Stanford Swimmer Who Raped Unconscious Woman Gets Short Sentence Because Jail Would Have a ‘Severe Impact on Him’ (ethical, deportation)

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by Lyndarn

My only real comment of this talking to him actually points to his nurtured "Moral Fibre" that gets established a a youngster..Right from Wrong expand as they grow older. Often, unfortunately many young men often observe how their mother gets treated by their father or significant other..and mother doesn't complain..so ASSumes it's normal behaviour.

We are now 2016.. NOT 1950-1990's.. when the attitude towards rape or any other physical force on a women (unwanted) got blamed on 2 things...1) the Girl asked for it 2) Boys will be boys~

Then of course IF and when anyone complained..IT was sour grapes/post coital regret. Times have changed..with so many high profile cases..and it's become so abundantly clear..Hey..Forceable physical contact of any kind (UNWANTED) is Assault on any level..Young men need to learn that from an early age and nurtured throughout their adolescents in into adulthood. Women back then had NO voice nor credibility..NOW..Far different story!!

I worked on "Rape Team" for a few years, collected forensics and dealt with horrible cases of young women being molested/raped..held captive and after rescue were threatened ( Yes so was Staff Caring for them) thus often victims given "Alternate name" and security +++ Gang Rape also is a huge problem!

Anyway , I have to say..Thankfully women who claim on "College Campus" or enter hospital or complain to Police..THEY all should be considered credible and STOP dismissing it !! Have experts deal with it..Let them figure it all out.. ALSO must mention..PLEASE..IF possible..do not take showers prior to having forensic testing..but then again..some rape victims refused to acknowledge it initially..or made excuses or blamed themselves or worse COULDN'T REMEMBER !

Having said all that..I'm sure there are some ( very few) who claim rape unfounded..but the percentage is so slight compared to the 80-90% who suffered and had to live with it for the rest of their lives..Pregancy due to rape..what to do? Man..I could go on..but won't. This subject is rather personal for me

Seems to be quite the same. Just look at some of these posts.

[The Dark Enlightenment]

The Hypermasculine Violence of Omar Mateen and Brock Turner

Two violent men, two symptoms of the same sickness.
By Lisa Wade

June 14, 2016

America woke up this weekend to the news of the deadliest civilian mass shooting in the nation’s history. The senseless tragedy will undoubtedly evoke anger, sadness and helplessness.
In the meantime, many will forget to think and talk about Stanford swimmer Brock Turner’s crime...

Beyond parody.

https://newrepublic.com/article/1342...n-brock-turner

[2e1m5a]

Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment

Beyond parody.

https://newrepublic.com/article/1342...n-brock-turner

Maybe so, but it's also funny that it seems the same posters going to great length to defend Brock are also the ones so "outraged" at the rapes and assaults going on in Europe. Wonder what the difference is....

[elan]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

There is something very wrong with any man/boy who thinks it's ok to have sex with someone who is unconscious. This is common sense. Something Brock is lacking.

I'm glad he's been banned from swimming professionally and expelled from college. At least the swimming organization and the school realize who the victim is here.

It's not normal, he could very well be on the road to becoming a necrophiliac.

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by ATG5

No, you only care because the golden boy is white. As illustrated, if it was a black person, you wouldn't even notice or care.

And your evidence for that?

Non-existent.

And if you're suggesting that only "liberals" (which I am not)

Oh, sure you're not. You just always support the liberal side.

And you can deflect all you want

How have I deflected? I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

because you still do not understand or defend that he sexually assaulted an unconscious woman who said she did not give consent.

She doesn't know whether or not she gave consent, because she doesn't even remember the incident.

She, by her own admission, blacked out. People who black out don't remember what happened.

I love how femi-Nazis just make up "facts" to support their non-existent "case."

You aren't worth the effort.

Oh, I am. But you're not. Unlike you, I actually pay attention to the evidence.

Originally Posted by kdog

No evidence? Consent? He was found guilty of three felonies:

* assault with intent to rape an intoxicated woman
* sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object and
* sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object.

There was PLENTY of evidence for the judge and jury which is why he was CONVICTED. Seriously. What is wrong with you?

There is no evidence that she didn't consent. There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the sex play started.

As for his being convicted, so what?

Juries are often wrong.

Isn't that why libs are opposed to the death penalty -- because so many innocent people have been convicted by juries and executed?

More lib hypocrisy. It never ends.

Originally Posted by 2e1m5a

I am a man; I have my doubts about you. Do you have sisters per chance?

I have my doubts about you being a man if you ignore the lack of evidence in this case.

Real men are interested in the truth. You, obviously, are not.

Originally Posted by Fox Terrier

Confirmed. You know nothing of female anatomy. I'd give you a lesson, but it wouldn't be worth my time.

I don't need your stupid lessons.

Originally Posted by randomparent

Inside her body? The only way they'd end up there is if they hitched a ride on the foreign object that penetrated her as she was unconscious and incapable of consent.

Well, duh.

They were on the ground, playing with each other.

That's how the "ride" got hitched.

As a mother, this is what I told my sons in the aftermath of this story. You are always responsible for what you do under the influence of alcohol. Being drunk is never an excuse. Never an excuse. Furthermore, do NOT have sex with unconscious people.

