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

[Grimalkin]

      https://www.google.com/amp/amp.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/09/06/the_armed_protests_outside_brock_turner_s_home_are_dangerously_counterproductive.html?client=safari

.    This doesn't help anything. On the other hand, people standing outside your house holding guns may be worse than jail.

[Hisey]

I really don't think the outrage is about the crime he committed. After all, men rape and murder women every day. They beat them up, stab them, break their bones. Other men commit terrible crimes on their own children. Many of them get off with easy sentences. You don't see 100s of comments condemning those men. No one even pays attention.

It's about privilege---it's a how-dare-he-just-because-he-went-to-Stanford attitude. If this were a case of a plumber's apprentice committing a sexual assault against a McDonald's worker, no one would even pay attention.

It's so weird, people need to make this guy far more evil than he already is. Rape a young woman when she is unconscious? Yeah, that's bad, but we think his PARENTS ALSO CODDLED HIM. Or HE'S GOING TO OFFEND AGAIN. Sure, invent stuff you can't really know, because the crime of digitally raping someone is not bad enough. 

Brock Turner's crime is committed every day.  I think the focus on this man is more about WHO he was than about WHAT he did. Which is very sad. I'd like to see the same anger generated at other rapists--like the ones who rape kids, for example--but it just doesn't happen. Unless they went to Stanford.

Instead of spending the energy trying to create an "internet hell" for Brock Turner, why not devote the same energy helping the victims of some of these crimes?

[Lurky]

On 14/09/2016 at 7:08 PM, Hisey said:

I really don't think the outrage is about the crime he committed. After all, men rape and murder women every day. They beat them up, stab them, break their bones. Other men commit terrible crimes on their own children. Many of them get off with easy sentences. You don't see 100s of comments condemning those men. No one even pays attention.

It's about privilege---it's a how-dare-he-just-because-he-went-to-Stanford attitude. If this were a case of a plumber's apprentice committing a sexual assault against a McDonald's worker, no one would even pay attention.

Disagree entirely - had he been a plumber's apprentice, no judge would have given him a super-light sentence because he was a promising young man who'd made a mistake, it would be the standard sentence tariff.  If he was an unemployed Black man, he'd have been  locked up for a hugely long time. 

The outrage is because it was such an open-and-shut case of guilt, given preferential treatment because he's privileged

[laPapessaGiovanna]

On 14/9/2016 at 8:08 PM, Hisey said:

Sure, invent stuff you can't really know, because the crime of digitally raping someone is not bad enough. 

Personally I think it's bad enough and that seen the crime and all the evidence he should still be in jail. And I think you too agree. Except that the judge didn't think it was bad enough to ruin the life of such a promising white college athlete (the victim's ruined life just doesn't seem to have counted in the equation). 

If the sentence had been more consistent with the crime committed I'm pretty sure this case wouldn't have become viral in this way. 

On 14/9/2016 at 8:08 PM, Hisey said:

It's about privilege---it's a how-dare-he-just-because-he-went-to-Stanford attitude.

Exactly. The judge said that if a young white Stanford student talented at sports commits a heinous crime (with plenty of evidence and witnesses, he was fucking caught doing it) his life can't be tainted by a just sentence. This in a world where if you are black and your car breaks down in the middle of the road you can be murdered by police because from the helicopter hovering over your hear you look like a bad guy or where if you are a black child playing with a toy gun police can legitimately think that you are dangerous and deserving to be shot, but that's fine because you aren't promising. Can you understand that the sort of blatant privilege advocated by the judge isn't going to fly particularly well?

On 14/9/2016 at 8:08 PM, Hisey said:

Instead of spending the energy trying to create an "internet hell" for Brock Turner, why not devote the same energy helping the victims of some of these crimes?

This is what people are doing. If I understand your judicial system correctly, past sentences become precedents for future ones, this sentence can pave the way to similarly unacceptable others. It must be clear that these sort of crimes aren't considered by the community as lightly as by this judge. 

