- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,432
- Reaction score
- 39,008
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
3 charges - 6 months jail- 3 years probation -thoughts are?A sexual assault case at Stanford University has ignited public outrage and a recall effort against a California judge after the defendant was sentenced to six months in a jail and his father complained that his son’s life had been ruined for “20 minutes of action” fueled by alcohol and promiscuity.
The case has made headlines since the trial concluded earlier this year but seized the public’s attention over the weekend after a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge, Aaron Persky, on Thursday handed the defendant, Brock Allen Turner, 20, what many critics denounced as a lenient sentence, including three years’ probation, for three felony counts of sexual assault.
The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia
3 charges - 6 months jail- 3 years probation -thoughts are?
What, exactly, did he do to her? I read "sexual assault" numerous times when discussed officially, but only read "rape" two times when it was talking in general. What he actually did will make a difference in my response.
If she was truly unconscious, then obviously she could not consent, and yeah that might sustain a serious sexual assault charge.He was penetrating her behind a dumpster while she was unconscious.
The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia
3 charges - 6 months jail- 3 years probation -thoughts are?
I fail to see the frat boy's wrongdoing or the leniency of the sentence. As I see it, both got drunk in a filthy frat party and were unaware of their subsequent actions. That the girl realized she was screwed in a dumpster after sobering up has no bearing to culpability or the law. Want to preserve precious volition? don't get drunk. Want to get drunk but not get ****ed? don't get drunk in frat parties. People are clamoring against the verdict and are ascribing it to privilege, but the fact is, the law pandered to worthless sensitivities and pandered to the woman in question when it felt it had no choice but to mete some sort of punishment and ascribe some measure of culpability to the guy.
I fail to see the frat boy's wrongdoing or the leniency of the sentence. As I see it, both got drunk in a filthy frat party and were unaware of their subsequent actions. That the girl realized she was screwed in a dumpster after sobering up has no bearing to culpability or the law. Want to preserve precious volition? don't get drunk. Want to get drunk but not get ****ed? don't get drunk in frat parties. People are clamoring against the verdict and are ascribing it to privilege, but the fact is, the law pandered to worthless sensitivities and pandered to the woman in question when it felt it had no choice but to mete some sort of punishment and ascribe some measure of culpability to the guy.
He was penetrating her behind a dumpster while she was unconscious.
The Judge followed the Probation Department's Recommendation.http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/07/u...column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
3 charges - 6 months jail- 3 years probation -thoughts are?
I think that judge needs to forced into retirement or kicked out because clearly he has failed to do his job.
This has absolutely nothing to do with "affluenza".Another affluenza baby, he's too precious to go to jail! Give me a break.
If she was truly unconscious, then obviously she could not consent, and yeah that might sustain a serious sexual assault charge.
I fail to see the frat boy's wrongdoing or the leniency of the sentence. As I see it, both got drunk in a filthy frat party and were unaware of their subsequent actions. That the girl realized she was screwed in a dumpster after sobering up has no bearing to culpability or the law. Want to preserve precious volition? don't get drunk. Want to get drunk but not get ****ed? don't get drunk in frat parties. People are clamoring against the verdict and are ascribing it to privilege, but the fact is, the law pandered to worthless sensitivities and pandered to the woman in question when it felt it had no choice but to mete some sort of punishment and ascribe some measure of culpability to the guy.
The Judge followed the Probation Department's Recommendation.
The Judge followed the Probation Department's Recommendation.
This has absolutely nothing to do with "affluenza".
They were both inebriated.
Her consenting doesn't prohibit her from passing out while in the act, nor does his drunken stupor necessitate that he notice.
"If" that is what happened it shouldn't be considered rape.
Those are not the totality of the facts in this case.He found her unconscious and raped her, whether he or she was drunk or not has nothing to do with it.
The Probation Department is the one doing the Presentence Investigation and recommending. They are far more knowledgeable of this case than you or I are and they are usually as biased as the Prosecution is.Then clearly both that judge and the people on the probation recommendation board need to be fired because clearly both failed to do their job then.
Never stated it had anything to do with the so called "affluenza" defense.The Judge followed the Probation Department's Recommendation.
The Judge followed the Probation Department's Recommendation.
This has absolutely nothing to do with "affluenza".
The judge, identified by The Guardian as a Stanford alumnus, handed Mr. Turner, a champion swimmer, far less than the maximum 14 years after he was convicted, pointing out that he had no “significant” prior offenses, he had been affected by the intense media coverage, and “there is less moral culpability attached to the defendant, who is ... intoxicated,” The Guardian said.
The probation officer weighed the fact that he has surrendered a hard-earned swimming scholarship. How fast Brock swims does not lessen the severity of what happened to me, and should not lessen the severity of his punishment. If a first-time offender from an underprivileged background was accused of three felonies and displayed no accountability for his actions other than drinking, what would his sentence be? The fact that Brock was an athlete at a private university should not be seen as an entitlement to leniency, but as an opportunity to send a message that sexual assault is against the law regardless of social class.
They were both inebriated.
Her consenting doesn't prohibit her from passing out while in the act, nor does his drunken stupor necessitate that he notice.
"If" that is what happened it shouldn't be considered rape.
The above bolded, is that opinion on your part?They were both inebriated.
Her consenting doesn't prohibit her from passing out while in the act, nor does his drunken stupor necessitate that he notice.
"If" that is what happened it shouldn't be considered rape.
I fail to see the frat boy's wrongdoing or the leniency of the sentence. As I see it, both got drunk in a filthy frat party and were unaware of their subsequent actions. That the girl realized she was screwed in a dumpster after sobering up has no bearing to culpability or the law. Want to preserve precious volition? don't get drunk. Want to get drunk but not get ****ed? don't get drunk in frat parties. People are clamoring against the verdict and are ascribing it to privilege, but the fact is, the law pandered to worthless sensitivities and pandered to the woman in question when it felt it had no choice but to mete some sort of punishment and ascribe some measure of culpability to the guy.
Those are not the totality of the facts in this case.
The Probation Department is the one doing the Presentence Investigation and recommending. They are far more knowledgeable of this case than you or I are and they are usually as biased as the Prosecution is.
The fact that they only recommended a six months sentence should tell you that there are facts involved in this sentence that we are not aware about.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?