That Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it matter that he never raped before? He was 20 not 50! There's no history at that age. There is a first for every scumbag.

He was 19. I agree that he was inexperienced.

He's had girlfriends before. Unless they were platonic, I presume he was sexually active

He was new to drinking parties/hooking up. His former HS girlfriends only indicate that Bock consistently respected them and did not pressure them to do anything that they didn't want to do. These girls and Brock were still relatively inexperienced even if they did fool around together. I do think that it is significant that these girls speak highly of Brock. It says something about his character and his attitude towards women.

I do think that Brock was treating Emily in a less than respectful way. But that could have had more to do with the situation (drunken dancing/kissing/loud music) and simply the fact that he didn't know or care about this girl. He wanted to fool around and he thought that she did too.

What does it say about his character that he used the n word on the regular?

Huh?

I'm asking this person who thinks so highly of Brock's character based on his high school girlfriends' reports if that is altered by the text evidence that he used the n word with some regularity. Still seem like a stand up young man?presumably his high school girlfriends knew that about him and still thought he was top notch, so one wonders about their judgement as well.

So you are now accusing him of being a racist too? Might as well throw that in there. A racist rapist frat boy. Well, he's actually not a racist or a rapist or a frat boy...but don't let little things like the facts get in your way.

Why can't you see that this guy could have led a perfectly decent and admirable life up until this nightmare?

[Anonymous]

You mean the nightmare he created, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it matter that he never raped before? He was 20 not 50! There's no history at that age. There is a first for every scumbag.

He was 19. I agree that he was inexperienced.

He's had girlfriends before. Unless they were platonic, I presume he was sexually active

He was new to drinking parties/hooking up. His former HS girlfriends only indicate that Bock consistently respected them and did not pressure them to do anything that they didn't want to do. These girls and Brock were still relatively inexperienced even if they did fool around together. I do think that it is significant that these girls speak highly of Brock. It says something about his character and his attitude towards women.

I do think that Brock was treating Emily in a less than respectful way. But that could have had more to do with the situation (drunken dancing/kissing/loud music) and simply the fact that he didn't know or care about this girl. He wanted to fool around and he thought that she did too.

What does it say about his character that he used the n word on the regular?

Huh?

I'm asking this person who thinks so highly of Brock's character based on his high school girlfriends' reports if that is altered by the text evidence that he used the n word with some regularity. Still seem like a stand up young man?presumably his high school girlfriends knew that about him and still thought he was top notch, so one wonders about their judgement as well.

So you are now accusing him of being a racist too? Might as well throw that in there. A racist rapist frat boy. Well, he's actually not a racist or a rapist or a frat boy...but don't let little things like the facts get in your way.

Why can't you see that this guy could have led a perfectly decent and admirable life up until this nightmare?

There's no way to know that. As Shakespeare wrote: "but at the length, truth will out"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it matter that he never raped before? He was 20 not 50! There's no history at that age. There is a first for every scumbag.

He was 19. I agree that he was inexperienced.

He's had girlfriends before. Unless they were platonic, I presume he was sexually active

He was new to drinking parties/hooking up. His former HS girlfriends only indicate that Bock consistently respected them and did not pressure them to do anything that they didn't want to do. These girls and Brock were still relatively inexperienced even if they did fool around together. I do think that it is significant that these girls speak highly of Brock. It says something about his character and his attitude towards women.

I do think that Brock was treating Emily in a less than respectful way. But that could have had more to do with the situation (drunken dancing/kissing/loud music) and simply the fact that he didn't know or care about this girl. He wanted to fool around and he thought that she did too.

What does it say about his character that he used the n word on the regular?

Huh?

I'm asking this person who thinks so highly of Brock's character based on his high school girlfriends' reports if that is altered by the text evidence that he used the n word with some regularity. Still seem like a stand up young man?presumably his high school girlfriends knew that about him and still thought he was top notch, so one wonders about their judgement as well.

So you are now accusing him of being a racist too? Might as well throw that in there. A racist rapist frat boy. Well, he's actually not a racist or a rapist or a frat boy...but don't let little things like the facts get in your way.

Why can't you see that this guy could have led a perfectly decent and admirable life up until this nightmare?

He's the dumbass that uses the n word-police found it in his texts so it's not my accusation. And I didn't say he was a frat boy and I'm aware that the crime he was convicted of wasn't rape. But don't let that get in the way of your "Brock is a poor blameless wee lamb" story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He obviously had a lot of trouble finding women who were interested in him and was really insecure about it, hence the picture he sent to try to impress his teammates. He went from being a big fish in a little pond at his high school and local swim team to a little fish in a big pond at Stanford. I think this brought out his true colors which nobody from his hometown saw.

He was almost assured of a place on the Olympic team, if he'd not gotten in trouble. He wasn't a little fish in a big pond. He was a big fish in a big pond. He was an important swimmer on one of the most important swim teams in the US at one of the most prestigious schools in the US. A huge part of this is about jock entitlement.

I disagree. At home he was a big deal for his swimming skills and because he was going to Stanford. At Stanford he was just another student athlete, not a standout in any way. I was a swimmer and nobody cares about swimmers until they are Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz caliber. I think most of the Stanford swim team has a chance of making the Olympics and he was not almost assured a spot on the Olympic team. Saying that shows you don't know anything about swimming.

SwimSwam reported that Brock Turner went 1:39 in the 200 free as a freshman. That's five seconds faster than Ryan Lochte's time or Michael Phelps's time, and he's the fastest guy going to the Trials. Turner was crazily fast and would have done very, very well in Rio. Nobody in the general public cares about swimmers. People at Stanford care about swimmers a lot. People who follow swimming news know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it matter that he never raped before? He was 20 not 50! There's no history at that age. There is a first for every scumbag.

He was 19. I agree that he was inexperienced.

He's had girlfriends before. Unless they were platonic, I presume he was sexually active

He was new to drinking parties/hooking up. His former HS girlfriends only indicate that Bock consistently respected them and did not pressure them to do anything that they didn't want to do. These girls and Brock were still relatively inexperienced even if they did fool around together. I do think that it is significant that these girls speak highly of Brock. It says something about his character and his attitude towards women.

I do think that Brock was treating Emily in a less than respectful way. But that could have had more to do with the situation (drunken dancing/kissing/loud music) and simply the fact that he didn't know or care about this girl. He wanted to fool around and he thought that she did too.

What does it say about his character that he used the n word on the regular?

Huh?

I'm asking this person who thinks so highly of Brock's character based on his high school girlfriends' reports if that is altered by the text evidence that he used the n word with some regularity. Still seem like a stand up young man?presumably his high school girlfriends knew that about him and still thought he was top notch, so one wonders about their judgement as well.

So you are now accusing him of being a racist too? Might as well throw that in there. A racist rapist frat boy. Well, he's actually not a racist or a rapist or a frat boy...but don't let little things like the facts get in your way.

Why can't you see that this guy could have led a perfectly decent and admirable life up until this nightmare?

He's the dumbass that uses the n word-police found it in his texts so it's not my accusation. And I didn't say he was a frat boy and I'm aware that the crime he was convicted of wasn't rape. But don't let that get in the way of your "Brock is a poor blameless wee lamb" story.

You can't throw that out there "He uses the n word" without a little context. I would be shocked if a guy with Brock's schedule spent much, if any, time hating on minorities. He was too busy with swimming and academics and fitting into Stanford to have much energy left to direct at hating people.

Why this complete character assassination of this man?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He obviously had a lot of trouble finding women who were interested in him and was really insecure about it, hence the picture he sent to try to impress his teammates. He went from being a big fish in a little pond at his high school and local swim team to a little fish in a big pond at Stanford. I think this brought out his true colors which nobody from his hometown saw.

He was almost assured of a place on the Olympic team, if he'd not gotten in trouble. He wasn't a little fish in a big pond. He was a big fish in a big pond. He was an important swimmer on one of the most important swim teams in the US at one of the most prestigious schools in the US. A huge part of this is about jock entitlement.

I disagree. At home he was a big deal for his swimming skills and because he was going to Stanford. At Stanford he was just another student athlete, not a standout in any way. I was a swimmer and nobody cares about swimmers until they are Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz caliber. I think most of the Stanford swim team has a chance of making the Olympics and he was not almost assured a spot on the Olympic team. Saying that shows you don't know anything about swimming.

SwimSwam reported that Brock Turner went 1:39 in the 200 free as a freshman. That's five seconds faster than Ryan Lochte's time or Michael Phelps's time, and he's the fastest guy going to the Trials. Turner was crazily fast and would have done very, very well in Rio. Nobody in the general public cares about swimmers. People at Stanford care about swimmers a lot. People who follow swimming news know that.

Is it just me or does anyone else feel that this guy was set up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He obviously had a lot of trouble finding women who were interested in him and was really insecure about it, hence the picture he sent to try to impress his teammates. He went from being a big fish in a little pond at his high school and local swim team to a little fish in a big pond at Stanford. I think this brought out his true colors which nobody from his hometown saw.

He was almost assured of a place on the Olympic team, if he'd not gotten in trouble. He wasn't a little fish in a big pond. He was a big fish in a big pond. He was an important swimmer on one of the most important swim teams in the US at one of the most prestigious schools in the US. A huge part of this is about jock entitlement.

I disagree. At home he was a big deal for his swimming skills and because he was going to Stanford. At Stanford he was just another student athlete, not a standout in any way. I was a swimmer and nobody cares about swimmers until they are Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz caliber. I think most of the Stanford swim team has a chance of making the Olympics and he was not almost assured a spot on the Olympic team. Saying that shows you don't know anything about swimming.

SwimSwam reported that Brock Turner went 1:39 in the 200 free as a freshman. That's five seconds faster than Ryan Lochte's time or Michael Phelps's time, and he's the fastest guy going to the Trials. Turner was crazily fast and would have done very, very well in Rio. Nobody in the general public cares about swimmers. People at Stanford care about swimmers a lot. People who follow swimming news know that.

Awesome to know that he has so much more to lose. At least there is some balance in what he is suffering and what his victim is suffering. His victim was further victimized during the trial, and so now his punishment after the trial has to be comparable to his sins, no?

He could have been an olympian but now he is a convicted rapist. Karma is a Bitch, ain't she? And he is getting the results of his own Karma - he raped and so he is a felon now. He worked hard in swimming and he was a probable Olympic level swimmer. See, in both instances he was getting the results of his action. He is a very good swimmer. He is also a convicted rapist.

Maybe he can start a swim club or school or something. Or maybe he can immigrate to Australia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He obviously had a lot of trouble finding women who were interested in him and was really insecure about it, hence the picture he sent to try to impress his teammates. He went from being a big fish in a little pond at his high school and local swim team to a little fish in a big pond at Stanford. I think this brought out his true colors which nobody from his hometown saw.

He was almost assured of a place on the Olympic team, if he'd not gotten in trouble. He wasn't a little fish in a big pond. He was a big fish in a big pond. He was an important swimmer on one of the most important swim teams in the US at one of the most prestigious schools in the US. A huge part of this is about jock entitlement.

I disagree. At home he was a big deal for his swimming skills and because he was going to Stanford. At Stanford he was just another student athlete, not a standout in any way. I was a swimmer and nobody cares about swimmers until they are Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz caliber. I think most of the Stanford swim team has a chance of making the Olympics and he was not almost assured a spot on the Olympic team. Saying that shows you don't know anything about swimming.

SwimSwam reported that Brock Turner went 1:39 in the 200 free as a freshman. That's five seconds faster than Ryan Lochte's time or Michael Phelps's time, and he's the fastest guy going to the Trials. Turner was crazily fast and would have done very, very well in Rio. Nobody in the general public cares about swimmers. People at Stanford care about swimmers a lot. People who follow swimming news know that.

Is it just me or does anyone else feel that this guy was set up?

It's just you. Have you asked yourself why you need so badly for there to be special circumstances in this sexual assault, that he can't really be guilty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He obviously had a lot of trouble finding women who were interested in him and was really insecure about it, hence the picture he sent to try to impress his teammates. He went from being a big fish in a little pond at his high school and local swim team to a little fish in a big pond at Stanford. I think this brought out his true colors which nobody from his hometown saw.

He was almost assured of a place on the Olympic team, if he'd not gotten in trouble. He wasn't a little fish in a big pond. He was a big fish in a big pond. He was an important swimmer on one of the most important swim teams in the US at one of the most prestigious schools in the US. A huge part of this is about jock entitlement.

I disagree. At home he was a big deal for his swimming skills and because he was going to Stanford. At Stanford he was just another student athlete, not a standout in any way. I was a swimmer and nobody cares about swimmers until they are Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz caliber. I think most of the Stanford swim team has a chance of making the Olympics and he was not almost assured a spot on the Olympic team. Saying that shows you don't know anything about swimming.

SwimSwam reported that Brock Turner went 1:39 in the 200 free as a freshman. That's five seconds faster than Ryan Lochte's time or Michael Phelps's time, and he's the fastest guy going to the Trials. Turner was crazily fast and would have done very, very well in Rio. Nobody in the general public cares about swimmers. People at Stanford care about swimmers a lot. People who follow swimming news know that.

Is it just me or does anyone else feel that this guy was set up?

It's just you. Have you asked yourself why you need so badly for there to be special circumstances in this sexual assault, that he can't really be guilty?

There is too much that is not ringing true for me with this. Something is off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He obviously had a lot of trouble finding women who were interested in him and was really insecure about it, hence the picture he sent to try to impress his teammates. He went from being a big fish in a little pond at his high school and local swim team to a little fish in a big pond at Stanford. I think this brought out his true colors which nobody from his hometown saw.

He was almost assured of a place on the Olympic team, if he'd not gotten in trouble. He wasn't a little fish in a big pond. He was a big fish in a big pond. He was an important swimmer on one of the most important swim teams in the US at one of the most prestigious schools in the US. A huge part of this is about jock entitlement.

I disagree. At home he was a big deal for his swimming skills and because he was going to Stanford. At Stanford he was just another student athlete, not a standout in any way. I was a swimmer and nobody cares about swimmers until they are Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz caliber. I think most of the Stanford swim team has a chance of making the Olympics and he was not almost assured a spot on the Olympic team. Saying that shows you don't know anything about swimming.

SwimSwam reported that Brock Turner went 1:39 in the 200 free as a freshman. That's five seconds faster than Ryan Lochte's time or Michael Phelps's time, and he's the fastest guy going to the Trials. Turner was crazily fast and would have done very, very well in Rio. Nobody in the general public cares about swimmers. People at Stanford care about swimmers a lot. People who follow swimming news know that.

Is it just me or does anyone else feel that this guy was set up?

It's just you. Have you asked yourself why you need so badly for there to be special circumstances in this sexual assault, that he can't really be guilty?

There is too much that is not ringing true for me with this. Something is off.

Now you're just fucking with us, right?

[Anonymous]

This thread, like so many on DCUM, has gone off the rails. He is guilty; yes, they were drinking; that doesn't entitle a guy to assault the girl; so what if he was a fast swimmer and his mother loves him. He should be in jail. He ran from the guys who tried to help his victim. He is an entitled jerk.

[Anonymous]

And, sorry, but 50 people were murdered in FL. Another 53 wounded. Can everybody get a grip, here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is it just me or does anyone else feel that this guy was set up?

It's just you. Have you asked yourself why you need so badly for there to be special circumstances in this sexual assault, that he can't really be guilty?

There is too much that is not ringing true for me with this. Something is off.

That would be quite the elaborate set up. Nice touch, adding the biking Swedes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is it just me or does anyone else feel that this guy was set up?

It's just you. Have you asked yourself why you need so badly for there to be special circumstances in this sexual assault, that he can't really be guilty?

There is too much that is not ringing true for me with this. Something is off.

That would be quite the elaborate set up. Nice touch, adding the biking Swedes.

Jeah! Brock set himself up.