And how dare we be outraged by privilege! Long live privilege! /sarcasm

You talk as if there's only an allotted quantity of outrage we can feel and express. Personally I don't agree, thinking and writing that this sentence is unjust isn't going to subtract from my outrage at other injustices. In fact this is your attitude, that of wanting to establish a hierarchy of cases that deserve outrage more than others. Or did I get it wrong and you'd just prefer that there were no outrage at all because

On 14/9/2016 at 8:08 PM, Hisey said:

After all, men rape and murder women every day. They beat them up, stab them, break their bones. Other men commit terrible crimes on their own children. Many of them get off with easy sentences. You don't see 100s of comments condemning those men. No one even pays attention.

 and so why bother? /sarcasm

Personally I think that media coverage of events is clickbaiting based and that this has a tremendous influence on what events become widely  known and therefore more likely to spark viral outrage. But I don't see you all up in arms about it as much as you are by people being pissed by an unjust sentence being motivated by straight privilege.

[GreyhoundFan]

So, the judge who let Brock Turner off with a slap on the wrist is trying to keep his job: "The judge in the infamous Brock Turner case finally explains his decision — a year later"

Spoiler

When Judge Aaron Persky sentenced a Stanford swimmer who sexually assaulted a woman behind a dumpster to six months in jail, critics came up with a slew of reasons for what they viewed as a frustratingly lenient punishment.

Persky, they said, was biased against women and didn’t take sexual assault seriously. They accused him of giving Brock Turner a light sentence because he was affluent and white. They even said Persky was biased because he, too, had been a student-athlete at Stanford.

But as the criticism against the judge intensified — aided by a stirring letter written by the victim, who said Turner “took away my worth” — Persky remained silent.

Now, almost a year later, as the judge is fighting an energized effort to recall him, he has started to speak publicly in his defense.

That includes a 198-word statement filed with the Santa Clara County registrar’s office last week. The statement doesn’t mention Turner’s case by name but alludes to Persky’s efforts to balance rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders. If approved by the registrar, it will appear on the ballot that voters will see as they decide whether Persky deserves to keep his job.

The San Jose Mercury-Mews posted the entire statement on its website:

“As a prosecutor, I fought vigorously for victims. As a judge, my role is to consider both sides. California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders. It’s not always popular, but it’s the law, and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or my opinions as a former prosecutor.”

In March 2016, Turner was convicted of three sex crimes — all felonies — after he sexually assaulted a woman who’d passed out behind a dumpster outside a frat party. Two graduate students saw the crime in progress and confronted Turner, who tried to run away. The graduate students caught and pinned Turner to the ground and called police.

The trial made national headlines, but its ending was controversial. For the felonies, Persky sentenced Turner to six months in jail. Because of good behavior, he was released after three.

The short stint in jail angered many people, who said it was too small a price to pay for sexually assaulting a woman.

Turner’s father didn’t exactly make things better. Dan A. Turner penned a letter arguing that his son should have received probation, not jail time. Critics called the letter “tone-deaf” and “impossibly offensive.”

“His life will never be the one that he dreamed about and worked so hard to achieve,” the older Turner wrote in the letter. “That is a steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action out of his 20 plus years of life.”

Although Brock Turner could not be retried, aggrieved voters still had another recourse: kick Persky out of office.

The woman Turner assaulted also released a powerful public statement in which she called Turner’s jail sentence “a soft timeout.” More than a million people signed a Change.org petition calling for Persky’s removal from the bench, while others took to social media to vent their frustrations.

Last week, 50 Californians filed a petition to recall Persky.

“Today we take the first step,” Michele Landis Dauber, a Stanford law professor who is leading the recall committee seeking Persky’s removal, said Monday after filing the petition. “Judge Persky has a long history of leniency in cases involving sexual assault. Here in Silicon Valley, women have had enough.”

But Persky and his supporters say the recall effort tries to incorrectly frame his two-decade legal career by a single, controversial case. On his website fighting the recall, he speaks of his career of going after sexual predators and cited independent analyses that concluded he was a fair judge.

“I have heard thousands of cases,” he said. “I have a reputation for being fair to both sides.”

On Friday, Dauber, who is a friend of Brock Turner’s victim and an activist against campus sexual assault, took issue with the judge’s defense of his fairness — and his record.

“Judge Persky did not just make a single bad decision,” Dauber said. “He made a slew of bad decisions involving sex crimes and violence against women.”

I hope he is recalled.

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

On 9/5/2016 at 1:09 PM, meep said:

What's the liklihood that he will be known as "Brock, the dumpster rapist" even a year from now? Will people still care?

Well, his face keeps popping up in my ads. (Under spoilers for anyone who doesn't want to see his picture.)

Spoiler

Spoiler

I guess that's something, at least.

[Hisey]

Quote

Except that the judge didn't think it was bad enough to ruin the life of such a promising white college athlete (the victim's ruined life just doesn't seem to have counted in the equation). 

Ruined her life? Come on. I know people who lost the ability to walk, to breathe on their own, to use their hands--and they didn't consider their lives ruined. I have experienced assault and don't consider my life "ruined." I think you are selling this woman short.

 

[laPapessaGiovanna]

If her life isn't ruined it is completely due to her strength and resilience and maybe the comfort she derives from her loved ones. For sure Brock Alan Turner the dumpster rapist and Aaron Persky the spineless judge didn't help one bit.

[Grimalkin]

Here you all go!

Introduction to Criminal Justice second edition, by Callie Rennson.

[GreyhoundFan]

The Dumpster Rapist made the news again: "Stanford sex offender Brock Turner is appealing his conviction"

Spoiler

Brock Turner, the former Stanford University swimmer who served a widely criticized six-month jail sentence for assaulting an unconscious woman on campus, is appealing his conviction and asking for a new trial.

Turner filed a 172-page brief Friday arguing that the prosecutor incorrectly told jurors during the trial that the sexual assault happened behind a dumpster — and that doing so amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, the San Jose Mercury News reported.

The latest development comes more than a year after Turner was released from jail, where he served only half of his sentence because of good behavior. Turner, once a record-setting swimming prodigy, was 20 when jurors convicted him last year.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky drew widespread condemnation when he sentenced Turner to six months in jail, three years of probation and a requirement to register as a sex offender. Prosecutors asked for six years in prison.

In his appeal, Turner argued that contrary to what Deputy District Attorney Alaleh Kianerci repeatedly told jurors, the sexual assault happened near a three-sided trash bin, but not behind it, according to the Mercury News. Saying the assault happened behind the dumpster is “prejudicial” and implied that Turner was trying to hide what he was doing.

He also argued that Persky deprived him of a fair trial when he did not instruct jurors to consider lesser criminal charges before they began deliberating and excluded testimony from character witnesses.

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen said in a statement to the Mercury News that Turner received a fair trial and was justly convicted.

“His conviction will be upheld. Nothing can ever roll back Emily Doe’s legacy of raising the world’s awareness about sexual assault,” Rosen said, referring to the name the victim was referred to throughout the trial.

Turner risks a second conviction by asking for another trial, which, if granted by California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal, would be presided over by another judge.

Turner was convicted in March 2016 of three felonies, including assault with intent to rape an intoxicated woman and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. The assault happened during a frat party in the early hours of Jan. 18, 2015, when witnesses saw Turner lying on top of a half-naked, unconscious woman.

The victim didn’t wake up until three hours later and had a blood alcohol level more than three times the legal limit for driving.

Her powerfully written statement about the assault moved many.

“You don’t know me, but you’ve been inside me, and that’s why you’re here today,” she said, addressing Turner.

Her words caught the attention of Vice President Joe Biden, who wrote an open letter to her: “I do not know your name — but your words are forever seared on my soul. Words that should be required reading for men and women of all ages. Words that I wish with all of my heart you never had to write.”

Turner was sentenced in summer 2016. Soon after he was sentenced, an independent agency that investigates and disciplines judges was inundated with complaints about Persky. Many thought he was unfair to the victim, that he did not take the crime seriously and that, as a former student athlete at Stanford himself, showed bias toward Turner.

The Commission on Judicial Performance later cleared Persky of judicial misconduct, finding that there’s no “clear and convincing evidence of bias [or] abuse of authority” and that the sentence imposed on Turner was “within the parameters set by law.”

Turner’s sentence also resulted in a push to recall Persky.

The judge broke his silence earlier this year, explaining his sentence in a 198-word statement.

“As a prosecutor, I fought vigorously for victims. As a judge, my role is to consider both sides. California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders. It’s not always popular, but it’s the law, and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or my opinions as a former prosecutor.”

I can't even...

[church_of_dog]

3 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

The Dumpster Rapist made the news again: "Stanford sex offender Brock Turner is appealing his conviction"

  Hide contents

Brock Turner, the former Stanford University swimmer who served a widely criticized six-month jail sentence for assaulting an unconscious woman on campus, is appealing his conviction and asking for a new trial.

Turner filed a 172-page brief Friday arguing that the prosecutor incorrectly told jurors during the trial that the sexual assault happened behind a dumpster — and that doing so amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, the San Jose Mercury News reported.

The latest development comes more than a year after Turner was released from jail, where he served only half of his sentence because of good behavior. Turner, once a record-setting swimming prodigy, was 20 when jurors convicted him last year.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky drew widespread condemnation when he sentenced Turner to six months in jail, three years of probation and a requirement to register as a sex offender. Prosecutors asked for six years in prison.

In his appeal, Turner argued that contrary to what Deputy District Attorney Alaleh Kianerci repeatedly told jurors, the sexual assault happened near a three-sided trash bin, but not behind it, according to the Mercury News. Saying the assault happened behind the dumpster is “prejudicial” and implied that Turner was trying to hide what he was doing.

He also argued that Persky deprived him of a fair trial when he did not instruct jurors to consider lesser criminal charges before they began deliberating and excluded testimony from character witnesses.

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen said in a statement to the Mercury News that Turner received a fair trial and was justly convicted.

“His conviction will be upheld. Nothing can ever roll back Emily Doe’s legacy of raising the world’s awareness about sexual assault,” Rosen said, referring to the name the victim was referred to throughout the trial.

Turner risks a second conviction by asking for another trial, which, if granted by California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal, would be presided over by another judge.

Turner was convicted in March 2016 of three felonies, including assault with intent to rape an intoxicated woman and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. The assault happened during a frat party in the early hours of Jan. 18, 2015, when witnesses saw Turner lying on top of a half-naked, unconscious woman.

The victim didn’t wake up until three hours later and had a blood alcohol level more than three times the legal limit for driving.

Her powerfully written statement about the assault moved many.

“You don’t know me, but you’ve been inside me, and that’s why you’re here today,” she said, addressing Turner.

Her words caught the attention of Vice President Joe Biden, who wrote an open letter to her: “I do not know your name — but your words are forever seared on my soul. Words that should be required reading for men and women of all ages. Words that I wish with all of my heart you never had to write.”

Turner was sentenced in summer 2016. Soon after he was sentenced, an independent agency that investigates and disciplines judges was inundated with complaints about Persky. Many thought he was unfair to the victim, that he did not take the crime seriously and that, as a former student athlete at Stanford himself, showed bias toward Turner.

The Commission on Judicial Performance later cleared Persky of judicial misconduct, finding that there’s no “clear and convincing evidence of bias [or] abuse of authority” and that the sentence imposed on Turner was “within the parameters set by law.”

Turner’s sentence also resulted in a push to recall Persky.

The judge broke his silence earlier this year, explaining his sentence in a 198-word statement.

“As a prosecutor, I fought vigorously for victims. As a judge, my role is to consider both sides. California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders. It’s not always popular, but it’s the law, and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or my opinions as a former prosecutor.”

I can't even...

Plus, the timing seems bizarre to me, what with the public tide finally turning against even nonviolent sexual assault and harassment...

[Peas n carrots]

The tone-deafness is astounding, not to mention timing of the appeal. There must be some epic level entitlement going on in the Turner family. Brock should be counting himself fortunate to begin with, but that isn't good enough.

[Cleopatra7]

6 hours ago, Peas n carrots said:

The tone-deafness is astounding, not to mention timing of the appeal. There must be some epic level entitlement going on in the Turner family. Brock should be counting himself fortunate to begin with, but that isn't good enough.

All of Turner’s actions since his slap on the wrist suggests massive tone deafness and entitlement. If he had any conscience or common sense, he’d either lead a low-key life or attempt to show contrition for his actions other than act sorry for getting caught. Instead, he’s been complaining about being the real victim since day one, despite getting an appallingly light sentence that could only have happened to a rich white athlete. It wouldn’t surprise me if he is the victim of vigilante justice one day, given how he refuses to quit the public eye.

[VelociRapture]

You know, I’m siding with Brock Turner, Stanford Dumpster Rapist, on this one. I think he should have a new trial. That way a new Judge can find him guilty and throw his sorry ass in jail. He can use the time in his cell to rethink his disgusting life choices and reflect on the fact that he’s a fucking moron who threw away an undeserved second chance because he’s an entitled prick. 

[Dandruff]

11 hours ago, Peas n carrots said:

The tone-deafness is astounding, not to mention timing of the appeal. There must be some epic level entitlement going on in the Turner family. Brock should be counting himself fortunate to begin with, but that isn't good enough.

It's interesting.  He seems to be joining the large number of people who thought the judge was bad...but for a very different reason.  If he were to have a new trial, might he have concerns of bias due to current public awareness/opinion regarding sexual assault and/or concerns about getting a "fair" trial due to the publicity he received following the first trial?

 

[HarryPotterFan]

2 hours ago, Dandruff said:

It's interesting.  He seems to be joining the large number of people who thought the judge was bad...but for a very different reason.  If he were to have a new trial, might he have concerns of bias due to current public awareness/opinion regarding sexual assault and/or concerns about getting a "fair" trial due to the publicity he received following the first trial?

 

"I can't get a fair trial because people think assault is bad! Waaaah!" 

[Glasgowghirl]

Brock and his family disgust me, he didn't make a mistake, he made a choice to rape an unconscious woman and who knows how worse it could have been if he wasn't stopped. He can moan all he wants about his life being ruined but that doesn't compare to the horror his victim had to endure and the trauma she is still suffering. 

[Howl]

Another thing to consider.  The two witnesses who stumbled upon the rape were Stanford doctoral students from Sweden. If they have returned to Sweden, perhaps Turner's lawyers are counting on them being unwilling or unable to return to the US to testify at a second trial, or some legal variation of that. 

This reminds me of the affluenza kid, Ethan Crouch. 

 

Edited December 5, 2017 by Howl

[Chocolatedefrauded]

Did anyone read the CNN story about this? The reason he wants a new trial is partly the use of the phrase "behind a dumpster." His lawyer say that is prejorative & makes it sound worse than it was. He also still claims it was concensual. His argument is disgusting. So unbelievable that they think a new trial would have a better outcome for him!

[GeoBQn]

So they feel that it was prejudicial to describe the facts of the crime in words that exist?

[Glasgowghirl]

4 hours ago, Howl said:

Another thing to consider.  The two witnesses who stumbled upon the rape were Stanford doctoral students from Sweden. If they have returned to Sweden, perhaps Turner's lawyers are counting on them being unwilling or unable to return to the US to testify at a second trial, or some legal variation of that. 

This reminds me of the affluenza kid, Ethan Crouch. 

 

They two poor little rich white boys, I feel so sorry that their privileged life made them commit crimes. Seriously both them and their families suck. 

