Jump to content
IGNORED

Stanford swimmer convicted of rape only gets 6 months b/c it would have a severe impact on him,


Chowder Head

Recommended Posts

A former Stanford swimmer who sexually assaulted an unconscious woman was sentenced to six months in jail because a longer sentence would have “a severe impact on him,” according to a judge. At his sentencing Thursday, his victim read him a letter describing the “severe impact” the assault had on her.

Spoiler
Spoiler

 

 

Trigger

https://www.buzzfeed.com/katiejmbaker/heres-the-powerful-letter-the-stanford-victim-read-to-her-ra?utm_term=.xloKmeb3n#.xkz8zmEr5

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that this short of a sentence is totally ridiculous, given the facts of the case. Not only were his actions deplorable and his excuses pathetic, she could have died behind that dumpster from alcohol poisoning or exposure. 

I take comfort in the fact that he will be spending the rest of his life on the sex offender registry. Have fun getting an education, job, or place to live with that popping up on every background check, asshole. 

  • Upvote 26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't finish reading her letter. A travesty. I hope she is able to get some real help. I have no words for him.

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why it shocks me, but ... 

This guy was caught raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster by two witnesses who didn't know either him or her from Adam ... and yet STILL there was a question as to whether or not it was rape? He took off running and had to be chased down ... and they still questioned whether it was rape? 

I fucking hate this culture sometimes.

 

  • Upvote 45
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of referring to him as the Stanford swimmer, we should be calling him out by his name:  Brock Allen Turner, convicted rapist.  What a powerful letter.  It should follow Brock Turner, rapist, around for the rest of his life.  I am shocked he received only six months.

:tw_cry:

  • Upvote 38
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disgusted.  I'm surprised the judge didn't just say "because he's rich and white", cause I can't think of any other reason that this piece of shit deserves for his feelings to be taken into account.  Wonder if the same judge worries about hurting the feelings of young black men who come before him.

  • Upvote 34
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mamallama said:

I'm disgusted.  I'm surprised the judge didn't just say "because he's rich and white", cause I can't think of any other reason that this piece of shit deserves for his feelings to be taken into account.  Wonder if the same judge worries about hurting the feelings of young black men who come before him.

What that judge hasn't taken into account is the feelings of the woman he raped. And of all of the others that came before (because there is just no way she was the first one)

I couldn't even read half of her letter. I can't even think of a thing to do with that parasit that isn't against basic human rights

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, CTRLZero said:

Instead of referring to him as the Stanford swimmer, we should be calling him out by his name:  Brock Allen Turner, convicted rapist.  What a powerful letter.  It should follow Brock Turner, rapist, around for the rest of his life.  I am shocked he received only six months.

:tw_cry:

 

Brock Allen Turner, the Stanford Dumpster Rapist

 

  • Upvote 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This letter was extremely powerful. I read it this morning as my uni students were taking their final exam.

She is so incredibly strong and eloquent. She raises some very significant issues not only relating to rape culture, but the privileging of sports culture, social class, and the adversarial nature of the US justice system.

And this piece of shit scumbag rapist can't even be bothered to just fucking acknowledge that he *sexually assaulted* someone. He had to drag her through over a year of bullshit, changing his story from the first version, and only admitting to "drinking too much."

And he gets what basically amounts to a slap on the wrist.

I'm just sickened. White, upper-class fucking privilege strikes again.

And exactly how bad does the scene have to be when a grown man *cries* to the police officer on duty? I'm guessing pretty fucking bad.

4 hours ago, Bad Wolf said:

I couldn't finish reading her letter. A travesty. I hope she is able to get some real help. I have no words for him.

If you're not horribly triggered, I would highly recommend reading the whole thing. She makes some very strong points, and does so in an extremely eloquent and intelligent way.

I particularly like the part where she talks about how this piece of shit is going to tour high schools to talk about the "campus culture of binge drinking and promiscuity that follows from that" (or something along those lines--so implying she was promiscuous and as culpable in her own sexual assault as he was).

In response to that, she says that she'll find out the places where he's going to speak and she'll follow him around and give her own talks to these schools that correct his version.

Right on, woman!

This guy is a true piece of shit.

10 hours ago, Fundie Bunny said:

I wish bad on no one, but if he was raped in jail I would not cry

Word. I'm not one for this kind of eye-for-an-eye justice, but seriously. Maybe he should feel what it's like to have what he did to her done to him.

