• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rapist gets 6 months because prison sentence would have a severe impact on him

Status
Not open for further replies.
Entirely possible. Get right back to the previous point, would 20 years address the issue?



Then we should remove that power from the judges. However, who is going to go for that? The judge made the call here to adjust based on what would you call it, leniency please? It may be the opinion that it failed here, but is it failing everywhere?
20 years would certainly act as a better deterrent than 3 fucking months for rape. lol.
Do you agree with the sentence that was given to him? Honestly. Can you really say you agree with it? I implore you to think for yourself for a second.

The judge acts leniently towards this guy because "prison sentence would have a severe impact on him"? What about the impact of this whole situation on the REAL victim, and their family? Just ridiculous.
 

Late Flag

Member
After reading that CNN article and knowing that that was all court record-that Jusge seems even more corrupt. This guy wasn't simply a drunk fondeler, he was a deliberate sexual predator.

He clearly seems to be a danger to society.

I agree, but to be honest, I would have agreed with you before reading the CNN article.

There really are instances involving two intoxicated 18-22 year-olds where reasonable people can disagree over what constitutes consent, what constitutes mens rea, how we can credibly evaluate the testimony of the people involved, and what standard of evidence we should require before convicting a person of a serious crime. This is absolutely not one of those cases.

I am 43 years old and I have been drunk many times in my life. I've have pleasant, tipsy, 100% consensual sex with my wife a whole bunch of times, as recently as last night. Contrary to what teetotalers seem to think, being drunk does not turn off your ability to comprehend reality, nor does it turn off your sense of moral judgement. There is absolutely no way -- literally no chance -- that I would fail to recognize that that the person I am with is unconscious. And there is similarly no chance that I would fail to recognize that this is a clear, bright line that I am under no circumstances justified in crossing.

Being drunk does lower your inhibitions, and IMO it makes you a little bit more of who you were already. When somebody says "I was drinking too, and I thought this was consensual" and then it turns out that the victim was literally passed out, people like me instantly know that the guy is lying through his teeth. It's just not possible to be confused about a situation like this, no matter how drunk you are. What I hear, when somebody says that they were drinking prior to the assault, is that they are a rapist who needed a little liquid courage to do what they wanted to do in the first place, which is to be a sexual predator. This is more of a reason to throw the book at the guy, not a reason to go easy on him.

In other words, I don't think there's such a thing as "simply" a drunk fondler. Guys who do stuff like that are absolutely predators. They know full well what they're doing.
 

The Beard

Member
"You can't get their respect unless you rape someone by a dumpster and take pictures of it, mom! I just wanted to be one of the guys!"

Him trying to blame his behavior on the college culture is so pathetic. I'd be fucking pissed if I were one of his teammates.
 

ANDS

Banned
20 years would certainly act as a better deterrent than 3 fucking months for rape.

Why not life?

Do you agree with the sentence that was given to him? Honestly. Can you really say you agree with it?

I have no idea what he "deserves."

I implore you to think for yourself for a second.

Who else am I thinking for?

The judge acts leniently towards this guy because "prison sentence would have a severe impact on him"? What about the impact of this whole situation on the REAL victim, and their family? Just ridiculous.

Maybe he spoke to them?
 
Just Before Giving Stanford Rapist 6 Months, Judge Dealt Another Light Sentence to Domestic Abuser

Was concerned abuser might nit make it to work the day after jail.


AMY GOODMAN: Can you describe, Professor Michele Landis Dauber, the
scene in the courtroom at the sentencing? You were there early, right, even before this case, the sentencing of Brock Turner, took place? Describe what happened.

MICHELE LANDIS DAUBER: Oh, yeah. So this is really interesting, relevant to the recall. Right before the perpetrator in the Brock Turner—right before Brock Turner was sentenced, a domestic violence case came up, and the defendant was there to plead guilty in a plea deal. And the victim, which is very rare, stepped up and made a victim impact statement, even though it was a plea deal, and it was a lengthy victim impact statement. And she was a Chinese immigrant who spoke very eloquently, although her English was not terrific, and—but she had pages and pages, and her statement was essentially, "I am not getting justice, because I’m a woman of color and I don’t speak English and I’m Chinese. But here, I want to show the audience," she said, "I want to show the courtroom these photos." And she held up photos that were grizzly. She had been beaten so badly that she was completely unrecognizable. She was covered in blood. She repeatedly referred to this as having been tortured, that her hair had been pulled out, that she was very, very, very severely injured, that she was hospitalized, that she had stitches. And, I mean, the photos were almost impossible to look at. They were like crime scene photos. And he got like a weekend or two in jail. And she was decrying this and saying, "This is too light. Where is justice? I’m not getting justice."

