Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why so much hostility toward this woman? Do you doubt she was a victim of rape?
I think the way the law was written at the time of the incident it could not be qualified as a rape- as it was an “outercourse”- this could explain a shorter sentence given by the judge.
They change the law since- the “ outercourse” is now considered rape as well.
Someone can't consent when passed out. It's as simple as that. That said, there may be some borderline situations where the other party might still get the benefit of the doubt. If Brock had been in an ongoing sexual relationship with her, if they'd gone to bed together, if she'd taken off her clothing, etc. before passing out, I might think, yeah, he could have reasonably misjudged the situation, especially if he was drunk himself. But there's nothing about drunk stranger girl passed out outdoors that suggests an invitation...unless you're a sexual predator.
And the thing is - colleges take great pains to explain this over and over during orientations, etc. It's a very big thing these days. Consent is explained at great length.
I see no excuse for it.
I cannot imagine myself climbing on top of some unconscious stranger or anything else.
This case was really shocking. The court was all about HIM, how this would affect HIS future, that he shouldn't be punished in such a way as to harm HIS future too much.
The judge was drummed off the bench, thank goodness. This is one reason it's so important to have diversity at every level of government. It was clear this the former college athlete judge identified with the criminal (a college athlete), and was all about protecting the criminal, not seeking justice or protecting the victim's rights. More women judges are needed. More minority judges are needed.
I think the way the law was written at the time of the incident it could not be qualified as a rape- as it was an “outercourse”- this could explain a shorter sentence given by the judge.
They change the law since- the “ outercourse” is now considered rape as well.
I think this was somewhat why his appeal was denied last summer.
This case was really shocking. The court was all about HIM, how this would affect HIS future, that he shouldn't be punished in such a way as to harm HIS future too much.
The judge was drummed off the bench, thank goodness. This is one reason it's so important to have diversity at every level of government. It was clear this the former college athlete judge identified with the criminal (a college athlete), and was all about protecting the criminal, not seeking justice or protecting the victim's rights. More women judges are needed. More minority judges are needed.
This is correct. I also think the reasoning behind the focus on his losses is perhaps because his losses were more based on things he was going to lose that were tangible and out in the open. Her losses were deeper and more private and emotional and would affect her life interwoven with a million other things on a daily basis. Yet these changes would be largely unnoticed except by her or very close friends. Often the effects of a rape or sexual assault are buried and don’t surface for months or years later. But I do remember at the time the judge was so very overly concerned for his future.
How is a drunk woman unable to consent and a drunk man completely able to make sober decisions and observations?
It boggles me when people pull out this line. In situations like this one a drunk woman who passes out is not using being drunk as an excuse for raping someone. The woman just passes out. The man actively chooses to hurt another person. It's not a man drunk=woman drunk situation, it's apples and oranges - it's a "laying down and passing out" vs. "choosing to rape" situation.
If a drunk man passes out and wakes up to a drunk woman sexually assaulting him, then he deserves the same consideration.
And the thing is - colleges take great pains to explain this over and over during orientations, etc. It's a very big thing these days. Consent is explained at great length.
I see no excuse for it.
Colleges have failed miserably wrt sexual assault due to Title IX mandates. Their definitions of consent vary from one school to the next and are often excessive. Consent must be given while stone cold sober. Or it can't be given while under the influence. Neither take into consideration that drugs affect different people differently, as well as the reality that you can, in fact, consent to sex when you drink. People often do drugs to enhance the experience or ease anxiety. Married people are having drugged sex all the time.
Then there is the express affirmative consent requirement where each touch must be granted clear verbal permission, which is absolutely ludicrous. Micromanaging consensual sexual activity is an overreach. A clear "NO" would be far more appropriate, because "no means no", right? Anything short of that is open to interpretation.
The reason sexual assault appears to be so frequent on college campuses is because most sexual behavior there can be deemed illegal, which makes for a LOT of false allegations.
Quote:
I cannot imagine myself climbing on top of some unconscious stranger or anything else.
Easy to say when you're not under the influence of drugs.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 28 days ago)
35,772 posts, read 18,115,470 times
Reputation: 50841
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinaTwo
This is correct. I also think the reasoning behind the focus on his losses is perhaps because his losses were more based on things he was going to lose that were tangible and out in the open. Her losses were deeper and more private and emotional and would affect her life interwoven with a million other things on a daily basis. Yet these changes would be largely unnoticed except by her or very close friends. Often the effects of a rape or sexual assault are buried and don’t surface for months or years later. But I do remember at the time the judge was so very overly concerned for his future.
The judge was very concerned for his future.
Registering as a sex offender for life, IMHO, should be reserved for people who violently grab strangers off the street, or rape children.
Murderers don't have to register for life. A man who tortures his girlfriend's small child to death doesn't have to serve as harsh a sentence as this.
This young man, who got very drunk - apparently .17ish, and was fingering a woman who had slightly less alcohol in her system who had fallen asleep during this little escapade, now has no life. It's like in Iran, when people are declared "nonpersons". Brock Turner is now a "non person" and can't live a normal life.
I do think future generations will judge us very, very harshly for this. Guys who are 20 years old with a 17 year old girlfriend, named sexual predators for life.
Couples like this who get dizzy drunk and engage in naughty behavior, and the man ends up paying for it with his entire future.
This is madness. This isn't like a predator who drugged her and waited for her to become ill, or a 30 year old man who watched a 14 year old drinking herself into confusion and then swept in to kidnap her.
This is a college guy, and a slightly older woman, behaving vulgarly in public. First drinking themselves into a stupor,
and then deciding to go back to his dorm when she stumbled and fell and they continued their groping on the ground.
And she just happened to fall asleep out of drunkeness where he was still awake.
At least, the public now has her name. And men can make a decision about whether they want to risk a relationship with her.
It boggles me when people pull out this line. In situations like this one a drunk woman who passes out is not using being drunk as an excuse for raping someone. The woman just passes out. The man actively chooses to hurt another person. It's not a man drunk=woman drunk situation, it's apples and oranges - it's a "laying down and passing out" vs. "choosing to rape" situation.
How do people quote me and miss what I'm addressing and/or translate what I'm saying into something I literally never said?
I was responding to this:
Quote:
And how would a conscious guy not know that his victim is not passed out?
He was drunk, that's how. It's really just that simple yet so elusive to people who don't seem to understand that drugs actually have the same effect on men as they do women. As such, how is a drunk woman unable to consent and be responsible for her behavior while a drunk man IS completely responsible and able to make sober decisions and observations?
And y'all are focused on her being passed out, yet none of you can say when it happened. The two passersby who caught mere seconds of an entire evening can't say. Turner didn't walk up on an unconscious woman laying by an open basketball court. The facts of the case suggest they arrived there together. That reality offers a far better outcome. It just wouldn't have gone over well with her boyfriend, made her a hero or millions of dollars.
This case was really shocking. The court was all about HIM, how this would affect HIS future, that he shouldn't be punished in such a way as to harm HIS future too much.
This is not true. She wasn't a nobody in that court room, but neither was he and it seems that is what you folks wanted, long before he was ever convicted.
Quote:
The judge was drummed off the bench, thank goodness. This is one reason it's so important to have diversity at every level of government. It was clear this the former college athlete judge identified with the criminal (a college athlete), and was all about protecting the criminal, not seeking justice or protecting the victim's rights.
Also couldn't be further from the truth. His recall was nothing short of a witch hunt by people who, to this day, still think Turner is a spoiled rich kid because they can't be bothered to care about actual facts. It was a grave injustice. Judge Persky followed procedure to the letter and lost his job to the savagery of hysterical armchair-advocates who don't actually care about victims or justice.
Quote:
More women judges are needed. More minority judges are needed.
The women behind this debacle have proven they can't be trusted, starting with Michele Dauber.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