I saw on another site suggestions that a gofundme is set up to pay for the Swedish mens flights to America first class if a retrial is ordered. Brock and his family are hoping that they can throw money at the problem and it will go away. If he is retried and convicted again he will most likely get a longer sentence because no judge is gonna risk another backlash.

[GreyhoundFan]

Let's hope he'll be off the bench for good: "Judge Who Sentenced Brock Turner To Face Recall In June"

Spoiler

Voters in California’s Santa Clara County will decide this summer whether or not to recall the judge who sentenced Brock Turner to six months in jail for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman outside a fraternity party.

A board of supervisors on Tuesday ordered Santa Clara Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky’s recall to be placed on the June 5 ballot after a petition calling for his removal garnered 95,000 signatures, making it eligible for a vote.

Michele Dauber, a Stanford law professor who has led the recall effort, said she was “extremely grateful” to the volunteers and signatories who made the ballot vote possible.

“Brock Turner’s victim Emily Doe wrote that when she learned that Judge Persky had sentenced Turner to only a few months in jail she was ‘struck silent.’ Today the voters of Santa Clara County spoke up loud and clear,” Dauber told HuffPost on Tuesday.

Persky came under fire after his 2016 sentencing of Turner, who was a freshman at Stanford University when he was accused of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman behind a dumpster on campus in 2015.

Turner faced up to 14 years in prison, but Persky sentenced him to six months in a county jail and three years of probation. He was released after just three months and was also required to register as a sex offender.

Turner filed an appeal to his sexual assault conviction in December.

The California Commission on Judicial Performance conducted an inquiry into possible misconduct by Persky following Turner’s trial and said it found no “clear and convincing evidence of bias.”

Persky has defended his action in the case. “California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders,” he said in a statement. “It’s not always popular, but it’s the law, and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or any personal opinions I might have as a former prosecutor.”

But many advocates were outraged over what they felt to be an overly lenient verdict granted to Turner, in part based on his privilege as a white male and a star athlete.

“This historic campaign is part of a national social movement to end impunity for athletes and other privileged perpetrators of sexual assault and violence against women,” Dauber said.

In a devastating statement read out loud by the victim in court and published online on media outlets, the 23-year-old woman, referred to “Emily Doe” in news reports, described waking up in the hospital and being told she was a “rape victim.” 

“I can’t sleep alone at night without having a light on, like a five year old, because I have nightmares of being touched where I cannot wake up,” she wrote. 

During the trial, she said, Turner’s attorneys asked her questions like, “What were you wearing” and “How much did you drink?”

Opponents of the recall effort, however, say Turner received a fair trial and that letting voters decide Persky’s fate would undermine the judicial system.

The Santa Clara County Bar Association opposes the proposed recall and has urged residents to vote “no” in June.

In a January op-ed for The Sacramento Bee, University of California, Berkeley’s law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky called the recall campaign “a threat to judicial independence.”

“Justice, and all of us, will suffer when judges base their decisions on what will satisfy the voters,” he wrote.

But Dauber disagreed, noting that Persky holds an elected position and stands for re-election every six years.

“This recall simply moves the date of his election from 2022 to 2018,” she said. “Judges at his level are not fully independent like federal judges. They are elected and accountable to the people they serve.”

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Oh, FFS: "Brock Turner’s sexual assault appeal: He intended ‘outercourse,’ not intercourse"

Spoiler

An attorney for Brock Turner, the former Stanford swimmer convicted of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman in 2016, launched a bid to overturn his client’s convictions before a panel of skeptical appellate judges Tuesday, arguing that Turner never intended to have sexual intercourse with the woman. He just wanted “outercourse,” attorney Eric S. Multhaup told the court in a brief and in oral arguments.

The distinction is central to Multhaup’s argument that Turner should not have been convicted of assault with intent to commit rape because, he claims, Turner’s clothes were on when two bicyclists saw him thrusting on top of the half-naked, unconscious woman. He argued Turner was only engaged in “outercourse,” a “version of safe sex” with no “penile contact,” Multhaup explained, the Palo Alto Weekly reported.