And when he was sentenced even to that weekend in jail, there was a—the judge was very concerned to make sure that he was going to get to go to work on Monday. And so, there was a sort of like, you know, thing that happened in the courtroom while we all had to sit there while they tried to communicate with the county jail to make sure that he wouldn’t be super-inconvenienced by having to go to jail for having basically almost beaten this woman to death. And when that happened, I thought, "Oh, man, you know, we’re in trouble," because this was a case of extremely serious beating, and the judge did not seem too worried about it when he sentenced him to his weekend. And I immediately thought, "Oh, man, we’re going to have a problem." And then we did.

AMY GOODMAN: So this judge, Persky, heard two, to say the least, powerful victim statements within a very brief period of time.

MICHELE LANDIS DAUBER: Yeah, it was sort of surreal, in a sense, you know, to see the Brock Turner victim statement juxtaposed with this immigrant victim impact statement, because I actually think the first one was probably just as compelling, but it’s that she, you know, maybe didn’t have all the benefits—a facility with language and elite education and so forth—that the victim in the Turner case had. So this is sort of going back to the, you know, "I am everywoman who has been victimized by violence against women." And she was really giving voice to many cases. And, you know, the judge interrupted the immigrant woman, whose name I don’t know—I’m sorry—multiple times and said, you know, "Could you hurry it along? Yes, yes, get to the point." You know, "Yes, I’m familiar with your case." He treated her very dismissively, to the point that other people in the courtroom were sort of murmuring, like, you know, "Why can’t she finish?" So, it was—it was a sign to me. And as I work on the recall, it is a sign to me that we need judges in place who really understand violence against women, where it comes from, how important it is to deter it, how we can get strong sentences for it, and who take it seriously and don’t trivialize it. And I just think that Judge Persky is not that person, and he should be replaced with someone who will do a better job.

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/6/9/just_before_giving_stanford_rapist_6
 

Keri

Member
I'm not saying I disagree, but do you think it's possible he weighed the crime, the perp and the victim in his decision?

I'm sure he feels that he appropriately weighed everything, but I strongly disagree that he appropriately weighed the crime and the effect the crime had on the victim. The fact that he provided the lowest possible sentence, means that he weighed the wellbeing of the perpetrator over all else. And I understand the perspective of "let's not ruin another life unnecessarily," but this sends a terrible message that has the potential of affecting numerous other lives. That message, as the victim said is: Consent is learned through trial and error. Whether the Judge intended it or not, his sentence trivializes rape and suggests that the crime is not as important, as the future of the person who committed it.
 
Was under the impression the victim had a letter entered during sentencing. I guess not.
Sorry. Was under the impression that I was talking to someone who knew the facts. I guess not.

Just Before Giving Stanford Rapist 6 Months, Judge Dealt Another Light Sentence to Domestic Abuser

Was concerned abuser might nit make it to work the day after jail.




http://www.democracynow.org/2016/6/9/just_before_giving_stanford_rapist_6

Jesus. This is brutal.
 
Entirely possible. Get right back to the previous point, would 20 years address the issue?

Here's what I know. If I were brutalized by a remorseless rapist, seeing him get 20 years would at least make me feel comfortable. It'd give me the semblance that he'd actually have some weighty punishment to actually reflect on what he'd done. If the max was 6 years, I'd feel jilted knowing that I'd get less than a decade before I have to start looking over my shoulder. What I do know is that my remorseless assaulter getting his sentence shortened to less than the amount of time it would take for me to start healing from my trauma before he's out on the streets, particularly if the judge's impetus for making such a decision was for my rapist's sake and not my own, I'd be fucking livid and would indeed not think it in anyway addresses the issue. In fact, I'd be baffled that anyone would think that my remorseless rapist would have any sort of opportunity for actual change or myself for any kind of healing in that short amount of time for such a horrid crime.
 

TCKaos

Member
Can we not lose sight of the fact this is an example of society blaming the victims of rape and devaluing their experiences and the severity of their victimization? To argue over how this is about race or wealth (without mentioning the above) seems like just another example of the problem... It's fine to talk about other contributing factors and issues, but to conclusively say: "This is about [insert issue that has nothing to do with rape culture]." Is a little insulting.

Is the discussion of the intersectionality of factors that determined the light sentence an example of rape culture?

I feel like the role that rape culture plays is implicit, isn't it? We understand that the crime deserved a sentence of higher severity, which is why this story has exploded. I feel like that realization and the backlash against the sentence is demonstrative of the value we've placed on the victim's sexual agency. The rest of the conversation stems from the other factors that played a role in the light sentence. Racial and economic disparities with sentencing are apparent and also worth discussing, especially given the notoriety of other cases recently, like the Affluenza teen.
 

ANDS

Banned
I'm sure he feels that he appropriately weighed everything, but I strongly disagree that he appropriately weighed the crime and the effect the crime had on the victim.

Fair enough. However I do go back to my original comment: at some point doesn't the sentencing become arbitrary? At what point (if at all) do we move from justice to vengeance?

The fact that he provided the lowest possible sentence, means that he weighed the wellbeing of the perpetrator over all else.

Is jail time the only means of assigning that weight though? I mean there are other consequences for Turner once he gets out.


Don't worry about it.

Was under the impression that I was talking to someone who knew the facts. I guess not.

So the victim did read the letter during sentencing?

Too busy with the devil's advocate/concern routine to follow the story itself...

Yes. My posting on this topic clearly shows I QUITE concerned with Turner.
 

Mr. X

Member
ANDS is pulling out all the stops playing devil's advocate. Do you just want to be a unique snowflake or do you actually believe that there is nothing amiss here?
 

Complete

Banned
The judge acts leniently towards this guy because "prison sentence would have a severe impact on him"? What about the impact of this whole situation on the REAL victim, and their family? Just ridiculous.
You don't make any reparations on the victim and her family by being harsher on the perpetrator.

Psychological and financial support are much, much more productive in that regard.
 
Fair enough. However I do go back to my original comment: at some point doesn't the sentencing become arbitrary? At what point (if at all) do we move from justice to vengeance?



Is jail time the only means of assigning that weight though? I mean there are other consequences for Turner once he gets out.



Don't worry about it.



So the victim did read the letter during sentencing?



Yes. My posting on this topic clearly shows I QUITE concerned with Turner.

The Judge clearly ignored what the victim wrote and opted to give the rapist a slap on the wrist because anything else would hurt his future.

He was clearly more concerned about the rapist than the victim. And this is a pattern with him.

The Judge also claimed the rapist showed remorse for being a rapist, that's demonstrably not true, he showed remorse for drinking, and remorse for sexual promiscuity (which is a dog whistle for calling the victim a slut).

3 months in jail is a travesty,
 
So the victim did read the letter during sentencing?

Yes? This isn't a new development. From the third line in the OP:
The 23-year-old victim delivered an emotional speech at the hearing, decrying rape culture and asking that the judge send a strong message about the severity of Brock’s attack on her.

You might want to read the whole thing before you continue.

You don't make any reparations on the victim and her family by being harsher on the perpetrator.

Psychological and financial support are much, much more productive in that regard.

Giving a harsh sentence is one thing, but the judge didn't even give him the minimum. Doing what he did actively hurt the victim and her family.
 

ANDS

Banned
What I do know is that my remorseless assaulter getting his sentence shortened to less than the amount of time it would take for me to start healing from my trauma before he's out on the streets, particularly if the judge's impetus for making such a decision was for my rapist's sake and not my own, I'd be fucking livid and would indeed not think it in anyway addresses the issue.

Is that the point of sentencing though? Are we punishing the perp or satisfying the victim (I suppose they don't have to be exclusive).

Yes? This isn't new. From the third line in the OP:


Might want to read the whole thing.

Not reading the letter thanks.

The Judge clearly ignored what the victim wrote and opted to give the rapist a slap on the wrist because anything else would hurt his future.

What future? Turner is effectively a pariah from society. As it should be.

The Judge also claimed the rapist showed remorse for being a rapist, that's demonstrably not true, he showed remorse for drinking, and remorse for sexual promiscuity (which is a dog whistle for calling the victim a slut).

3 months in jail is a travesty,

From the texts that have come out, it's clear the judge didn't have all the information he needed during sentencing.
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
You don't make any reparations on the victim and her family by being harsher on the perpetrator.

Psychological and financial support are much, much more productive in that regard.

At some point, you need to meet in the middle. I agree with you that psychological and financial support for the victim is paramount. However, the victim's belief in the fairness of the justice system is going to do nothing but add some much needed comfort with the outcome. No matter how you look at it, 3 months for this offense just isn't right.
 
Is that the point of sentencing though? Are we punishing the perp or satisfying the victim (I suppose they don't have to be exclusive).

You're missing an important pillar of the justice system: Protecting the public, including the victim. In that sense, not only is part of a year not punishment, nor is it a satisfying amount for the victim to feel safe or like her story was listened to, it also is an embarrassment in terms of the goal to keep someone confirmed to be dangerous and unrepentant from repeating his behavior in the near future.
 

Mr. X

Member
Not reading the letter thanks.

You're here to be contrarian and argue that the government and justice are fine. not to discuss the rape case? Afraid of a little empathy for the victim?

This is a failure of the system to protect the populace with a 3 month sentence.
 

Dalek

Member
Not reading the letter thanks.

hqdefault.jpg
 

Fusebox

Banned
ANDS, we get it - you struggle with the concept of measuring sentences against crimes, you seem to think all sentences are arbitrary. The fact that everyone else in this thread disagrees with the 6 month sentence should have indicated to you that it actually isn't arbitrary, but it's difficult to explain to people who lack empathy.
 

Complete

Banned
Giving a harsh sentence is one thing, but the judge didn't even give him the minimum. Doing what he did actively hurt the victim and her family.
At some point, you need to meet in the middle. I agree with you that psychological and financial support for the victim is paramount. However, the victim's belief in the fairness of the justice system is going to do nothing but add some much needed comfort with the outcome. No matter how you look at it, 3 months for this offense just isn't right.
Well, I don't necessarily disagree. 3 months is pretty much a slap in the face.

If the system were better-functioning, however, I wouldn't care so much about the length of the sentence as much as the end result (i.e. whether or not any positive behavioral changes were made). But we work with what we've got, I suppose.
 
Not reading the letter thanks.

You are an extraordinarily obnoxious human being. As someone else said, are you just playing devil's advocate because you enjoy pissing people off or do you think that this case is an example of a successful application of the judiciary?
 

Dicktatorship

Junior Member
Man, I wish I had enough money to get away with whatever I wanted. The rich actually get out of more criminal trials by spending millions than the fucking Mafia does with witness intimidation.
 
The fact that he only really admitted to drinking is so absurd. Being drunk you might make a pass at somebody you normally wouldn't. You might say stuff you normally wouldn't.

You don't fucking knowingly rape people, hiding behind dumpsters and running when caught.
 

Dicktatorship

Junior Member
The fact that he only really admitted to drinking is so absurd. Being drunk you might make a pass at somebody you normally wouldn't. You might say stuff you normally wouldn't.

You don't fucking knowingly rape people, hiding behind dumpsters and running when caught.

How would you know? Have you ever raped somebody?
 
At work at the moment so I can't trawl through articles, but is there a description of what led up to the rape? Did he meet her earlier in the night and they left together, or did she pass out behind the dumpster on her own and he just happened to find her and decided to assault her? In these kinds of cases people often argue that the woman gave consent and then passed out and get leniency that way.

Neither situation would make it acceptable but I'm curious what his defense was. All the reports people have linked are about the sentencing and aftermath and don't mention the details of the prosecution.
 

zoukka

Member
At work at the moment so I can't trawl through articles, but is there a description of what led up to the rape? Did he meet her earlier in the night and they left together, or did she pass out behind the dumpster on her own and he just happened to find her and decided to assault her? In these kinds of cases people often argue that the woman gave consent and then passed out and get leniency that way.

Neither situation would make it acceptable but I'm curious what his defense was. All the reports people have linked are about the sentencing and aftermath and don't mention the details of the prosecution.

Who gives a shit about that, it doesn't make it less worse no matter what happened before the rape.
 
At work at the moment so I can't trawl through articles, but is there a description of what led up to the rape? Did he meet her earlier in the night and they left together, or did she pass out behind the dumpster on her own and he just happened to find her and decided to assault her? In these kinds of cases people often argue that the woman gave consent and then passed out and get leniency that way.

Neither situation would make it acceptable but I'm curious what his defense was. All the reports people have linked are about the sentencing and aftermath and don't mention the details of the prosecution.

I believe the defense stated that they'd met earlier in the night at the party and that she supposedly consented that she was fine with him even if she was out. I heard this myself from a current events podcast however so I have no source of my own.
 
