That Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can understand the sentence. It was basically a hookup at a frat party gone wrong. It doesn't make sense to send one party to prison for years.. There's no way to know when she became unconscious, but it was probably later rather than sooner.

No, IT WAS A RAPE, you idiot

Do you think a woman ever bears any responsibility re staying sober, not trusting drunk strangers, not walking down a street at 2 a.m. alone, etc? We're not doing any favors to perpetuate the myth that women can be and do anything they want and go anywhere they want without being responsible for their own safety to the degree possible. That's beyond naive and truly not very smart.

Well lucky for you this woman got her comeuppance, huh? That'll teach her!!

You're misinterpreting what I said. Think what you want, but I believe women need to think smart for their own safety as much as is humanly possible. I think the same for men. No one deserves to be hurt, raped, killed, maimed, etc.; and no one can ever be completely safe.

If you're ever raped, I presume you'll blame yourself, then. Surely you would have done something that caused it to happen to you.

If this ever happened to me. And I had some close calls in my college years. It could have happened to me ! I would blame myself. I can recall a few drunken nights that I do not remember if I said yes or no. I hate to admit it but it's true. I never did it behind a dumpster but I did it on a picnic table and in a car and on the beach. What if she had brought him home to her apartment? What if she said yes and doesn't remember anything beyond that cause she passed out in bed and he was gone in the morning. She needs to take some responsibility. Not saying what he did was right. But she was wrong too. They are both victims of making bad decisions while drunk. The only lesson I would give my child from this is don't get drunk - you'll do stupid things you'll regret and may ruin your life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the women posters here are identifying with the alleged victim and making a lot of assumptions in her favor about what happened that night. How was there rape beyond a reasonable doubt when she remembers nothing about the course of events and he testified he got consent? If she was unconscious the whole time and got dragged behind the dumpster, then it's obviously rape. But if they both drunkenly ran off to hook up in the only nearby secluded place (behind a dumpster) and started mutually getting it on, then it's not rape. Even if she went to sleep in the middle. And I haven't heard of any actual evidence, like a third-party witness, distinguishing those two situations. It's not good enough that the girl says in her statement that she's not the kind of person who would do that. She doesn't remember. Or, if she is going to deny consent based on her moral character (I have a boyfriend), she can't complain about being asked about promiscuity, etc., since that goes to the question of whether she consented.

Rape trials used to be so f-ed up against women -- who had to prove that they tried to fight off the attacker, etc. in order to disprove consent -- but now they are so f-ed up against men. The public presumption has completely switched from consent to no-consent whenever someone is prosecuted for rape. And the man on trial is lambasted even for having a lawyer defend him or appealing, which is how the legal system works.

Also, everyone is misinterpreting the dad's use of the word "action." He wasn't saying that his son got 20 mins of action from a girl. He was saying that 20 mins of behavior shouldn't result in a long prison sentence. He used action like a neutral word for behavior/conduct because he couldn't say 20 minutes of "sex" or "raping".

there were witnesses though. the two swedes. he was assaulting an unconscious woman. do you refute this?

This was also a full grown woman with a full time job and a serious boyfriend... who was out at a party drinking to the point of passing out and hooking up and leaving with a 19 year old guy. She was a bit out of control that night and I really don't doubt that she intended to fool around with this guy. She likely passed out while they were fooling around and the hot and bothered guy didn't have the decency to get off of her. The Swedes came on the scene, tackled the guy and called the cops.

The woman was so passed out drunk that she slept through the cops coming on the scene (and apparently taking pics of her!), the ambulance ride and then later continued to sleep at the hospital for 2 hours. When she woke up she had no memory of what happened to her and I assume that someone told her that she had been assaulted. She didn't know or remember what had happened to her so she agreed to that invasive examination and more photographs of her naked body - she was even told that she needed to do another HIV test in a few months just to be sure. She must have been absolutely terrified as to WTH had happened to her. She later found out in the newspaper, while sitting at her desk at work , what had happened, how she was found. The Newspaper!

So she expected the guy to accept a plea deal to avoid a trial and that didn't happen. I would imagine that she will try to go for compensatory damages...and maybe the lighter sentence will make it easier for this guy to finish school, get a job and compensate her for damages. It's a tough situation for sure.

wow lots of assumptions on your part. its so interesting how many people seem to know exactly what happened here.