There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the foreplay started.

Originally Posted by LearnMe

PS: When it comes to people like "little Brockie," I'm not sure a little talk about what birds and bees do (or should not do) is going to make much difference.

I suspect "Little Brockie' could kick your ass.

Very brave of you, talking about him like that on the internet.

Originally Posted by LearnMe

You are also right to emphasize the dangers of alcohol, though I'm not sure my kids would be around if not for a little too much to drink...

Yeah, go ahead and make your hypocrisy even more obvious.

Kidding! Just kidding!

Yeah -- sure you are.

Originally Posted by Katarina Witt

I think this issue provides a wonderful "teachable moment". Someone should have talked to Brock about these issues.

What issues?

They were drunk, fondled each other, and now he's a "rapist."

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

There is something very wrong with any man/boy who thinks it's ok to have sex with someone who is unconscious.

No one has proven that she was unconscious when they started "playing" with each other (there was no sexual intercourse.)

No one has proven that she didn't consent when they started fondling each other.

And no one has proven that he was aware that she had passed out.

This is common sense. Something Brock is lacking.

People with common sense don't ignore facts.

So you're not a good judge in this regard.

Originally Posted by Lyndarn

We are now 2016.. NOT 1950-1990's.. when the attitude towards rape or any other physical force on a women (unwanted) got blamed on 2 things...1) the Girl asked for it 2) Boys will be boys~

No physical force, lack of consent, or rape (which means actual sexual intercourse) was proven in this case.

And guess what. Actual rape WAS severely punished in the 1950s. In some states, it got the death penalty.

So much for your "knowledge" about the 1950s....

Anyway, I have to say.....women who claim on "College Campus" or enter hospital or complain to Police..THEY all should be considered credible

Why?

Are you saying that women are incapable of lying or being mistaken?

I love your standard of "justice."

Simply to be accused means you're "guilty."

Originally Posted by jaypee

Apparently, to some posters here, her DNA on his finger isn't enough proof and pine needles can crawl.

Nobody has said that they didn't fondle each other.

And pine needles can travel on fingers.

Duh!

Originally Posted by 2e1m5a

Maybe so, but it's also funny that it seems the same posters going to great length to defend Brock are also the ones so "outraged" at the rapes and assaults going on in Europe. Wonder what the difference is....

The difference is that the rapes by Muslims against non-Muslims in Europe really ARE rapes -- with actual forced sexual intercourse, and no consent by the victims.

Originally Posted by elan

It's not normal, he could very well be on the road to becoming a necrophiliac.

Yadda yadda yadda.

This must be the dumbest thread ever on C-D.

[jazzcat22]

For Brock apologists who say he wasn't aware that the woman had passed out, let's say for a minute this was true. Why did he run when the Swedish grad students arrived? And why wasn't he aware? Because he was so drunk himself? Shouldn't be still be held to the same responsibility whether sober, drunk, upset, happy about winning a swim meet? Why do we prosecute drunk drivers? With your way of thinking, they can't notice they are drunk or sometimes even that there are other cars on the road.

For you who still condone what Brock did, judge Persky is still your man. The latest:

"Persky also responded to a probation officer's finding that Turner's crime was "less serious" than similar assaults because he was drunk. Persky said alcohol is "not an excuse," but ultimately found it to weigh in Turner's favor as he assessed moral culpability." ?????? Why is it less serious because alcohol is fueling it? Brock himself said there was peer pressure, with the college atmosphere, so what, we should allow him to drink to his heart's content with impunity for anything he does while under the influence? If you're assaulted by someone's fingers or their car, it's just as awful for the victim when the perp is drunk!

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by jazzcat22

For Brock apologists who say he wasn't aware that the woman had passed out, let's say for a minute this was true. Why did he run when the Swedish grad students arrived? And why wasn't he aware? Because he was so drunk himself? Shouldn't be still be held to the same responsibility whether sober, drunk, upset, happy about winning a swim meet?

Responsibility for what?

Engaging in consensual fondling with a woman?

On C-SPAN today, the Democrats in Congress took turns reading a 6,000 word letter of indignation and accusation by the "victim" -- who, by her own admission, blacked out and doesn't even remember what happened.

This is nothing other than a witch hunt, with the Democrats leading the charge.

Nothing surprising there.

Hillary said that women who accuse men of rape should always be believed, not matter what.

Except, of course, when it comes to her own husband!

LOL

[jazzcat22]

Right, the victim doesn't remember. But why didn't the Swedish grad students think it was consensual? Why did they intervene? Why did they apprehend him? Why did one of them report that he was really distressed by what he saw?

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by jazzcat22

Right, the victim doesn't remember. But why didn't the Swedish grad students think it was consensual?

Why don't you ask them?

We know that they weren't there when the hanky-panky started.

So there is no way that they can rightfully claim that it wasn't consensual.

[Fox Terrier]

[quote=dechatelet;44433746]

I don't need your stupid lessons.

Well, they DO say 'ignorance is bliss'.

This must be the dumbest thread ever on C-D.

You seem to enjoy posting here.