The long-shot legal argument had three California 6th District Court of Appeal justices scratching their heads, according to multiple accounts of the hearing.

“I absolutely don’t understand what you are talking about,” Justice Franklin D. Elia told Multhaup, the Mercury News reported.

Turner was convicted of two counts of digital penetration of an intoxicated and unconscious person and one count of assault with intent to commit rape in 2016, crimes for which he served three months of his six-month jail sentence and three years of probation. He also was required to register as a lifetime sex offender. The sentence, which many described as too lenient, outraged sexual assault survivors and domestic violence groups across the country, resulting in a bid to unseat the judge who sentenced Turner, Judge Aaron Persky. In June that campaign was successful: Santa Clara County voters recalled him from the bench with 60 percent of the vote.

Turner’s attempt to overturn his convictions began in December, when Multhaup filed a 172-page brief with the California appeals court. He filed a second brief in May, arguing Turner was convicted on constitutionally insufficient evidence and deprived of due process and a fair trial. Specifically, he argued that Turner shouldn’t have been convicted of digital penetration of an unconscious and intoxicated person because the prosecution didn’t prove he “knew or should have known [the victim] was so intoxicated as to be unable to resist digital penetration,” as California statute requires. “There was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she had lapsed into unconsciousness at the time of the digital penetration,” Multhaup wrote.

And he shouldn’t be convicted of intent to commit rape because it was “outercourse,” Multhaup argued.

In his brief, he describes outercourse this way:

“[T]he ‘aggressive thrusting’ or ‘humping’ while fully clothed is viewed in modern times as an alternative to or substitute for sexual intercourse, not a precursor to it. The term for this type of activity in the popular lexicon is ‘outercourse,’ and Anne Bolin and Patricia Whelehan…have described it as follows: ‘Outercourse,’ interfemoral intercourse or what in your author’s generation was known as ‘dry-docking’ or ‘dry humping,’ is a relatively safer sensual-sexual alternative'” to sexual intercourse, they write in their 1999 book, “Perspectives on Human Sexuality.”

In the police report, Turner’s conduct is described this way: Two young men on bicyclists encountered Turner behind a dumpster thrusting on top of a woman whose dress was pulled up over her waist, whose underwear was thrown to the side and whose tangled hair and back were covered in pine needles, as sheriff’s deputies would soon discover. The two men noticed she was not moving at all. They decided to interrupt Turner, who fled but was soon pinned to the ground by the men. They said they did not know whether Turner’s pants were undone prior to the chase. Police soon arrived and found the woman lying unconscious. Turner admitted to digitally penetrating her, police said.

At the time Turner was convicted, California law differed from other states in that rape was specifically confined to sexual intercourse by force, excluding digital or oral penetration. That’s the core reason Multhaup argues Turner isn’t guilty of “intent to commit rape.” That loophole is what inspired legislation reforming the rape statute in 2016 to include any type of non-consensual sexual assault.

But it won’t affect Turner’s case because the law was passed after his attack.

At Tuesday’s oral argument, the three justices reminded Multhaup that the purpose of an appellate court is not to question the jury’s verdict retrospectively.

“We are not in a position to say [of the jury], ‘You should have gone a different way,” Justice Elia said, the Mercury News reported. Elia added: “Intent is rarely proved by direct evidence” but rather circumstantial evidence. “You can’t surgically remove things and look at them separately.”

The justices have 90 days to issue a ruling.

 

 

[Chocolatedefrauded]

I hate the fact that that they are disputing if she was really unconscious or not.

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

At least there was one little piece of good news in that article.

Quote

The sentence, which many described as too lenient, outraged sexual assault survivors and domestic violence groups across the country, resulting in a bid to unseat the judge who sentenced Turner, Judge Aaron Persky. In June that campaign was successful: Santa Clara County voters recalled him from the bench with 60 percent of the vote.

Thank goodness that judge is off the bench.