  • Upvote 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like churches, they are likely more concerned over it being made public and ruining the guy rep and their rep instead of more concern for the crime itself.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just stumbled upon the "Brock Turner For 2016 Olympics" Facebook page. This statement sounds like satire, but I'm afraid these people are serious:

Quote

In a tragic miscarriage of justice, Brock has been found guilty by some betas who probably never got any play in college. This sends the message that only men are capable of making decisions after they've had a few drinks, which belittles women everywhere. Everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions and it saddens us to see that the "justice" system gives one gender a free pass but holds the other gender totally accountable for both parties' actions. Hopefully, this patronizing verdict does not encourage more women to "be that girl," but unfortunately it probably will, just as long as they can get media attention and maybe a payout.

Go with God, Brock! We'll be voting for Trump in the hopes that he will fix things by giving you a well-deserved pardon.

May he rot in the hell he apparently believes in.

  • Upvote 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And may I add even if the female is drunk, it is still rape. A woman being a little tipsy is no blamed excuse.

 

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A longer sentence would have a "severe impact" on him?

I thought prison sentences were supposed to have a severe impact on the offender. I thought that would be an appropriate punishment.

But, I concur, have fun being on the sex offender registry.

  • Upvote 28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ShepherdontheRock said:

A longer sentence would have a "severe impact" on him?

Word.

Plus, what kind of "severe impact" has the survivor gone through? They just spent an entire year re-victimizing her.

Instead of showing true remorse, he fucking changed his story and has *yet* to own up to what he did.

Unfortunately, since this guy is rich, white, and has a degree from Stanford, I think he'll end up falling on his feet. Pieces of shit like that always seem to.

Nevermind the fact that had this guy been ethnic or not a star swimmer or lower down the socio-economic food chain, he probably would have received a way more severe sentence.

  • Upvote 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This situation gets worse, because the father of the poor afflicted Stanford swimmer and Dumpster Rapist, Brock Turner, speaks out!  I may need to set up a GFM or comparable to pay my bail money for disturbing the peace of the public library, because I'm ready to go on a wrecking and screaming rampage:

Spoiler

 

(snipped, but bolding is mine) 

The father of a former Stanford University athlete convicted on multiple charges of sexual assault has said his son should not have to go to prison for “20 minutes of action”.

Brock Turner, a former swimmer at Stanford University, was on Thursday sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and probation for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman.

The 20-year-old from Dayton, Ohio – who was convicted of three felonies, including assault with intent to rape – faced a maximum of 14 years in prison.

But Turner was expected to spend only three months of a six-month sentence in county jail after the judge, Aaron Persky, said positive character references and lack of a criminal record had persuaded him to be more lenient. Prison would have a “severe impact on him”, the judge said.

 

 

Guardian article (didn't spoiler the whole link)---sorry, couldn't transfer the father's letter here but if you read it---probable rage warning.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/06/father-stanford-university-student-brock-turner-sexual-assault-statement?CMP=fb_us

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole story makes me sad. Reading her letter made me cry. She deserves far better then she has been given.

This man made choices. He made poor choices. 

She made choices. She made poor choices.

However, her choices, had she been left where she was for the night, would have hurt herself first and foremost. I mean, I've passed out in chairs and on the floor before. Not the most comfortable way to wake up. She would be sore, and cold and likely feel sick. She may have a severe headache.

His choices however, hurt someone else.

That to me, is where I draw the line and he is scum for not admitting it, and for deflecting. The letter his father wrote is specifically disgusting. This outcome makes me sad for rape victims who do come forward. 

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, the poor little Dumpster Rapist, whose appetite was spoiled due to 20 minutes of action.  His father should be consoled that he no longer has to find hiding places for the potato chips and pretzels.

37 minutes ago, samira_catlover said:

I may need to set up a GFM or comparable to pay my bail money for disturbing the peace of the public library, because I'm ready to go on a wrecking and screaming rampage:

Your jail sentence would probably be longer than that of Dumpster Rapist Brock Turner.

