That Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't other human beings in other countries have hormones and drink alcohol?

This begs the question .... WTF is the "sexual revolution"?

Are you asking rhetorically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have to consent to the rape kit procedure?

Yes. You don't have to do it, whether or not you decide to press charges.

Dis she consent to it or was she unconscious? Anyone know?

No one knows for sure whether she consented to being fingered. Based on eyewitness accounts, she was passed out drunk and was unable to giving consent to being dry humped.

I meant consent to the rape kit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have to consent to the rape kit procedure?

Yes. You don't have to do it, whether or not you decide to press charges.

Dis she consent to it or was she unconscious? Anyone know?

Yes, while she was in the hospital, they asked her if she wanted an examination for rape, and if she wanted to press charges. These were two separate questions, and she answered them separately.

Her letter was illuminating -- I knew the rape kit was invasive, but she really brought home how awful it is. I wonder if her letter will dissuade other girls from putting themselves through that, instead of empowering them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If Brock Turner had been black out drunk too would that have meant that she sexually assaulted him too? I mean that seriously. Would that have meant that these two raped each other if they both couldn't remember what happened?

How about this question: if Brock Turner had been black, would you still be looking for reasons to absolve his guilt?

I can guarantee that if he were, with the same accomplishments and potential, the same upstanding family and background, and all other facts were the same, the search for "what really happened" would include thorough research for any and everything that could prove he's nothing but a criminal and the lesson would be that sexual predators have be stopped and they have to pay.

Because what the judge and all these apologists are saying is that the reward for being successful is getting away with mistreating other people.

I'm so glad he has a memorable name and face. So glad this is all over the media. I'm sickened that this thread has gone on for 90+ pages because so many still want make excuses for a felon, but it's really kept the issue in the minds of a lot of people and I'm glad that there's outrage. Otherwise, I don't even know how we could call this a civilized society.

I am not looking for reasons to absolve his guilt. Personally I think he is guilty as sin and wish there was stronger evidence to give him a harsher sentence. And no, I would not feel any different if Brock were black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have to consent to the rape kit procedure?

Yes. You don't have to do it, whether or not you decide to press charges.

Dis she consent to it or was she unconscious? Anyone know?

No one knows for sure whether she consented to being fingered. Based on eyewitness accounts, she was passed out drunk and was unable to giving consent to being dry humped.

So by your logic he could have taken her purse, watch, jewelry and pierced her cheek before the swedes arrived and his word that she had agreed to all of that would suffice, wouldn't be appropriate to question further simply because there wasn't an eyewitness?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have one question,

WTF is a hookup culture and how the hell did we get there?

Err... And who's to blame?

Alcohol, hormones, and the sexual revolution?

The sexual revolution was in the 60s. Hookup culture is much more modern than that, although the sexual revolution was probably the grandmother of hookup culture.

Um no. After the sexual revolution is when people started casually hooking up. The term hook up culture is relatively new. The behavior isn't

Pickup bars are not new. Hookup culture is new -- lots of drinking on college campuses is not new, but casual sex is more accepted and expected than it used to be. No longer illicit.

You must be extremely young. People were "hooking up" plenty in the 70's and no it was not limited to pickup bars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If Brock Turner had been black out drunk too would that have meant that she sexually assaulted him too? I mean that seriously. Would that have meant that these two raped each other if they both couldn't remember what happened?

How about this question: if Brock Turner had been black, would you still be looking for reasons to absolve his guilt?

I can guarantee that if he were, with the same accomplishments and potential, the same upstanding family and background, and all other facts were the same, the search for "what really happened" would include thorough research for any and everything that could prove he's nothing but a criminal and the lesson would be that sexual predators have be stopped and they have to pay.

Because what the judge and all these apologists are saying is that the reward for being successful is getting away with mistreating other people.

I'm so glad he has a memorable name and face. So glad this is all over the media. I'm sickened that this thread has gone on for 90+ pages because so many still want make excuses for a felon, but it's really kept the issue in the minds of a lot of people and I'm glad that there's outrage. Otherwise, I don't even know how we could call this a civilized society.

I don't think we can know, but I disagree. I don't think his being a black Olympic swimmer would change things. Rape is hard to prove, even when caught in the act, as he was.

