BAN WHITE MEN!!!*
*This only applies to biological white men, living beings that identify as white men are precluded.
Stanford rape case
- Thread starter CommuterBob
- Start date
BAN WHITE MEN!!!*
*This only applies to biological white men, living beings that identify as white men are precluded.
Judge is a Stanford Alum...he knows how important Swimming Recruiting is...obviously didn't want a black eye over the program. (Rapist will be eligible for parole after just 3 months in County Jail, aka, not being sent to State Prison).
Stanford Alum Judge Aaron Persky
He should have recused himself.Judge is a Stanford Alum...he knows how important Swimming Recruiting is...obviously didn't want a black eye over the program. (Rapist will be eligible for parole after just 3 months in County Jail, aka, not being sent to State Prison).
Stanford Alum Judge Aaron Persky
.
Clearly this judge has a little bias in him. Are we sure he doesn't come from a Mexican heritage?
If the kid eventually identifies as a woman, Whata will send him a Courage Award, thus forgiving his white privilege!
Can a woman rape a woman? You might be on to something here.*
If a male that identifies as a female gets convicted and sentenced to prison, do they send them to a female prison or a male prison. Would a female that identifies as male get sent to a male prison?
Why are jails segregated? That seems extremely sexist.
The picture on the right is a man who still enjoys a ribeye and some pretzels. That's the difference here people.Saw this on faceberg, should've replied it was payback for OJ
I've seen this circulating on social media and it's another attempt to illustrate "white privilege". What they don't talk about is the case of Sam Ukwuachu, the football player at Baylor who was found guilty of rape and sentenced to 6 months in prison and 10 years probation. The legal system allows these lenient sentences to be carried out.Saw this on faceberg, should've replied it was payback for OJ
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/opinion/joe-nocera-baylor-football-and-rape.html?_r=0
And it gets better. Here's the letter the swimmer-rapist wrote to the court. which prompted the victim to pen her letter and read it in open court.
As expected, the whole letter is about how bad he's doing, and not really any sort of apology to the victim. This is about as close to an apology as it gets:
" Not only have I altered my life, but I’ve also changed [redacted] and her family’s life. I am the sole proprietor of what happened on the night that these people’s lives were changed forever. I would give anything to change what happened that night. I can never forgive myself for imposing trauma and pain on [redacted]. It debilitates me to think that my actions have caused her emotional and physical stress that is completely unwarranted and unfair. The thought of this is in my head every second of every day since this event has occurred. These ideas never leave my mind."
The rest of the letter serves as a pity party for the rapist, trying to portray him as one who has suffered because of this and should be considered for leniency.
" I’ve lost two jobs solely based on the reporting of my case. I wish I never was good at swimming or had the opportunity to attend Stanford, so maybe the newspapers wouldn’t want to write stories about me."
"Before this happened, I never had any trouble with law enforcement and I plan on maintaining that. I’ve been shattered by the party culture and risk taking behavior that I briefly experienced in my four months at school. I’ve lost my chance to swim in the Olympics. I’ve lost my ability to obtain a Stanford degree. I’ve lost employment opportunity, my reputation and most of all, my life. These things force me to never want to put myself in a position where I have to sacrifice everything."
Wow. Just no remorse. Not really at all. Poor me. I've suffered enough, right? No more cushy scholarship at a dream college. I lost a couple of jobs (wait, I thought scholarship athletes couldn't have jobs...and what were those jobs?) I promise to be a lecturer, showing the world how ruined my life is (not talking about how ruined the victim's life is). And of course it's filled with blame on outside pressures (alcohol, promiscuity (why is that even in here?), peer pressure (they were alone), etc.). Just zero empathy. At least he didn't mention not eating steaks anymore.
As expected, the whole letter is about how bad he's doing, and not really any sort of apology to the victim. This is about as close to an apology as it gets:
" Not only have I altered my life, but I’ve also changed [redacted] and her family’s life. I am the sole proprietor of what happened on the night that these people’s lives were changed forever. I would give anything to change what happened that night. I can never forgive myself for imposing trauma and pain on [redacted]. It debilitates me to think that my actions have caused her emotional and physical stress that is completely unwarranted and unfair. The thought of this is in my head every second of every day since this event has occurred. These ideas never leave my mind."
The rest of the letter serves as a pity party for the rapist, trying to portray him as one who has suffered because of this and should be considered for leniency.
" I’ve lost two jobs solely based on the reporting of my case. I wish I never was good at swimming or had the opportunity to attend Stanford, so maybe the newspapers wouldn’t want to write stories about me."
"Before this happened, I never had any trouble with law enforcement and I plan on maintaining that. I’ve been shattered by the party culture and risk taking behavior that I briefly experienced in my four months at school. I’ve lost my chance to swim in the Olympics. I’ve lost my ability to obtain a Stanford degree. I’ve lost employment opportunity, my reputation and most of all, my life. These things force me to never want to put myself in a position where I have to sacrifice everything."
Wow. Just no remorse. Not really at all. Poor me. I've suffered enough, right? No more cushy scholarship at a dream college. I lost a couple of jobs (wait, I thought scholarship athletes couldn't have jobs...and what were those jobs?) I promise to be a lecturer, showing the world how ruined my life is (not talking about how ruined the victim's life is). And of course it's filled with blame on outside pressures (alcohol, promiscuity (why is that even in here?), peer pressure (they were alone), etc.). Just zero empathy. At least he didn't mention not eating steaks anymore.
Poor guy? When did he ever identify as a guy you sexist fukc?
None of this would've happened if that girl would've been taking a shit outside like Vishnu intended us to. This is all her fault.
And swimmer-rapist's shtick about being a novice partier is total BS. He's a veteran in that regard.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/brock-t...ut-drinking-doing-drugs-sentencing-memo-says/
"Coming from a small town in Ohio, I had never really experienced celebrating or partying that involved alcohol," he said in the statement.
In the memo, however, prosecutors point to cell phone evidence they say proves otherwise. In a search of Turner's cell phone, prosecutors say they found photos of Turner smoking a pipe and a Dec. 27, 2014 video of Turner smoking a bong and drinking out of a liquor bottle immediately after.
They say texts also point to drug use, including a Dec. 18, 2014 message in which he asks a friend, "Do you think I could buy some wax so we could do some dabs?" referring to a highly concentrated form of marijuana. Other text messages referenced smoking, buying and sharing "weed" and trying to find a "hook up" to buy acid both while Turner was in high school and at Stanford, the memo says.
On Dec. 24, 2014, according to the memo, Turner received a message from a friend that read, "I've got a hankerin for a good acid trip when we get back." Prosecutors say Turner replied: "I'm down for sure."
The memo says he responded to a friend bragging about "candyflippin" - referring to taking LSD and MDMA together - by saying, "I gotta [expletive] try that. I've heard it's awesome."
The memo says on June 3, 2014 Turner's sister asked him via text, "Did you rage last night?" To which Turner replied, "Yeah kind of. It was hard to find a place to drink. But when we finally did we could only drink for like an hour an a half."
Prosecutors say the records show Turner was already an experienced drinker in high school, had routinely smoked marijuana and experimented with hard drugs including LSD, despite his statement."
Candyflippin? That's a new one for me.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/brock-t...ut-drinking-doing-drugs-sentencing-memo-says/
"Coming from a small town in Ohio, I had never really experienced celebrating or partying that involved alcohol," he said in the statement.
In the memo, however, prosecutors point to cell phone evidence they say proves otherwise. In a search of Turner's cell phone, prosecutors say they found photos of Turner smoking a pipe and a Dec. 27, 2014 video of Turner smoking a bong and drinking out of a liquor bottle immediately after.
They say texts also point to drug use, including a Dec. 18, 2014 message in which he asks a friend, "Do you think I could buy some wax so we could do some dabs?" referring to a highly concentrated form of marijuana. Other text messages referenced smoking, buying and sharing "weed" and trying to find a "hook up" to buy acid both while Turner was in high school and at Stanford, the memo says.
On Dec. 24, 2014, according to the memo, Turner received a message from a friend that read, "I've got a hankerin for a good acid trip when we get back." Prosecutors say Turner replied: "I'm down for sure."
