact same paragraph substituting him in her place.
But let’s cast this in a different light. If I say a 23 year old was found having sex behind a dumpster with an underaged college freshman with a BAC twice the legal limit, what’s your reaction? My reaction is that the freshman is the victim.
The only fact countering that reaction in my mind is that in this case she passed out at some point. Beyond that, it all comes down to bias and assumptions unless someone wants to come with facts.
holy fucking shit, treis.
Having read the thread linked by Jimmy Chitwood above, and subsequently having showered with extra sandpaper, I’d say: forget it, Stickler. It’s Chinatown.
Yeah don’t do it.
No, we assume he is the one who pursued her because she was unconscious.
Which is why drunk strangers shouldn’t have sex.
Driving while drunk might turn out just fine - you’d save on cab fare, wouldn’t have to figure out how to get your car tomorrow. Or it could go horribly wrong, so don’t do it.
Having sex while drunk with a stranger is similar - you could both have a great time. Hell, maybe you get married and live happily ever after. But there is the chance something will go horribly wrong - one of you will blackout, have no memory of consenting, and you get caught having sex behind a dumpster by two Swedish guys, she is unconscious, and are suddenly accused of rape.
And this goes for both genders, but just as its more likely for a woman to end up sexually victimized by drinking too much and showing poor judgement, its more likely that a man will get accused of being a rapist if he drinks too much and shows poor judgement.
Many on the net are calling this kid a convicted rapist. He wasn’t convicted of rape but attempted rape. The prosecutor dropped the initial rape charge. I think this goes some way towards explaining the lighter sentence.
The point is that we shouldn’t round up an internet mob and virtually lynch a judge based on what is likely. We should care about the facts.
And then immediately tried to run away when caught in the act. I hazard to say most non-rapists would abstain from abandoning their dates behind a dumpster naked like that*. If I didn’t know better, I would take his attempt at flight as a strong indicator of guilt.
- Pancakes suddenly have come to mind.
All reasonable points but it’s hard for me to read a post like Dangerosa’s and not see bias.
There are facts we know.
We know she had abrasions
We know she was unconscious when found
We know he ran away when approached leaving her behind
We know his story changed when he realized she didn’t remember
We know she was digitally penetrated
We know she was drunk - we don’t know if he was drunk - we only have his word on that.