:smiley-signs131:

  • Upvote 11
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes me rage shake: Brock Turner, rapist, wants to go on a speaking tour and be paid to discuss the dangers of alcohol??!?!  What.the.actual.fuck! He is seriously thinking that he can book gigs in schools as a registered sex offender? Or that anyone, anywhere can learn from his bullshit excuses and victim blaming? His only value to society is as a cautionary tale of not knowing when to shut the fuck up and take responsibility for your actions.

Those of you who don't wish bad things would happen to him are far better people than I am. I hope he winds up destitute, with only a ratty Stanford sweatshirt and his broken dreams to keep him warm.

  • Upvote 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2016 at 10:55 AM, polecat said:

I don't know why it shocks me, but ... 

This guy was caught raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster by two witnesses who didn't know either him or her from Adam ... and yet STILL there was a question as to whether or not it was rape? He took off running and had to be chased down ... and they still questioned whether it was rape? 

I fucking hate this culture sometimes.

 

Legal semantics - it isnt "rape."  He digitally penetrated her, there was never an allegation that he took his pants off.  Thats why he was convicted of the sexual assault with a foreign object rather than rape.

It doesnt change the absurdity of the sentence or the situation.  

It never ceases to amaze me how we blame victims for situations and how hard it is for victims to receive justice.  This asshat not only committed these heinous acts, but forced her through a trial.  Six months (three with good behavior and likely less) is a travesty.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buzzard said:

Legal semantics - it isnt "rape."  He digitally penetrated her, there was never an allegation that he took his pants off.  Thats why he was convicted of the sexual assault with a foreign object rather than rape.

It doesnt change the absurdity of the sentence or the situation.  

It never ceases to amaze me how we blame victims for situations and how hard it is for victims to receive justice.  This asshat not only committed these heinous acts, but forced her through a trial.  Six months (three with good behavior and likely less) is a travesty.

 

According to the FBI, digitally penetrating someone IS rape: “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, polecat said:

According to the FBI, digitally penetrating someone IS rape: “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

California Penal Code Section 261

Quote

(a) Rape is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator, under any of the following circumstances:

(1) Where a person is incapable, because of a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability, of giving legal consent, and this is known or reasonably should be known to the person committing the act.  Notwithstanding the existence of a conservatorship pursuant to the provisions of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 5000) of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code), the prosecuting attorney shall prove, as an element of the crime, that a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability rendered the alleged victim incapable of giving consent.

(2) Where it is accomplished against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another.

(3) Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused.

(4) Where a person is at the time unconscious of the nature of the act, and this is known to the accused.  As used in this paragraph, “unconscious of the nature of the act” means incapable of resisting because the victim meets one of the following conditions:

(A) Was unconscious or asleep.

(B) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant that the act occurred.

(C) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraud in fact.

(D) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraudulent representation that the sexual penetration served a professional purpose when it served no professional purpose.

(5) Where a person submits under the belief that the person committing the act is the victim's spouse, and this belief is induced by any artifice, pretense, or concealment practiced by the accused, with intent to induce the belief.

(6) Where the act is accomplished against the victim's will by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim or any other person, and there is a reasonable possibility that the perpetrator will execute the threat.  As used in this paragraph, “threatening to retaliate” means a threat to kidnap or falsely imprison, or to inflict extreme pain, serious bodily injury, or death.

(7) Where the act is accomplished against the victim's will by threatening to use the authority of a public official to incarcerate, arrest, or deport the victim or another, and the victim has a reasonable belief that the perpetrator is a public official.  As used in this paragraph, “public official” means a person employed by a governmental agency who has the authority, as part of that position, to incarcerate, arrest, or deport another.  The perpetrator does not actually have to be a public official.

(b) As used in this section, “duress” means a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, or retribution sufficient to coerce a reasonable person of ordinary susceptibilities to perform an act which otherwise would not have been performed, or acquiesce in an act to which one otherwise would not have submitted.  The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, and his or her relationship to the defendant, are factors to consider in appraising the existence of duress.

(c) As used in this section, “menace” means any threat, declaration, or act which shows an intention to inflict an injury upon another.

- See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-261.html#sthash.jXWvVqdv.dpuf

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buzzard said:

Legal semantics - it isnt "rape."

It was something like sexual assault with intent to commit rape?  So...Brock Turner, Dumpster Rapist Interruptus.  Thank goodness the bicyclists decided to take another look and notice Turner humping an unconscious woman.  The sentence is a sad commentary.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.