The memo says he responded to a friend bragging about "candyflippin" - referring to taking LSD and MDMA together - by saying, "I gotta [expletive] try that. I've heard it's awesome."
The memo says on June 3, 2014 Turner's sister asked him via text, "Did you rage last night?" To which Turner replied, "Yeah kind of. It was hard to find a place to drink. But when we finally did we could only drink for like an hour an a half."
Prosecutors say the records show Turner was already an experienced drinker in high school, had routinely smoked marijuana and experimented with hard drugs including LSD, despite his statement."
Candyflippin? That's a new one for me.
He got re-elected because he ran unopposed. So, no. Nothing yet.
He probably can't be a Stanford commencement speaker... this year.
Damn [redacted] sure did screw up a lot of peoples lives by allowing herself to be raped* what a thoughtless [redacted] ...
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!
There's a difference between the Kid being wrong and the Dad being a poor father who doesn't hold his son accountable for his actions, and a judge trying to account for all of the realities in this situation. I cannot believe the number of people not only calling for judge's head, but going after his career and even his license!
In fact, several judges warned prior that California's "Yes Means Yes" might result in this situation. That people would be upset that someone who is involved where both parties were inebriated doesn't get the same sentence as someone who date raped when they weren't inebriated and/or it was clear the woman did not consent at any time prior.
The problem always becomes what someone said when they weren't yet inebriated or passed out. Even many DUIs get thrown out of court because the person wasn't tested for BAL until 30+ minutes later. Many times people do not become inebriated or passed out until later, and that's the difference in a lot of cases. Frankly, I hate -- no, despise -- men like this. I hate the whole drunken scene. I've long called for the US to drop the drinking age to much like the EU, so we get rid of the binge drinking and other, irresponsibility.
As someone who has never drank, and always been the designated driver, I've always been that asshole that has come over to a friend at a party and gone, "Dude, she wouldn't be like this if she was sober." Do you know how many times I've gotten that look and seriously strained friendships as a result? But there's also another side.
I've also seen the other side, when inebriated women are irresponsible, and even sexually assaulting men when they were inebriated. It gets really f'd up, especially if the guy isn't as inebriated and says no. I'd say more, but most of you guys wouldn't believe the stories I could tell.
Because men, not women, are assumed the default assaulting party because men are statistically more likely, don't be shocked when the rulings only result in 6 months to 6 years, and not 14+ years versus a case where it's shown the woman clearly did not consent before she was inebriated and/or lost consciousness. It's how the courts work right now.
Even the stories about the man in this were pathetic, and apply to more than half the men I knew and watched in college at parties, and a good fourth of women. That's the thing ... we're talking about sexual advances that happen, and more likely when people's inhibitions are removed. So where do we draw the line ... other than to always assume a woman never consents and a man always does?
The problem is a bigger one ... toxic social situations, and beyond just college. Read a great article about a woman who made the mistake of trying to press charges on another woman who got her room key and took advantage of her when she was passed out. The reality? The corporate environment, having to work during social events where alcohol was involved and other things, were part of the issue.
Irresponsible people will always be the problem. My only concern is how much we always assume it's just men. I've seen my share of women where it went the other way, and if you don't think women don't press charges ... I've never seen a man do so yet. Yes, it's far, far less, but if it wasn't for me in one situation, where I was the only one not drinking, a clear, female aggressor who didn't even have her facts straight after the matter would have caused a similar situation.
Now, the letter from the mom.
All I need to know about her morals is in this letter. And where she complains "Why him? Why?"
F her and F that whole sh!tty family.
http://www.marieclaire.com/culture/.../?mag=mar&list=nl_mhb_news&src=nl&date=061316
.
All I need to know about her morals is in this letter. And where she complains "Why him? Why?"
F her and F that whole sh!tty family.
http://www.marieclaire.com/culture/.../?mag=mar&list=nl_mhb_news&src=nl&date=061316
.
On a scale of 1 to rape, I wonder how she'd rate the discomfort.
Listen, I'm not saying her son is a bad guy; he's just a rapist piece of shit, that's all.
That entire family should be deported. What awful people. Your son is a POS, time to put the blame where it belongs.
Ex-girlfriend's letter:
- http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Brock-Turner-ex-girlfriend-letter-defend-support-8136094.php
Interesting take. Wonder how long before she's destroyed for stating her experiences too.
- http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Brock-Turner-ex-girlfriend-letter-defend-support-8136094.php
Interesting take. Wonder how long before she's destroyed for stating her experiences too.
So despite letters from family members and former HS girlfriends portraying what a saint swimmer-rapist was, the women's swim team at Stanford tells a different story - and also claims they were encouraged to suppress their statements.
http://nypost.com/2016/06/16/womens-swim-team-not-surprised-by-brock-turner-arrest/
“From the beginning, the women swimmers had found him to be very, very odd. Brock would make comments to the women such as ‘I can see your t–s in that swimsuit.’ ”
One top competitor said she would never let herself be alone with Turner after observing his drunken antics at parties, the magazine reported."
“There were rumblings that the women were pressured by Stanford officials to not do [write to the judge] since they hadn’t witnessed any crime that Brock had committed,” an insider told InTouch.
A school representative, however, told the magazine that the students can make whatever statement they would like as private individuals.
However, the insider insisted that the school had indeed silenced the women.
“The team has been instructed to not discuss Brock Turner publicly or to the media,” InTouch quoted the source as saying. “The entire team completely supports the victim and wishes that Brock had gotten a much harsher sentence.”
http://nypost.com/2016/06/16/womens-swim-team-not-surprised-by-brock-turner-arrest/
“From the beginning, the women swimmers had found him to be very, very odd. Brock would make comments to the women such as ‘I can see your t–s in that swimsuit.’ ”
One top competitor said she would never let herself be alone with Turner after observing his drunken antics at parties, the magazine reported."
“There were rumblings that the women were pressured by Stanford officials to not do [write to the judge] since they hadn’t witnessed any crime that Brock had committed,” an insider told InTouch.
A school representative, however, told the magazine that the students can make whatever statement they would like as private individuals.
However, the insider insisted that the school had indeed silenced the women.
“The team has been instructed to not discuss Brock Turner publicly or to the media,” InTouch quoted the source as saying. “The entire team completely supports the victim and wishes that Brock had gotten a much harsher sentence.”
The female friend has since rescinded her praise of Brock, claiming she wasn't aware of the extent of the crime committed.
But his ex-girlfriend has not.
I think people are missing the point that most of these people are only defending the judge's sentence. Frankly, I think 6 months was too lenient, and would have gone for 3 years. But given the facts in the case, I think he was totally undeserving of 14 years. And there are several lawyers that agree, even if it's not PC to do so.
In fact, several judges and lawyers, even the ones that supported the bill, predict this would exactly happen when "Yes Means Yes" was passed. They said people would outcry if any judge found the circumstances limiting, and reduced the sentence to anything less than the maximum.
I've read all sorts of stuff that could apply to 50% of the men I knew in high school and early college. Even the comment he made about the T-shirt I've heard from craploads of 17-20 year-olds, and they even thought I was "over-reacting" when I pointed out how bad it looked later (and most agreed with him, not me).
Heck, I used to be labeled the "a-hole" for pointing out to guys that did hook up with an inebriated woman that she would normally say "no" to them if she was sober.
I guess that's what bothers me most about all this. A lot of people are being "PC" who very much pulled this same thing. And even worse, although far, far less often, several drunk women who also didn't take "no" for an answer as well, or utterly just did things anyway (which would totally be assault if roles were flipped).
People act like this stuff is not normal, but it is. But a lot of people pay lip service, instead of recognizing many situations are toxic because of many people, and all it takes is one, inebriated person to go too far ... especially if the other one doesn't say anything, or worse yet, consented earlier because they were already inebriated and inhibited (and only got worse as their BAL got higher).
That's the only thing I do agree on ... too many situations are toxic but considered no big deal ... at least until stuff like this happens, and only after-the-fact when someone is caught.
And after serving only 3 months of his overly-lenient six-month sentence, Brock Turner is now a free man (excepr he has to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life).
The poor kids life is ruined. He can't even eat steak anymore.
Imagine being trapped in your dad's house and not eating his favorite pretzels. The horror!!