Some sports, particularly college and professional football, have started to be less tolerant of the actions of players. But historically, athletes can get away with a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brock is undoubtedly a douchebag, but 6 months of jail and spending the rest of your life as a registered sex offender seems like a reasonable punishment for a man who fingered a passed out drunk girl (and even then we don't know for certain that she was passed out at that moment he did it)

People are outraged at the lenient 6 month sentence. The probation officer took into account the notorieity of the case, that Turner's name is forever besmirched, and the llifetime sentence of the sex offender registry when advising the jail time.

I think the sex offender registry is an awful creation, myself. A lifetime sentence that limits where a person can live, severely limits what job a person can have, and does not distinguish between one sex offense and another. Does the punishment fit the crime? I don't think so. a person is supposed toserve their sentence, pay their debt to society, and then move on. If a person is too dangerous to be out in society, then either give them a lifetimeprison sentence, kill them, or castrate and release them.

I actually do not consider 6 months to be a lenient sentence for someone who fingered a woman In a situation where it can't be proved as to whether she gave her consent. And fwiw, I actually DO believe she was passed out and therefore couldn't give consent, but speculation isn't enough

I also want to add that I actually think he would have raped her (with his penis) if the men on the bike hadn't come along. But legally you can't just go on gut feelings, you have to go by what is known and what is known is that she doesn't remember the events of the evening and eventually passed out, he fingered her at some point, but it can't be determined if it was prior to her passing out, and witnesses saw him dry hump her with his pants on while she was apparently passed out. Based on what can actually be determined six months in jail and a lifetime branded as a sex offender does not seem lenient to me.

I think that they were fooling around and he had hoped to have sex with her - that was his intent. Then she passed out. He was aroused and was getting himself off by dry humping her. I don't think he had any intentions of raping her unconscious body. He wouldn't have wasted time dry humping her if he was going to rape her. But in CA if the victim doesn't remember what happened....it is assault. Ironically, if she had remained conscious they probably would have had sex....which could have gotten him a rape charge because she blacked out and didn't remember what happened. Thus the intent to rape...

It was a mess of a night alright.

You're leaving out the part where he shoved his fingers inside of her. It was a lot more than dry humping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have to consent to the rape kit procedure?

Yes. You don't have to do it, whether or not you decide to press charges.

Dis she consent to it or was she unconscious? Anyone know?

She was unconscious for the crime scene photos that the cops took which included pictures of her half naked body. She consented to the rape kit at the hospital after being told at the hospital that she was assaulted - that included vaginal and anal swabs and dye inserted on and inside of her. She agreed to additional crime photos of her abrasions which included a photo of in between her legs. This all became evidence that was later shown to jurors.

She didn't know if she had been raped because she had blacked out. She didn't know who this guy was. She didn't know if it was just him or a group of guys. She didn't know if he(they) had stds, including HIV. She had no memory of what had happened so these invasive exams and photos were necessary in her mind and that's why she consented to them.

It was a lot to go through.

She went through hell. I would be having nightmares after that too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brock is undoubtedly a douchebag, but 6 months of jail and spending the rest of your life as a registered sex offender seems like a reasonable punishment for a man who fingered a passed out drunk girl (and even then we don't know for certain that she was passed out at that moment he did it)

People are outraged at the lenient 6 month sentence. The probation officer took into account the notorieity of the case, that Turner's name is forever besmirched, and the llifetime sentence of the sex offender registry when advising the jail time.

I think the sex offender registry is an awful creation, myself. A lifetime sentence that limits where a person can live, severely limits what job a person can have, and does not distinguish between one sex offense and another. Does the punishment fit the crime? I don't think so. a person is supposed toserve their sentence, pay their debt to society, and then move on. If a person is too dangerous to be out in society, then either give them a lifetimeprison sentence, kill them, or castrate and release them.

I actually do not consider 6 months to be a lenient sentence for someone who fingered a woman In a situation where it can't be proved as to whether she gave her consent. And fwiw, I actually DO believe she was passed out and therefore couldn't give consent, but speculation isn't enough

I also want to add that I actually think he would have raped her (with his penis) if the men on the bike hadn't come along. But legally you can't just go on gut feelings, you have to go by what is known and what is known is that she doesn't remember the events of the evening and eventually passed out, he fingered her at some point, but it can't be determined if it was prior to her passing out, and witnesses saw him dry hump her with his pants on while she was apparently passed out. Based on what can actually be determined six months in jail and a lifetime branded as a sex offender does not seem lenient to me.

I think that they were fooling around and he had hoped to have sex with her - that was his intent. Then she passed out. He was aroused and was getting himself off by dry humping her. I don't think he had any intentions of raping her unconscious body. He wouldn't have wasted time dry humping her if he was going to rape her. But in CA if the victim doesn't remember what happened....it is assault. Ironically, if she had remained conscious they probably would have had sex....which could have gotten him a rape charge because she blacked out and didn't remember what happened. Thus the intent to rape...

It was a mess of a night alright.

You're leaving out the part where he shoved his fingers inside of her. It was a lot more than dry humping.

No one knows if he fingered her while she was unconscious. He says that she was awake when that was happening. The swedes witnessed him dry humping her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only crime we know for sure he committed was dry humping a passed out drunk girl. Six months in jail and a lifetime of being branded as a sex offender does not seem too lenient a punishment for that.

Why do you keep leaving out the part about digital penetration? That's what he was convicted of

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If Brock Turner had been black out drunk too would that have meant that she sexually assaulted him too? I mean that seriously. Would that have meant that these two raped each other if they both couldn't remember what happened?

How about this question: if Brock Turner had been black, would you still be looking for reasons to absolve his guilt?

I can guarantee that if he were, with the same accomplishments and potential, the same upstanding family and background, and all other facts were the same, the search for "what really happened" would include thorough research for any and everything that could prove he's nothing but a criminal and the lesson would be that sexual predators have be stopped and they have to pay.

Because what the judge and all these apologists are saying is that the reward for being successful is getting away with mistreating other people.

I'm so glad he has a memorable name and face. So glad this is all over the media. I'm sickened that this thread has gone on for 90+ pages because so many still want make excuses for a felon, but it's really kept the issue in the minds of a lot of people and I'm glad that there's outrage. Otherwise, I don't even know how we could call this a civilized society.

+1

Well said and I couldn't agree more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have to consent to the rape kit procedure?

Yes. You don't have to do it, whether or not you decide to press charges.

Dis she consent to it or was she unconscious? Anyone know?

No one knows for sure whether she consented to being fingered. Based on eyewitness accounts, she was passed out drunk and was unable to giving consent to being dry humped.

So by your logic he could have taken her purse, watch, jewelry and pierced her cheek before the swedes arrived and his word that she had agreed to all of that would suffice, wouldn't be appropriate to question further simply because there wasn't an eyewitness?

Well, people hook up and engage in sex acts for a reason. And certainly most hookups are consensual with both people wanting to do what they are doing. I think that Emily Doe likely engaged in sexual activity with Brock Turner. Neither one of these people were sober enough or knew each other well enough to accurately gauge the level of drunkeness - not just of each other, but of themselves. They underestimated just how hammered they were.

All of that violent stuff that you mention would be unwanted no matter what. Not the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only crime we know for sure he committed was dry humping a passed out drunk girl. Six months in jail and a lifetime of being branded as a sex offender does not seem too lenient a punishment for that.

Why do you keep leaving out the part about digital penetration? That's what he was convicted of

Because she doesn't remember it and he admits it. But he said that occurred while she was awake. Not that it matters in California law - she doesn't remember so it's assault.

Witnesses saw him dry humping her passed out body. So his statement matches up with what the swedes say they saw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have to consent to the rape kit procedure?

Yes. You don't have to do it, whether or not you decide to press charges.

Dis she consent to it or was she unconscious? Anyone know?

No one knows for sure whether she consented to being fingered. Based on eyewitness accounts, she was passed out drunk and was unable to giving consent to being dry humped.

So by your logic he could have taken her purse, watch, jewelry and pierced her cheek before the swedes arrived and his word that she had agreed to all of that would suffice, wouldn't be appropriate to question further simply because there wasn't an eyewitness?

Well, people hook up and engage in sex acts for a reason. And certainly most hookups are consensual with both people wanting to do what they are doing. I think that Emily Doe likely engaged in sexual activity with Brock Turner. Neither one of these people were sober enough or knew each other well enough to accurately gauge the level of drunkeness - not just of each other, but of themselves. They underestimated just how hammered they were.

All of that violent stuff that you mention would be unwanted no matter what. Not the same thing.

"You think" that this is what "likely" happened and yet a jury of people who actually sat through the trial and heard all the testimony and reviewed all the evidence unanimously found to the contrary. Or were you in fact present for the trial?