That Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you saying he was drunk so he should be excused, how many of you have raped another human while drunk? I'm gonna guess NONE.

Some of the PPs may be saying that. I'm saying he may have thought he was having (unromantic) consensual sex with a stranger met a party.

The fact that he said he was not guilty and is appealing makes him look unremorseful. Or that he believes that he is innocent. He's not, because by definition any sex with a drunk girl is rape.

Its still trivializing what he did to suggest it was rape by definition or that he had anything to be confused about. She was passed out behind a dumpster. Anyone who attempted to think about the question even slightly would come to the conclusion that most women do not in fact want to be fingered while unconscious behind a dumpster.

There are some legitimately hard questions about consent. (For example, what sort of consent is needed for someone in a long term loving relationship to initiate sex in the morning with their then-still-sleeping romatic partner?) Fingering an unconscious woman who just fell over behind a dumpster is not a tough case, and its sad we pretend it is.

All of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If he was sober enough to realize he should run away and did in fact run away, he was sober enough to realize she was unconscious.

Fight or flight is pretty primitive. He wasn't sober when he fled. Either he knew he was committing a crime, panicked and fled, or thought he wasn't committing a crime, panicked and fled.

People don't usually panic and flee when they're not doing anything wrong.

Remember the Duke lacrosse case? The UVA "Jackie" BS? Accusations of rape can absolutely ruin someone's life. He obviously did it in this case, and I think he's a monster, but fact is there is a culture of "guilty until proven innocent" in many of these cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why was this rape and not regret sex? He ran, which makes him a jerk. Bit it doesn't make him a rapist, it means he didn't want to be caught having sex with a stranger outside.

Hope it was rape and she didn't send a man to jail for regret sex.

Regret sex? She was unconscious. There are no circumstances in which an unconscious person can consent to sex. NONE.

Do you have a specific timeframe re: when she passed out? None of you know if he dragged her behind the dumpster. Or carried her, for that matter. They were snuggly inside the house - she could have passed out while in the act, and he, being drunk too, didn't notice.

Then why the injuries to her vagina? Then why did the swedes know she was unconscious? She was clearly passed out long enough for it to be a crime. The jury agreed.

Again, if he was drunk, he will not be of his right mind either. Too rough, etc. All you people screaming 'rapist' are explaining away her drunk (and she was drunk with a capital D) and not even considering that he was drunk too. If she's not of his right mind, neither is he. Or do guys have to be responsible when drunk and women don't?

It's simple anatomy. Men have to enter a woman. Women do not enter a man and for the most part can't force a man to have sex. Additionally, women are able to get pregnant and men are not. All of these facts are what lead us to concern over rape. Additionally women typically aren't as strong and able to defend themselves. Even if this woman was completely sober she probably wouldn't have been able to defend herself against a student athlete much larger and stronger.

I'm concerned you don't understand this.

I'm concerned that you do, yet don't hold responsible in any way women who drink to excess and agree to leave parties with men they've just met.

I'm concerned that you think that is what we should be talking to when a young man thought that it was okay to engage in sexual contact with someone he did not know on the ground behind a dumpster. I'm concerned that you apparently do not understand that this is a young man who was actually found guilty of multiple serious crimes. Was he charged with rape? No, because he didn't put his penis inside her. He put other things inside her, however, and she was not able to consent. I am concerned that you are splitting hairs about that. The person putting things inside someone is responsible. Full stop. It doesn't matter what she drank or how long she'd known him. She was not able to consent. She says she did not consent. It is not consensual and he is a sex offender.

She has no idea. She doesn't know what she said.

She was unconscious, so it doesn't really matter what she said beforehand. Once a person is unconscious, anything they said earlier no longer applies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Supposedly he remembered her consenting (yeah right) so he couldn't have been that drunk.

I don't know that she said anything, but she went with him. She didn't have to, she could have stayed at the party and passed out there. Or she could have said no at any time, and maybe he would have stopped and helped her home.

It's a funny thing how hard it is to say "no, I changed my mind" when you're unconscious, you moron.

And leaving a party with someone does not mean you are consenting to sex. Are you this stupid in real life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Supposedly he remembered her consenting (yeah right) so he couldn't have been that drunk.

I don't know that she said anything, but she went with him. She didn't have to, she could have stayed at the party and passed out there. Or she could have said no at any time, and maybe he would have stopped and helped her home.

He easily could have roofied her and carried her. No girl lays down by a dumpster when consious. I bet he was carrying her and no one else noticed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If he was sober enough to realize he should run away and did in fact run away, he was sober enough to realize she was unconscious.

Fight or flight is pretty primitive. He wasn't sober when he fled. Either he knew he was committing a crime, panicked and fled, or thought he wasn't committing a crime, panicked and fled.

People don't usually panic and flee when they're not doing anything wrong.

Remember the Duke lacrosse case? The UVA "Jackie" BS? Accusations of rape can absolutely ruin someone's life. He obviously did it in this case, and I think he's a monster, but fact is there is a culture of "guilty until proven innocent" in many of these cases.

Maybe because they're usually guilty. Most rapist get away with it anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Facts are pretty horrible things. She can't get that stinking drunk, and then complain about not being able to physically fend for herself. He didn't pour the liquor down her throat. She drank it herself. She made HERSELF vulnerable. It sucks, but it is what it is.

Okay, so if you leave your back door unlocked and a burglar comes into your house and takes all of your valuables, does that no longer make him a criminal?

The question is one of whether we live in a society where we should expect to be victims of crimes and live accordingly or the reverse. Yes, it's prudent to lock your front door, but when you get robbed the only person the police will be blaming is the person is the burglar. Rape is one of the only crimes where the onus seems to be on the victim to prove that s/he's done everything in their power to prevent the crime before people are willing to concede that maybe the perpetrator actually committed a crime. Imagine a world where it's common to say, "Well, the homeowner obviously wanted to have all of their valuables taken from their house. They left their back door unlocked, and they didn't have an alarm system or choose to live in a neighborhood with an active Neighborhood Watch." That's what the world is like for rape victims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe we should revisit the issue of consent after Brock gets 20 minutes of action in prison.

I hope that happens. That seems to be the only justice he could get - being on the receiving end of rape this time.

He is a bit feminine looking and a young one so I'm sure he will see much more than 20 minutes of action. Hope he thinks about what he did when unwanted objects are being inserted into his body.

I bet he is going to be getting lots of "20 minutes of action" for all three months. Maybe his dad can write some more letters to make for good joke material when he is getting raped senseless at jail.

Hopefully he's watched OZ and knows what he's in for. Gonna be one heck of a ride!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Supposedly he remembered her consenting (yeah right) so he couldn't have been that drunk.

I don't know that she said anything, but she went with him. She didn't have to, she could have stayed at the party and passed out there. Or she could have said no at any time, and maybe he would have stopped and helped her home.

Considering how drunk she was, it seems unlikely that she even consciously made the decision to leave the party with him. He might have led her, forcefully or otherwise, away from the party without her really understanding where she was going or why. Maybe Turner didn't really understand consent or how to determine if a woman is actually really interested, but ignorance is rarely a defense for committing a crime. It also strains credulity that an 18 y.o. can't understand that he should trust an incoherent person to provide consent, but if that's even a possibility it says a lot more about his culture and upbringing than it does about the victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Face it, the guy was a horndog and the girl was a slut. They both got very drunk and animal instincts took over. I don't drink to excess but I've seen rutting drunk couples in high school and college before, and it doesn't surprise me in the least that in 2016 the girl gets to be the victim and the guy gets branded a criminal for life.

Rape is not about sex. It is about violence.

If a person hits you with a spade, you wouldn't call it gardening.

He wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of having sex with an intoxicated/unconscious person.

From the DA's press release regarding the sentence:
"The punishment does not fit the crime," the District Attorney said. "The predatory offender has failed to take responsibility, failed to show remorse and failed to tell the truth. The sentence does not factor in the true seriousness of this sexual assault, or the victim’s ongoing trauma. Campus rape is no different than off-campus rape. Rape is rape. And I will prosecute it as such."

The sentence follows a trial and a jury’s verdict in late March that found Turner guilty of three felony charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated/unconscious person, penetration of an intoxicated person, and penetration of an unconscious person."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Face it, the guy was a horndog and the girl was a slut. They both got very drunk and animal instincts took over. I don't drink to excess but I've seen rutting drunk couples in high school and college before, and it doesn't surprise me in the least that in 2016 the girl gets to be the victim and the guy gets branded a criminal for life.

Rape is not about sex. It is about violence.

If a person hits you with a spade, you wouldn't call it gardening.

He wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of having sex with an intoxicated/unconscious person.

From the DA's press release regarding the sentence:
"The punishment does not fit the crime," the District Attorney said. "The predatory offender has failed to take responsibility, failed to show remorse and failed to tell the truth. The sentence does not factor in the true seriousness of this sexual assault, or the victim’s ongoing trauma. Campus rape is no different than off-campus rape. Rape is rape. And I will prosecute it as such."

The sentence follows a trial and a jury’s verdict in late March that found Turner guilty of three felony charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated/unconscious person, penetration of an intoxicated person, and penetration of an unconscious person."

Are you saying this was about violence/power instead of sex?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Face it, the guy was a horndog and the girl was a slut. They both got very drunk and animal instincts took over. I don't drink to excess but I've seen rutting drunk couples in high school and college before, and it doesn't surprise me in the least that in 2016 the girl gets to be the victim and the guy gets branded a criminal for life.

Rape is not about sex. It is about violence.

If a person hits you with a spade, you wouldn't call it gardening.

He wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of having sex with an intoxicated/unconscious person.

From the DA's press release regarding the sentence:
"The punishment does not fit the crime," the District Attorney said. "The predatory offender has failed to take responsibility, failed to show remorse and failed to tell the truth. The sentence does not factor in the true seriousness of this sexual assault, or the victim’s ongoing trauma. Campus rape is no different than off-campus rape. Rape is rape. And I will prosecute it as such."

The sentence follows a trial and a jury’s verdict in late March that found Turner guilty of three felony charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated/unconscious person, penetration of an intoxicated person, and penetration of an unconscious person."

Are you saying this was about violence/power instead of sex?

Assault is about violence/power instead of sex, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every single woman in this thread knows she has at some point drank too much and if she has a daughter, her daughter will undoubtedly one night or more in college drink too much because that's what happens. You misjudge your tolerance, you're having a good time, and suddenly you're hammered. There but for the grace of God did I never end up raped behind a dumpster when I had too much to drink at 21, and same goes for all of you. And if you have a daughter who at some point will go to parties or bars, you need to think very, very carefully about assigning blame to this girl because it could happen to your daughter just as easily and I highly doubt you would be so sanguine about her "role" in being victimized as you are right now

nope. Never. And I know other women who have never been that drunk. Not an excuse for what happened, though, but your blanket statement is incorrect.

The rape counselor at my daughter's college said that on that particular campus, 100% of rapes involved alcohol on the part of at least one person. Alcohol allows one person to make bad choices more easily.

Allow?

It also "allows" people to kill kids with their automobile, and that's a crime. In those cases, the drunk driver doesn't intend to kill someone, either. They just want to go home. And nobody ever asks what the victim of a drunk driver should have done differently. Why didn't you see the car going the wrong way down the highway? Why were you out at night? Did you want to get hit by the car? Bad choices. Tsk. Tsk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If he was sober enough to realize he should run away and did in fact run away, he was sober enough to realize she was unconscious.

Fight or flight is pretty primitive. He wasn't sober when he fled. Either he knew he was committing a crime, panicked and fled, or thought he wasn't committing a crime, panicked and fled.

People don't usually panic and flee when they're not doing anything wrong.

Remember the Duke lacrosse case? The UVA "Jackie" BS? Accusations of rape can absolutely ruin someone's life. He obviously did it in this case, and I think he's a monster, but fact is there is a culture of "guilty until proven innocent" in many of these cases.

Maybe because they're usually guilty. Most rapist get away with it anyway.

I will point out that this man was found guilty. That is not up for debate. He was charged with 5 things. He was convicted of 3 of them. He was not convicted of the first 2 charges (raping an unconscious person and raping an intoxicated person), I assume because California rape law defines rape as non-consensual intercourse and doesn't include fingers in the equation. He was, however, convicted of the other 3 charges. He couldn't spent 14 years in jail. Prosecutors recommended 6 years. The sentencing judge gave him 6 MONTHS, plus probation.

[Anonymous]

Getting so drunk that someone else has to explain what happened to you should be a wake up call to this woman. She clearly has a drinking problem and needs to get a handle on it. Keeping your younger sister company at a frat party is just plain stupid. She clearly went through college and just can't let go or act her age. No, I'm not excusing his act of rape, but I do think that accountability has to be met by all parties involved. Women need to think about their actions,and anticipate possible outcomes, if they are to protect themselves.