Reply to That Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "That Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It can be very confusing for an 18 or 19 year old boy when he is with a girl and they both been drinking heavily in regards to where the line is...especially if he has no explicit conversations with anyone about the exact parameters of what constitutes consent.

In many cases, you are asking a boy whose judgment is impaired to make judgment calls on the amount of impairment of the girl, something that can be very hard for him to do. A boy can be drunk and not realize the girl is as drunk or drunker than he is.[/quote]

I would expect a kid who gets into Stanford to realize that he should not finger a woman who is unconscious behind a dumpster.[/quote]

But he was a DRUNK kid who got into Stanford. Brains and rational thought go out the window when you're that drunk. Women can't trust someone like that to care what they're doing. [/quote]

True fact: I drank a lot of alcohol in college and did not finger any unconscious women behind a dumpster.[/quote]

True fact: Not everyone has the same intelligence level, emotional maturity, social experience, impulse control, ability to handle alcohol,etc.[/quote]

How about when in doubt, don't have sex with the person. No mental gymnastics or genius needed. Can't figure it out? THEN JUST STOP.[/quote]

Okay, so should he be asking her for permission for every single thing he does? Is he supposed to ask for permission to kiss her first? At each stage of the progression does he need to stop and ask her if what he's doing is Ok? What about when she is progressing things in her own physical manner? What is the conversation then? Or isn't there one?

Again, how many drinks constitute her ability to give consent? Does she specifically have to say the word yes, or it's ok?

For the parents of kids who are of the age where this is a pertinent discussion to have, what are the conversations you're having with your children to have with their potential parents regarding consent? [/quote]

Are you noticing, pp, that the more you take this conversation into rational, intelligent thinking, the more emotional and mean the comments get?

This is because you are 100% correct and these folk know it. They are trying to ignore facts, using phrases like "accidentally drunk" and not wanting to acknowledge that he was drunk and impaired as well. The CA law states "and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused. ".  When someone is as drunk as this boy's lab test indicated, there is a question as to whether or not this criteria was met. It would take a mighty strong judge to face the political fallout had he/she ruled otherwise. That is why, though, the boy got a light sentence, and rightfully so. Personally, were I the judge, I would have ruled otherwise.[/quote]

Here's the difference between her drunk and his drunk:

She was unconscious

He was conscious

Ergo, the onus was on him to determine SHE WAS NOT CAPABLE OF CONSENTING TO BE FINGERED BEHIND A DUMPSTER[/quote]

You don't know when she went from consciousness to unconsciousness, and you don't know, therefore, if she gave consent or not. [b]When she WAS conscious, she was physically engaged with him.[/b] [/quote]

She doesn't remember what happened.  You are taking the word of a convicted rapist.  He has an interest is saying she was engaged and consented.

He is patently lying about that. He didn't say that when he was first arrested. He ran away from the scene.  This only came up once he had a defense lawyer on board to help him create a defensible story.[/quote]

Other people saw them (allegedly together) at the party -- no one was willing to testify for the prosecutor or the defense. [/quote]

Until someone is under oath, it's gossip, rumors and hearsay. It's why hearsay rules exist for evidence.  All you have is what he testified to.  She didn't remember.  You are taking the word of a rapist.[/quote]

O.k....the guy was not convicted of rape.  He was convicted of sexual assault with the intent to rape.  Calling him a "rapist" would be the same thing as calling an attempted murderer a murderer.  Yeah, he may have intended to do worse damage than he did but he didn't actually do it. I think it's important to stick to the facts and not "convict" him of things that he wasn't actually convicted of.  What he did was terrible enough - the facts speak for themselves.   There is no indication that the victim did not go willingly with this guy - he did not kidnap her, he did not force her to leave with him.  There is an indication that this guy had come on to multiple women at this party, the victim's sister included - he did not try to drag them out of the party, he took their "no's" for an answer and tried to find a woman that was interested.  I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that he also came on to the victim and the victim left the party with him willingly to fool around with him.

At some point, this victim passed out and this young man continued to sexually engage with her passed out body - an obvious, cut and dry sexual assault.  The Swedes came along and saw him doing it, tackled him and called the police.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics