The Stanford University Rape Case

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
HuffPost has an article on Brock:

Mad About Brock Turner? Maybe You Shouldn't Be.

[M]ore “justice” has been served in this case than in 99.4% of instances of sexual violence.His face has been plastered on every media outlet for months. The entire world knows he’s a rapist. Even if people don’t immediately recognize his name twenty years from now, a quick Google search will solve that. He’s on the sex offender registry. Brock Turner will walk around with a scarlet “RAPIST” branded on his forehead for the rest of his life. That is all he will ever be. The other sex offenders in his court-mandated rehab program will recognize his face from the newspapers and whisper, “Well, at least I’m not that guy.” He’s banned from swimming, expelled from school, and the life he knew is rightfully ruined.

Though he won’t be sitting in a cell for the next 14 years, the public vilification will make him wish he were. Jail was just one of the many forms of punishment that he will face for the rest of his pathetic life. So while you’re outraged that Turner was only incarcerated for 3 months, remember that it’s more prison time than what 99.4% of other rapists get.
 


Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,209
Letter: Sentence was Appropriate in Stanford Assault Case

This is an extract from a letter by "Patrick Newman" from the city of Chico, California

Letter: Sentence was appropriate in Stanford assault case

I don’t think Brock Turner should do 14 years in prison — as millions are screaming he should. In fact, Judge Aaron Persky’s six-month sentence was fair. .............

Rapes, involving abduction, or anything of the sort, should net perpetrators a life sentence. Putting a “date rape drug” in someone’s drink? Twenty years.

But, in the Turner case, we have a man and woman drinking to great excess and going off in the night, anticipating a consensual sexual encounter. The woman then falls into alcohol-induced unconsciousness. The drunken Turner fondles, until he is chased away. Feminist zealots are outraged that Turner didn’t get the maximum sentence. (I wonder if they would feel the same way if Turner had slipped into unconsciousness and the woman was discovered fondling him? Fourteen years?) [My Emphasis]

There’s a sort of mass hysteria going on: It’s actually considered misogynistic (and evidence of obtuseness begat of my white male privilege) to tell my daughter that she might bear some responsibility, were she to drink herself into oblivion, flirt with a man and wander off into a parking lot. Regardless, if that man’s fingers wandered to places they should not go, for even one second after my daughter became unconscious — exactly what Turner was convicted of—I’d say that man committed a crime. But, that’s just not a 14-year sort of crime
.....
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,209
There’s a Sort of Mass Hysteria Going On

"There’s a sort of mass hysteria going on"wrote Patrick Newman in his local California newspaper and newspapers all the (ideological) way from the Daily Mail to The (UK) Independent are illustrating the truth of his observation. Here is The Independent on 4 September
Stanford rape case: Armed protesters await Brock Turner's arrival at Ohio home | The Independent

Stanford Rape Case: Armed Protesters Await Brock Turner's Arrival at Ohio Home

Armed protesters stood outside the home of Brock Turner – the man convicted of sexual assault while attending Stanford University – who was released from jail after serving only three months of a six-month sentence. ..............

About a dozen protesters waited outside the Sugarcreek Township home on Friday, and others returned Saturday. Some brandished rifles while others brandished placards calling for Turner - whose light sentence sparked a national uproar - to be castrated.

Protesters scrawled messages into the street and sidewalk using chalk. “He’s not going to live some happy pleasant life,” a protester told WCPO. “We’re going to never let him forget what he did.”

One mother brought her children to the protest because she saw it as a teaching moment. “The reason we decided to bring the kids is to teach them, at a young age, that 20 minutes of wrongdoing to someone...that can ruin your life forever,” the woman, declining to give her name, told WHIO. She added that she is “furious” the Turner family lives in the neighbourhood, describing them as a “cancer to us and we need to get them out of here.”
........

That harpy is teaching her children to join a lynch mob.
 

Old Mr Grouser

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
6,376
"There’s a sort of mass hysteria going on" ...
Yes, the mass hysteria is worrying, but there are a mass of serious implications that arise from the idea that a woman has a right to be drunk in safety.

That's all very well in Dreamland, but in the real world it's similar to campaigning to repeal the Law of Gravity. Nobody, male or female, is ever safe when they're drunk.

There's the politically incorrect fact that a drunk, of either sex,is a danger to other people. They can start fights, they can cause road accidents by distracting drivers, and so on.

Then again, if a man can be sent to prison for an incident which involves a woman - when they're both drunk - then shouldn't women be jailed for similar 'drunken lesbian' incidents, and gay men also jailed for 'drunken gay' incidents.
 
Last edited:

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
17,950
Then again, if a man can be sent to prison for an incident which involves a woman - when they're both drunk - then shouldn't women be jailed for similar 'drunken lesbian' incidents, and gay men also jailed for 'drunken gay' incidents.
There is case in the states where a US College student(Male) passed out and a female performed oral sex on him while he was unconscious , yet he was the one who got expelled over the incident for inappropriate sexual activity.

Man receives sex act while blacked out, gets accused of sexual assault | Washington Examiner
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,209
Armed Protesters Threaten Former Stanford student Brock Turner with Violence

I mentioned that all the media stretching ideologically from the Daily Mail to The (UK) Independent seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet on this case. One notable exception is the Trotskyite "World Socialist Web Site" - an article by David Walsh on 10 September. I think that they are committed to the classic ideas of Marxism involving the Workers, Class Struggle etc and regard Feminists and hysteria about "rape epidemics" in Universities as unwelcome distractions from the REAL isues!
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/09/10/turn-s10.html

The foul logic of the media and feminist campaign over the Brock Turner sexual assault case found expression this week when right-wing elements showed up outside his parents’ Bellbrook, Ohio home brandishing weapons and threatening to murder him.

The protesters, who called themselves “anarchists,” were armed with assault rifles and shotguns and carried placards bearing various inflammatory slogans, including: “Shoot your local rapist” and “If I rape Brock [Turner] will I only do 3 months.” Other signs called for the castration and killing of rapists. The open carry of weapons is legal in Ohio.

One of the organizers of the action, Micah Naziri, who sported a .300 Blackout rifle, according to the Guardian, told reporters, “The number one reason why we had this armed protest was to make a militant feminist statement in favor of self-defense of would-be rape victims.” Another participant, Molly Hardin, asserted that “it’s completely legal to kill a rapist in the act of rape. … If he were to try something like this again … we would help protect the city. We are not going to stand for it.”

Remarkably, the American media treated this sinister event in the Dayton area in generally favorable or at least muted tones, as though it were some legitimate, if perhaps overzealous, response to the immensity of Brock Turner’s crimes..............The Turner case became the occasion for an outpouring of vindictive and filthy commentary by the American media. The sheer volume, crudity and violence of the attempt to demonize the Stanford student should be enough to arouse suspicion in the mind of anyone alive to American political and social realities.....


It's rather curious to see Anarchists described as "right-wing" but the remainder seems right on the ball.
 

Dedogs

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
6,278

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,209
Stanford 'Rape Case' Judge Did No Wrong, Says Judicial Watchdog

This is an extract from a letter by "Patrick Newman" from the city of Chico, California

Letter: Sentence was appropriate in Stanford assault case

I don’t think Brock Turner should do 14 years in prison — as millions are screaming he should. In fact, Judge Aaron Persky’s six-month sentence was fair. .............

Rapes, involving abduction, or anything of the sort, should net perpetrators a life sentence. Putting a “date rape drug” in someone’s drink? Twenty years.

But, in the Turner case, we have a man and woman drinking to great excess and going off in the night, anticipating a consensual sexual encounter. The woman then falls into alcohol-induced unconsciousness. The drunken Turner fondles, until he is chased away. Feminist zealots are outraged that Turner didn’t get the maximum sentence. (I wonder if they would feel the same way if Turner had slipped into unconsciousness and the woman was discovered fondling him? Fourteen years?) [My Emphasis]

There’s a sort of mass hysteria going on: It’s actually considered misogynistic (and evidence of obtuseness begat of my white male privilege) to tell my daughter that she might bear some responsibility, were she to drink herself into oblivion, flirt with a man and wander off into a parking lot. Regardless, if that man’s fingers wandered to places they should not go, for even one second after my daughter became unconscious — exactly what Turner was convicted of—I’d say that man committed a crime. But, that’s just not a 14-year sort of crime
.....
From a recent article in the UK Independent
Stanford 'rape case' judge did no wrong, says judicial watchdog | The Independent

The judge who sentenced convicted sex offender Brock Turner to six months in prison for assaulting an unconscious woman behind a dumpster did not act wrongly, according to a body set up to monitor judicial behaviour.

The California Commission on Judicial Performance, established to investigate court misconduct in the state, found no evidence that Santa Clara county judge Aaron Persky acted with bias in his sentencing of the former Stanford University student last June.

“The commission has concluded that there is not clear and convincing evidence of bias, abuse of authority, or other basis to conclude that Judge Persky engaged in judicial misconduct warranting discipline,” the group said, according to the Associated Press....


The hysteria will no doubt continue but in one sense this is the conclusion of a case that led to threats of violence not only against the convicted guy, but his parents, the judge and a former schoolmate who gave character evidence on his behalf - she was forced to apologise. To say this is Third World type behaviour is an insult to many Third World counteries. It's more in line with Islamic State type behaviour - and the fact that the Islamists would direct their hate filled hysteria MAINLY at women is not an excuse for the American mob!
 

Apple in Eden

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,718
I mentioned that all the media stretching ideologically from the Daily Mail to The (UK) Independent seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet on this case. One notable exception is the Trotskyite "World Socialist Web Site" - an article by David Walsh on 10 September. I think that they are committed to the classic ideas of Marxism involving the Workers, Class Struggle etc and regard Feminists and hysteria about "rape epidemics" in Universities as unwelcome distractions from the REAL isues!
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/09/10/turn-s10.html

The foul logic of the media and feminist campaign over the Brock Turner sexual assault case found expression this week when right-wing elements showed up outside his parents’ Bellbrook, Ohio home brandishing weapons and threatening to murder him.

The protesters, who called themselves “anarchists,” were armed with assault rifles and shotguns and carried placards bearing various inflammatory slogans, including: “Shoot your local rapist” and “If I rape Brock [Turner] will I only do 3 months.” Other signs called for the castration and killing of rapists. The open carry of weapons is legal in Ohio.

One of the organizers of the action, Micah Naziri, who sported a .300 Blackout rifle, according to the Guardian, told reporters, “The number one reason why we had this armed protest was to make a militant feminist statement in favor of self-defense of would-be rape victims.” Another participant, Molly Hardin, asserted that “it’s completely legal to kill a rapist in the act of rape. … If he were to try something like this again … we would help protect the city. We are not going to stand for it.”

Remarkably, the American media treated this sinister event in the Dayton area in generally favorable or at least muted tones, as though it were some legitimate, if perhaps overzealous, response to the immensity of Brock Turner’s crimes..............The Turner case became the occasion for an outpouring of vindictive and filthy commentary by the American media. The sheer volume, crudity and violence of the attempt to demonize the Stanford student should be enough to arouse suspicion in the mind of anyone alive to American political and social realities.....


It's rather curious to see Anarchists described as "right-wing" but the remainder seems right on the ball.
This would appear to be the Zenith of what I would term the feminist inspired drive to politically castrate the modern male who does not fit easily into the meta sexual paradigm. This finds its presence primarily in 3 areas. Family law, domestic abuse and sexual consent. It has also filtered into other areas in particular the Nordic inspired laws criminalising the purchase of sex. It has been an organised,coherent and well financed project which has been going on for a considerable period of time. It has at its core a form of demonisation of the male party to such an extent to entirely exonerate a female even when they may have contributed to a particular outcome.

thinking has established a strong foothold in the media and this manages to enhance the belief that a male protagonist should bear 99% of the blame. An example of this is a recent editorial in the Bangkok Post which sets out to exonerate a women who had arranged the murder of her husband in a cold and calculated manner. The women described as a caring and loving wife had been the victim of domestic abuse which had resulted in the public humiliation of her husband. Thankfully the courts were not as sympathetic and the women has been handed a death sentence which is probably a tad harsh and most likely will be altered on appeal.

Now I am not trying to defend male domestic violence but I am arguing strongly that female violence within the home is grossly underestimated and grossly lacking in research and analysis in the political arena and media. Put simply the Rad Fems have had a a free run the last 20 or 30 years.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
56,762
Its very ironic this judge was appointed by ex Democratic Governor Gray Davis. The Democrats accuse the GOP of a "war on women", yet here is a Democrat appointed judge giving a very lenient sentence to this rapist.

On the other hand are Irish judges any better? From what I can see, very few rape cases result in conviction here. Its difficult to prove unless there is medical evidence, which may require it be reported quickly. And the big obstacle to that is that a traumatised victim may not be in the right frame of mind to feel ready to report it (as in the Linda Carter case in Eastenders some time ago), or fear that she wont be believed.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,768
Its very ironic this judge was appointed by ex Democratic Governor Gray Davis. The Democrats accuse the GOP of a "war on women", yet here is a Democrat appointed judge giving a very lenient sentence to this rapist.

On the other hand are Irish judges any better? From what I can see, very few rape cases result in conviction here. Its difficult to prove unless there is medical evidence, which may require it be reported quickly. And the big obstacle to that is that a traumatised victim may not be in the right frame of mind to feel ready to report it (as in the Linda Carter case in Eastenders some time ago), or fear that she wont be believed.
IMO, it's not so much an American political partisan thing with these kinds of sentences. Take the Texan Republican judge in the infamous 'affluenza' case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Hudson_Boyd

Ethan Anthony Couch (born April 11, 1997) is an American man who killed four people while drinking and driving on June 15, 2013, in Burleson, Texas. He was intoxicated, illegally driving on a restricted license and speeding, lost control, plowed into a group of people standing near a disabled SUV and struck a parked vehicle, which was there to assist. Four people were killed in the collision, two passengers in Couch's truck suffered serious bodily injury and a total of nine people were injured.[4]

Couch was indicted on four counts of intoxication manslaughter for recklessly driving under the influence. In December 2013, Judge Jean Hudson Boyd sentenced Couch to ten years of probation and subsequently ordered him to therapy at a long-term in-patient facility,[5] after his attorneys argued that the teen had affluenza and needed rehabilitation instead of prison.[6] Couch's sentence, believed by many to be incredibly lenient, set off what The New York Times called "an emotional, angry debate that has stretched far beyond the North Texas suburbs".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethan_Couch

Ever heard of the old cliche "All the Justice you can buy"? Race also matters as the OP pointed out in sentencing disparities. If you're native, rich and white, it garners empathetic handling way too much in egregious cases, and results in unduly harsh treatment at times for more minor offences for those that are not.

In civil actions, the opening scene here put it well along similar lines:
A Civil Action - Opening Scene
I don't agree with the last claim that a dead child is worth the least if it's from a native, white and well-to-do family. Just be a dead poor minority and that's the lowest.
 

Kilbarry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,209
Lenient Sentence for Rape?

Its very ironic this judge was appointed by ex Democratic Governor Gray Davis. The Democrats accuse the GOP of a "war on women", yet here is a Democrat appointed judge giving a very lenient sentence to this rapist. ........
And this is the reason WHY even a judge appointed by Democrats might give a "lenient" sentence to a "rapist":

This is an extract from a letter by Patrick Newman from the city of Chico, California

Letter: Sentence was appropriate in Stanford assault case

QUOTE
I don’t think Brock Turner should do 14 years in prison — as millions are screaming he should. In fact, Judge Aaron Persky’s six-month sentence was fair. .............

Rapes, involving abduction, or anything of the sort, should net perpetrators a life sentence. Putting a “date rape drug” in someone’s drink? Twenty years.

But, in the Turner case, we have a man and woman drinking to great excess and going off in the night, anticipating a consensual sexual encounter. The woman then falls into alcohol-induced unconsciousness. The drunken Turner fondles, until he is chased away. Feminist zealots are outraged that Turner didn’t get the maximum sentence. (I wonder if they would feel the same way if Turner had slipped into unconsciousness and the woman was discovered fondling him? Fourteen years?) [My Emphasis]

There’s a sort of mass hysteria going on: It’s actually considered misogynistic (and evidence of obtuseness begat of my white male privilege) to tell my daughter that she might bear some responsibility, were she to drink herself into oblivion, flirt with a man and wander off into a parking lot. Regardless, if that man’s fingers wandered to places they should not go, for even one second after my daughter became unconscious — exactly what Turner was convicted of—I’d say that man committed a crime. But, that’s just not a 14-year sort of crime
..... ENDOFQUOTE

And that "mass hysteria" is why an armed gang paraded outside Turner's home threatening him AND his parents. This is why the judge was threatened and why a former female schoolmate of Turner's who gave character evidence on his behalf was intimidated and forced to apologise. The scumbags who behaved like that are a grave danger to democracy and to the judicial system. Other judges may feel obliged to base their sentencing decisions on a desire to appease the mob, rather than the circumstances of the case.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,768
And this is the reason WHY even a judge appointed by Democrats might give a "lenient" sentence to a "rapist":

This is an extract from a letter by Patrick Newman from the city of Chico, California

Letter: Sentence was appropriate in Stanford assault case

QUOTE
I don’t think Brock Turner should do 14 years in prison — as millions are screaming he should. In fact, Judge Aaron Persky’s six-month sentence was fair. .............

Rapes, involving abduction, or anything of the sort, should net perpetrators a life sentence. Putting a “date rape drug” in someone’s drink? Twenty years.

But, in the Turner case, we have a man and woman drinking to great excess and going off in the night, anticipating a consensual sexual encounter. The woman then falls into alcohol-induced unconsciousness. The drunken Turner fondles, until he is chased away. Feminist zealots are outraged that Turner didn’t get the maximum sentence. (I wonder if they would feel the same way if Turner had slipped into unconsciousness and the woman was discovered fondling him? Fourteen years?) [My Emphasis]

There’s a sort of mass hysteria going on: It’s actually considered misogynistic (and evidence of obtuseness begat of my white male privilege) to tell my daughter that she might bear some responsibility, were she to drink herself into oblivion, flirt with a man and wander off into a parking lot. Regardless, if that man’s fingers wandered to places they should not go, for even one second after my daughter became unconscious — exactly what Turner was convicted of—I’d say that man committed a crime. But, that’s just not a 14-year sort of crime
..... ENDOFQUOTE

And that "mass hysteria" is why an armed gang paraded outside Turner's home threatening him AND his parents. This is why the judge was threatened and why a former female schoolmate of Turner's who gave character evidence on his behalf was intimidated and forced to apologise. The scumbags who behaved like that are a grave danger to democracy and to the judicial system. Other judges may feel obliged to base their sentencing decisions on a desire to appease the mob, rather than the circumstances of the case.
In fairness, the case didn't involve an actual rape conviction...it was felony sexual assault. Granted, it's a sex offence felony and serious and warrants prison and sex offender registration, but this was the sentence:

On June 2, 2016, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky sentenced Turner to six months confinement in the Santa Clara County jail to be followed by three years of probation. He was ordered Turner to register as a sex offender and participate in a sex offender rehabilitation program.
People v. Tuner - Wikipedia

That sentence isn't unduly lenient based upon what is common in other cases of that genre in the US with no prior criminal record regardless of class or race. It's at the minimum of what kind of range it would ordinarily receive. (6-11 months with a parole tail and sex offender registry, etc).

As noted, "[t]he convictions carried a potential sentence of 14 years in prison." That involves statutory maximums, but in most jurisdictions, judges cannot simply hand those out at will. They are required to follow what's called 'sentencing guidelines' that lay forth sentencing ranges based on severity of the crime plus prior record that assigns points scores to the gravity of each prior offence. To go above the range, they have to set forth particular objective grounds that make the case unusually more aggravated than just doing the crime itself.

Judges also have to concern themselves with the doctrine of merger (lesser included offences of a main charge) when viewing convictions. They also usually don't stack sentences consecutively if it's not addressing separate and aggravating circumstances because it has a unfair cumulative effect, e.g, running a larceny conviction sentence consecutive to a receiving stolen property conviction sentence where the person took and thereby accepted the same stolen item.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top