Most of it is from her letter. Some of it is filling in.

uh huh....

Read her letter.

I did. twice. you have no idea if she intended on fooling around with the guy. and you have no idea when she passed out. And neither does she.

We know that he had been openly coming on to other women at the party and they rejected him. She knew what he wanted when she left with him. No one has ever said that she left with him unwillingly. Remember: he is only responsible for what HE actually did.

No one has ever said that she left with him willingly, or even that she left with him at all. My guess is that she felt sick and needed some fresh air, and he either offered to go outside with her or followed her when she went outside by herself. But that is speculation. "What HE actually did" was put his fingers inside an unconscious person. Not speculation.

There were other people at the party. They refused to come forward and be witnesses (possibly because they were drinking underage) for either the prosecution or the defense. There is gossip that says she was with him at the party and left with him, FWIW -- he testified as much and no one has disputed that part of his testimony.

sure that sounds reputable. and what he said as testimony is also suspect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

I agree. And initially I was bringing up what she could have done differently. It seems that almost everyone is posting that perspective. A few posters on the other side really made me think though. So see - DCUM can be good if you're willing to listen to each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

Mostly on DCUM, we're women. We naturally focus on the woman's side, we're sympathetic to her, we've been in her shoes and done the same things she did, or done things differently than she did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the women posters here are identifying with the alleged victim and making a lot of assumptions in her favor about what happened that night. How was there rape beyond a reasonable doubt when she remembers nothing about the course of events and he testified he got consent? If she was unconscious the whole time and got dragged behind the dumpster, then it's obviously rape. But if they both drunkenly ran off to hook up in the only nearby secluded place (behind a dumpster) and started mutually getting it on, then it's not rape. Even if she went to sleep in the middle. And I haven't heard of any actual evidence, like a third-party witness, distinguishing those two situations. It's not good enough that the girl says in her statement that she's not the kind of person who would do that. She doesn't remember. Or, if she is going to deny consent based on her moral character (I have a boyfriend), she can't complain about being asked about promiscuity, etc., since that goes to the question of whether she consented.

Rape trials used to be so f-ed up against women -- who had to prove that they tried to fight off the attacker, etc. in order to disprove consent -- but now they are so f-ed up against men. The public presumption has completely switched from consent to no-consent whenever someone is prosecuted for rape. And the man on trial is lambasted even for having a lawyer defend him or appealing, which is how the legal system works.

Also, everyone is misinterpreting the dad's use of the word "action." He wasn't saying that his son got 20 mins of action from a girl. He was saying that 20 mins of behavior shouldn't result in a long prison sentence. He used action like a neutral word for behavior/conduct because he couldn't say 20 minutes of "sex" or "raping".

there were witnesses though. the two swedes. he was assaulting an unconscious woman. do you refute this?

This was also a full grown woman with a full time job and a serious boyfriend... who was out at a party drinking to the point of passing out and hooking up and leaving with a 19 year old guy. She was a bit out of control that night and I really don't doubt that she intended to fool around with this guy. She likely passed out while they were fooling around and the hot and bothered guy didn't have the decency to get off of her. The Swedes came on the scene, tackled the guy and called the cops.

The woman was so passed out drunk that she slept through the cops coming on the scene (and apparently taking pics of her!), the ambulance ride and then later continued to sleep at the hospital for 2 hours. When she woke up she had no memory of what happened to her and I assume that someone told her that she had been assaulted. She didn't know or remember what had happened to her so she agreed to that invasive examination and more photographs of her naked body - she was even told that she needed to do another HIV test in a few months just to be sure. She must have been absolutely terrified as to WTH had happened to her. She later found out in the newspaper, while sitting at her desk at work , what had happened, how she was found. The Newspaper!

So she expected the guy to accept a plea deal to avoid a trial and that didn't happen. I would imagine that she will try to go for compensatory damages...and maybe the lighter sentence will make it easier for this guy to finish school, get a job and compensate her for damages. It's a tough situation for sure.

wow lots of assumptions on your part. its so interesting how many people seem to know exactly what happened here.

Most of it is from her letter. Some of it is filling in.

uh huh....

Read her letter.

I did. twice. you have no idea if she intended on fooling around with the guy. and you have no idea when she passed out. And neither does she.

NP here. It doesn't matter if she intended to fool around with him. She can change her mind any point, even after they get started. And HE should have noticed if the person he was fooling around with PASSED OUT, not to mention the other signs that should've told him that fooling around with her (or continuing to do so) was not a good idea. It can be criminal - as in this case -- or at the very least, you're a scumbag who preys on drunk girls. You want to focus on her lack of judgment - well, where was his judgment? He was so intent on getting some that he didn't stop to notice how drunk she was? What good can come of fooling around with a girl in that situation? Decent, moral guys walk away from those situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

I think it's been posted 70x because some loon kept posting some crap about helping rapists rape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

How is that irrelevant? If the hook up culture has guys having sex with a bunch of wasted girls that black out and can't remember a thing and tell him what a great time they had and they come back for more... how is that not relevant to the problem on college campuses. How is a guy to know when a girl is going to say, they didn't consent, when the same situation happened 20 times before and it was consent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

How is that irrelevant? If the hook up culture has guys having sex with a bunch of wasted girls that black out and can't remember a thing and tell him what a great time they had and they come back for more... how is that not relevant to the problem on college campuses. How is a guy to know when a girl is going to say, they didn't consent, when the same situation happened 20 times before and it was consent?

It's irrelevant because hooking up had nothing to do with this case, because SHE WAS UNCONSCIOUS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

How is that irrelevant? If the hook up culture has guys having sex with a bunch of wasted girls that black out and can't remember a thing and tell him what a great time they had and they come back for more... how is that not relevant to the problem on college campuses. How is a guy to know when a girl is going to say, they didn't consent, when the same situation happened 20 times before and it was consent?

It's irrelevant because hooking up had nothing to do with this case, because SHE WAS UNCONSCIOUS.

She was not unconscious when she first hooked up with him.

[Anonymous]

I hope everyone who is outraged by this signs the change dot org petition to recall the judge. I did!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope everyone who is outraged by this signs the change dot org petition to recall the judge. I did!

What are you outraged about? The judge followed the recommendation of the probation officer, someone who sees lots of different crimes and can evaluate the facts of the case as well as punitive, deterrent, and rehabilitative factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope everyone who is outraged by this signs the change dot org petition to recall the judge. I did!

Would you mind posting the link to that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to find a way that the victim could have prevented the situation in order to reassure themselves it could never happen to them. Wishful thinking but it doesn't guarantee anyone's safety.

That's not entirely fair. I posted earlier saying there but for the grace of God. I have no assurance that this could not have happened to me; I behaved just like Emily Doe in my college years and even a few times in graduate school. At the time I was just embarrassed to have made a fool of myself; I was too clueless to realize how incredibly risky that behavior was. And so I damn sure want to teach my kids as best not to ever do anything like that - that binge drinking is not some harmless adolescent rite of passage.

Drilling basic self-protection measures into our kids isn't a fantasy. It will not keep them from all harm or prevent any possibility of rape or some other horrible crime. But it may decrease their odds of facing such a terrible situation as Emily Doe, or something even worse.

I think what has so many PP's dander up is the rather noxious focus on what Emily Doe could have differently. Seriously. Over and over and over: binge drinking is bad! Drinking is bad! And my favorite, completely irrelevant one: hookup culture is bad! So much focus on what the victim did or did not do, and so very little on the fact that this man, and many like him, feel entitled to a woman's body whether or not she wants to give it or can consent. There's very little focus on that. For some reason.

I think it's been posted 70x because some loon kept posting some crap about helping rapists rape.

You mean the person who was pointing out those posters who insist on identifying all the reasons why Emily Doe brought this on herself and what she should've done differently, as opposed to looking at why the guy felt so entitled and how we change that mentality to stop these crimes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope everyone who is outraged by this signs the change dot org petition to recall the judge. I did!

Would you mind posting the link to that?

https://www.change.org/p/california-state-house-recall-judge-aaron-persky