I believe the defense stated that they'd met earlier in the night at the party and that she supposedly consented that she was fine with him even if she was out. I heard this myself from a current events podcast however so I have no source of my own.

From the victim

And then it came time for him to testify and I learned what it meant to be revictimized. I want to remind you, the night after it happened he said he never planned to take me back to his dorm. He said he didn’t know why we were behind a dumpster. He got up to leave because he wasn’t feeling well when he was suddenly chased and attacked. Then he learned I could not remember.

So one year later, as predicted, a new dialogue emerged. Brock had a strange new story, almost sounded like a poorly written young adult novel with kissing and dancing and hand holding and lovingly tumbling onto the ground, and most importantly in this new story, there was suddenly consent. One year after the incident, he remembered, oh yeah, by the way she actually said yes, to everything, so.

He said he had asked if I wanted to dance. Apparently I said yes. He’d asked if I wanted to go to his dorm, I said yes. Then he asked if he could finger me and I said yes. Most guys don’t ask, can I finger you? Usually there’s a natural progression of things, unfolding consensually, not a Q and A. But apparently I granted full permission. He’s in the clear. Even in his story, I only said a total of three words, yes yes yes, before he had me half naked on the ground. Future reference, if you are confused about whether a girl can consent, see if she can speak an entire sentence. You couldn’t even do that. Just one coherent string of words. Where was the confusion? This is common sense, human decency.

According to him, the only reason we were on the ground was because I fell down. Note; if a girl falls down help her get back up. If she is too drunk to even walk and falls down, do not mount her, hump her, take off her underwear, and insert your hand inside her vagina. If a girl falls down help her up. If she is wearing a cardigan over her dress don’t take it off so that you can touch her breasts. Maybe she is cold, maybe that’s why she wore the cardigan.

Next in the story, two Swedes on bicycles approached you and you ran. When they tackled you why didn’t say, “Stop! Everything’s okay, go ask her, she’s right over there, she’ll tell you.” I mean you had just asked for my consent, right? I was awake, right? When the policeman arrived and interviewed the evil Swede who tackled you, he was crying so hard he couldn’t speak because of what he’d seen.
 

Zakalwe

Banned
Who gives a shit about that, it doesn't make it less worse no matter what happened before the rape.

No need for that, the poster clearly explained they were trying to understand the way the case was defended and even stated they understand it wouldn't make it better.
 

Jerm411

Member
Am I nuts or did I really see that there's a "support" page for this fucking POS and his family on FB.....?

I can't.....
 
Holy shit

Is there no end to this depravity?

I want to say that this judge is pure scum but I've already said so already. In fact I used all my expletives already. I literally have no words anymore

I've worked with judges that have shortened sentences for similar reasons, the idea behind it is that the abuser still should be supporting his family financially and losing income would hurt the family.

I've sat on a few sexual assault cases and it's really bonkers what defence lawyers will do just to make a testifying victim feel uncomfortable during their testimony.
 

zoukka

Member
I've worked with judges that have shortened sentences for similar reasons, the idea behind it is that the abuser still should be supporting his family financially and losing income would hurt the family.

I've sat on a few sexual assault cases and it's really bonkers what defence lawyers will do just to make a testifying victim feel uncomfortable during their testimony.

Corrupt and injust system that needs to burn.
 

berzeli

Banned
I fucking hate to bump this thread and with this:
Brock Turner laughed after bystanders stopped Stanford sex assault, files show
New records from the Stanford sexual assault trial show how former swimmer Brock Turner and his attorneys attempted to discredit the victim and argued that the attack on the unconscious woman constituted consensual sex.
...
The documents also reveal that Turner allegedly laughed at bystanders who intervened during the assault on the Stanford campus. Turner changed his story throughout the process and came to trial with a version of the events that contradicted his earlier statements and the testimony of witnesses and police.
There is more in the actual article (including details of the contradictions).

Fuck the judge. Fuck Brock. Fuck this broken ass system which let this happen.
 
I fucking hate to bump this thread and with this:
Brock Turner laughed after bystanders stopped Stanford sex assault, files show

There is more in the actual article (including details of the contradictions).

Fuck the judge. Fuck Brock. Fuck this broken ass system which let this happen.

Questioned by prosecutor Alaleh Kianerci about Jonsson’s claims that Turner smiled, the defendant said, “I was laughing at the situation of how ridiculous it was.”

"Boy, it sure is ridiculous that I was caught having sex with an unconscious woman! What a silly situation!"

Like, what?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom