Also why would this guy's ex defend him?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/06/15/stanford-swimmer-brock-turners-ex-girlfriend-defends-him-in-a-letter-to-the-court/

Anonymous wrote:The kid was socially awkward around women. That is not atypical for a college freshman to be inexperienced and inexpert when hitting on women. Older guys seem more mature for a reason.

Brock was not walking around attacking girls in secluded places. He wasn't lurking behind bushes waiting for the wounded antelope party stragglers to wander home. Brock wasn't going behind dumpsters to meet women.

If Brock had seemed at all threatening those women would have insisted that Emily leave that party with them. They didn't insist that she leave because Emily seemed fine and they were not afraid of Brock even if they found him to be annoying. They left. Emily opted to stay because ?...well, we don't know why she chose to stay at a party where she didn't know anyone. Where was she planning to sleep that night?

Wait, I thought she was the predator hitting on a poor little 19-year-old teenager?

Anonymous wrote:The kid was socially awkward around women. That is not atypical for a college freshman to be inexperienced and inexpert when hitting on women. Older guys seem more mature for a reason.

Brock was not walking around attacking girls in secluded places. He wasn't lurking behind bushes waiting for the wounded antelope party stragglers to wander home. Brock wasn't going behind dumpsters to meet women.

If Brock had seemed at all threatening those women would have insisted that Emily leave that party with them. They didn't insist that she leave because Emily seemed fine and they were not afraid of Brock even if they found him to be annoying. They left. Emily opted to stay because ?...well, we don't know why she chose to stay at a party where she didn't know anyone. Where was she planning to sleep that night?

Post number 947 that attempts to blame the wome who was sexually assaulted rather than the one who committed the crime. Grow up.

She wasn't planning on anything because that would make too much sense. What we have learned is that the more you drink the less responsible you become for your own actions.

The kid was socially awkward around women. That is not atypical for a college freshman to be inexperienced and inexpert when hitting on women. Older guys seem more mature for a reason.

Brock was not walking around attacking girls in secluded places. He wasn't lurking behind bushes waiting for the wounded antelope party stragglers to wander home. Brock wasn't going behind dumpsters to meet women.

If Brock had seemed at all threatening those women would have insisted that Emily leave that party with them. They didn't insist that she leave because Emily seemed fine and they were not afraid of Brock even if they found him to be annoying. They left. Emily opted to stay because ?...well, we don't know why she chose to stay at a party where she didn't know anyone. Where was she planning to sleep that night?

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]In the police report given hours after the incident, the defendant makes no mention of asking Emily if she wants to do something sexual and her saying "yes." That statement was only mentioned later.

Also, the defendant is described as "aggressive" and as going around and just walking up to and kissing young women. Two female witnesses were talking to each other and he stepped in between them and started trying to kiss the one and grab her around the waist. She was able to sidestep him and move away from his hands.

Emily was already outside. Could he have still been acting aggressively when he came across her in the outside area? Shortly before the incident witnesses say he was kissing and grabbing a different young woman around the waist without asking for her permission. If I were a juror, I would take this information into account in my deliberations.
[/quote]

One of the women was Emily's sister?? And the sister was not at the party at the time of this incident between Brock and Emily?

It is my understanding (and I might be misunderstanding) that Emily's sister had left the party to walk a drunk girl back to her dorm. Emily's sister said that Emily seemed fine at that point. At some point Emily asked her boyfriend to pick her up and he told her to go find her sister. She tried calling her sister and her sister wasn't picking up. Later Emily and Brock were dancing and kissing inside. They then went outside and wound up behind the dumpster. I seem to remember seeing somewhere that Emily remembers dancing and kissing Brock at one point. After that, things got hazy for her.

She remembers enough to put herself with Brock at the point that she blacked out (so she knows that no other guys touched her - just Brock) but she knows nothing about what occurred after that. And then she passed out and remained passed out for 3 hours.[/quote]

In the police report, the last thing Emily remembers is being outside the KA house with the friend whose dorm room the other girls went to. That girl gave her room key to the other girls and stayed with Emily at the party. I'm not sure anyone knows when exactly she passed out, but it is known that she was passed out for a very long time.

Do you have a cite for the information that Emily and the defendant were dancing inside? I don't see that in the interview with the defendant from the police report the night of the incident.

If the other witness hadn't pushed him away, would he have gone on kissing her and grabbing her around the waist even if she wasn't responding in a favorable way? He didn't just stop, she had to "wiggle out from his hold." What if she had been incapable of wiggling away from him? I would have been thinking carefully about these witness reports if I were a juror in this case. At the very least, it would make me wonder about his definition of consent.

[/quote]

And two weeks earlier at another party girl reported him for making him very uncomfortable with his advances. Unfortunately for the Brock fan club I don't have further info for you to pick her credibility apart, though perhaps "girl" and "party"will suffice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the police report given hours after the incident, the defendant makes no mention of asking Emily if she wants to do something sexual and her saying "yes." That statement was only mentioned later.

Also, the defendant is described as "aggressive" and as going around and just walking up to and kissing young women. Two female witnesses were talking to each other and he stepped in between them and started trying to kiss the one and grab her around the waist. She was able to sidestep him and move away from his hands.

Emily was already outside. Could he have still been acting aggressively when he came across her in the outside area? Shortly before the incident witnesses say he was kissing and grabbing a different young woman around the waist without asking for her permission. If I were a juror, I would take this information into account in my deliberations.

One of the women was Emily's sister?? And the sister was not at the party at the time of this incident between Brock and Emily?

It is my understanding (and I might be misunderstanding) that Emily's sister had left the party to walk a drunk girl back to her dorm. Emily's sister said that Emily seemed fine at that point. At some point Emily asked her boyfriend to pick her up and he told her to go find her sister. She tried calling her sister and her sister wasn't picking up. Later Emily and Brock were dancing and kissing inside. They then went outside and wound up behind the dumpster. I seem to remember seeing somewhere that Emily remembers dancing and kissing Brock at one point. After that, things got hazy for her.

She remembers enough to put herself with Brock at the point that she blacked out (so she knows that no other guys touched her - just Brock) but she knows nothing about what occurred after that. And then she passed out and remained passed out for 3 hours.

In the police report, the last thing Emily remembers is being outside the KA house with the friend whose dorm room the other girls went to. That girl gave her room key to the other girls and stayed with Emily at the party. I'm not sure anyone knows when exactly she passed out, but it is known that she was passed out for a very long time.

Do you have a cite for the information that Emily and the defendant were dancing inside? I don't see that in the interview with the defendant from the police report the night of the incident.

If the other witness hadn't pushed him away, would he have gone on kissing her and grabbing her around the waist even if she wasn't responding in a favorable way? He didn't just stop, she had to "wiggle out from his hold." What if she had been incapable of wiggling away from him? I would have been thinking carefully about these witness reports if I were a juror in this case. At the very least, it would make me wonder about his definition of consent.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]In the police report given hours after the incident, the defendant makes no mention of asking Emily if she wants to do something sexual and her saying "yes." That statement was only mentioned later.

Also, the defendant is described as "aggressive" and as going around and just walking up to and kissing young women. Two female witnesses were talking to each other and he stepped in between them and started trying to kiss the one and grab her around the waist. She was able to sidestep him and move away from his hands.

Emily was already outside. Could he have still been acting aggressively when he came across her in the outside area? Shortly before the incident witnesses say he was kissing and grabbing a different young woman around the waist without asking for her permission. If I were a juror, I would take this information into account in my deliberations.
[/quote]

One of the women was Emily's sister?? And the sister was not at the party at the time of this incident between Brock and Emily?

It is my understanding (and I might be misunderstanding) that Emily's sister had left the party to walk a drunk girl back to her dorm. Emily's sister said that Emily seemed fine at that point. At some point Emily asked her boyfriend to pick her up and he told her to go find her sister. She tried calling her sister and her sister wasn't picking up. Later Emily and Brock were dancing and kissing inside. They then went outside and wound up behind the dumpster. I seem to remember seeing somewhere that Emily remembers dancing and kissing Brock at one point. After that, things got hazy for her.

She remembers enough to put herself with Brock at the point that she blacked out (so she knows that no other guys touched her - just Brock) but she knows nothing about what occurred after that. And then she passed out and remained passed out for 3 hours.[/quote]

In the police report, the last thing Emily remembers is being outside the KA house with the friend whose dorm room the other girls went to. That girl gave her room key to the other girls and stayed with Emily at the party. I'm not sure anyone knows when exactly she passed out, but it is known that she was passed out for a very long time.

Do you have a cite for the information that Emily and the defendant were dancing inside? I don't see that in the interview with the defendant from the police report the night of the incident.

If the other witness hadn't pushed him away, would he have gone on kissing her and grabbing her around the waist even if she wasn't responding in a favorable way? He didn't just stop, she had to "wiggle out from his hold." What if she had been incapable of wiggling away from him? I would have been thinking carefully about these witness reports if I were a juror in this case. At the very least, it would make me wonder about his definition of consent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Or, you know, she could end up the victim of sexual assault. WTF is your point?! No, it's not a great idea to drink as much as she did. I don't think anyone else here would say otherwise. But the topic of this thread and this discussion is whether Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag. He is a convicted felon and a creep. It doesn't matter if he assaulted a choir girl or a prostitute, he's still a criminal. That's all that matters.

Sorry, thread police, this thread has been about both Turner and Doe from page 1.

Interesting.... True, for this thread and probably every sexual assault victim in this United States. Sad but true statement you just made.

Anonymous wrote:

Actually, Emily Doe's conduct and her own state of mind is very relevant. Brock is not in trouble because he jumped this woman, dragged her behind a dumpster and violently assaulted her. Brock is in trouble because Emily Doe passed out while they were fooling around and doesn't remember what she may or may not have consented to. And Brock is in trouble because two upstanding young men (the swedes) witnessed Brock 'dry humping' Emily after she was passed out.

So much of this situation is directly related to her blacking out and passing out - not remembering. If Emily had not blacked out/passed out she and Brock would have likely fooled around, adjusted their clothes, walked away from each other and that would have been it. Typical frat party stuff. Hangovers.

But Emily did pass out. And the accusation is that Brock should have known that she was about to pass out. I personally do not think that a kid like Brock had ever been around such a heavy drinker before. He didn't fully appreciate how drunk this woman was and he did not expect her to pass out suddenly like that. His judgement was clouded by inexperience and being drunk himself.

You say that it doesn't matter what Emily was doing herself that night. You seem to believe that once she crossed over the line into black out drinking that she ceased to be responsible for her own actions. It doesn't matter if she walked behind those dumpsters with the intention of fooling around with Brock or not. But I disagree. It does matter. It matters a lot.

It's not about what I believe, it's about what California Law says. And California law says that a person who is as intoxicated as Emily Doe clearly was, is not able to give consent...regardless of her state of consciousness. The law does not require a cold-blooded attacker to jump out of the bushes and grab a sober school girl to make it be sexual assault. The law allows that exactly the circumstances that occurred that night on campus can happen; and if the man begins or continues to fondle, penetrate, etc a severely inebriated person, then he is violating the law.

If you feel that Turner's drunkenness excuses some of his culpability, you are in luck...so did the judge who commuted his sentence from 6 years to 6 mos. A lot of people disagree with that decision, but there you go. The justice you are seeking was exactly what was served. Turner violated the law, and he was convicted of a crime for doing so. The judge felt there were mitigating circumstances due to his level of drunkenness, so he reduced the recommended sentence.

If you feel so strongly that the law in California is wrong or unfair in this regard, then you should go to California and lobby to have it changed to avoid having Turner's fate befall the minority of drunk college guys in the future who fail to notice or care about the difference between a willing partner and a slobbering, incoherent, drunk one. But, as it stands, Turner violated the law that was on the books, and that makes him a criminal.

Anonymous wrote:In the police report given hours after the incident, the defendant makes no mention of asking Emily if she wants to do something sexual and her saying "yes." That statement was only mentioned later.

Also, the defendant is described as "aggressive" and as going around and just walking up to and kissing young women. Two female witnesses were talking to each other and he stepped in between them and started trying to kiss the one and grab her around the waist. She was able to sidestep him and move away from his hands.

Emily was already outside. Could he have still been acting aggressively when he came across her in the outside area? Shortly before the incident witnesses say he was kissing and grabbing a different young woman around the waist without asking for her permission. If I were a juror, I would take this information into account in my deliberations.

One of the women was Emily's sister?? And the sister was not at the party at the time of this incident between Brock and Emily?

It is my understanding (and I might be misunderstanding) that Emily's sister had left the party to walk a drunk girl back to her dorm. Emily's sister said that Emily seemed fine at that point. At some point Emily asked her boyfriend to pick her up and he told her to go find her sister. She tried calling her sister and her sister wasn't picking up. Later Emily and Brock were dancing and kissing inside. They then went outside and wound up behind the dumpster. I seem to remember seeing somewhere that Emily remembers dancing and kissing Brock at one point. After that, things got hazy for her.

She remembers enough to put herself with Brock at the point that she blacked out (so she knows that no other guys touched her - just Brock) but she knows nothing about what occurred after that. And then she passed out and remained passed out for 3 hours.

Anonymous wrote:In the police report given hours after the incident, the defendant makes no mention of asking Emily if she wants to do something sexual and her saying "yes." That statement was only mentioned later.

Also, the defendant is described as "aggressive" and as going around and just walking up to and kissing young women. Two female witnesses were talking to each other and he stepped in between them and started trying to kiss the one and grab her around the waist. She was able to sidestep him and move away from his hands.

Emily was already outside. Could he have still been acting aggressively when he came across her in the outside area? Shortly before the incident witnesses say he was kissing and grabbing a different young woman around the waist without asking for her permission. If I were a juror, I would take this information into account in my deliberations.

Yes, he was "aggressive" because he put his hands on women's waists and tried to kiss them. Then, when they told him No, he left them alone. It made them uncomfortable and was socially awkward, but it's not grabbing women and pulling them, or drugging them. I've occasionally called DCUM posters aggressive when they make certain posts, but I don't mean that I expect them to start physically assaulting anyone at any moment.

Also, in the police report, he doesn't say he asked her and she said Yes, that seems to have been made up by his defense attorney at trial -- but he does say they were making out and seems confused and drunk. It could all be an act, but he had also had a fair amount to drink at that point.

In the police report given hours after the incident, the defendant makes no mention of asking Emily if she wants to do something sexual and her saying "yes." That statement was only mentioned later.

Also, the defendant is described as "aggressive" and as going around and just walking up to and kissing young women. Two female witnesses were talking to each other and he stepped in between them and started trying to kiss the one and grab her around the waist. She was able to sidestep him and move away from his hands.

Emily was already outside. Could he have still been acting aggressively when he came across her in the outside area? Shortly before the incident witnesses say he was kissing and grabbing a different young woman around the waist without asking for her permission. If I were a juror, I would take this information into account in my deliberations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
She primed herself with 4 shots of whiskey before her mother drove her and her sister to that college campus. Her mother thought she was fine. Her sister thought she was fine. The girl is/was a drinker. Hell, I partied in college and I still like alcohol. But could I drink 4 shots of whiskey and not show it? Never in a million years - especially around my mom and my sister.

Demean her? She did that when she drank herself black out drunk and passed out in the dirty pine needles behind a gross dumpster. What Brock did to Emily was gross and wrong. But what Emily did to herself was gross and wrong too. The girl drank herself almost comatose. She was passed out cold and unresponsive for 3 hours! She was assaulted, photographed by the police, young men standing around her wondering what to do "Roll her on her side", finally picked up, transported - and she had no clue about any of it. She has no clue what she did or did not say to Brock or any other guy at that party. She can't remember because she blacked out. She blacked out because she had 3X the legal limit BAC. That is serious. That is life threatening. That is not - "Oops! My tolerance went down" tipsy. This girl drank A LOT.

She could have choked on her own vomit. She could have died from exposure that night. Do not underestimate just how bad this could have been for her. She could be brain damaged or in a coma or dead.

Or, you know, she could end up the victim of sexual assault. WTF is your point?! No, it's not a great idea to drink as much as she did. I don't think anyone else here would say otherwise. But the topic of this thread and this discussion is whether Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag. He is a convicted felon and a creep. It doesn't matter if he assaulted a choir girl or a prostitute, he's still a criminal. That's all that matters.

Actually, Emily Doe's conduct and her own state of mind is very relevant. Brock is not in trouble because he jumped this woman, dragged her behind a dumpster and violently assaulted her. Brock is in trouble because Emily Doe passed out while they were fooling around and doesn't remember what she may or may not have consented to. And Brock is in trouble because two upstanding young men (the swedes) witnessed Brock 'dry humping' Emily after she was passed out.

So much of this situation is directly related to her blacking out and passing out - not remembering. If Emily had not blacked out/passed out she and Brock would have likely fooled around, adjusted their clothes, walked away from each other and that would have been it. Typical frat party stuff. Hangovers.

But Emily did pass out. And the accusation is that Brock should have known that she was about to pass out. I personally do not think that a kid like Brock had ever been around such a heavy drinker before. He didn't fully appreciate how drunk this woman was and he did not expect her to pass out suddenly like that. His judgement was clouded by inexperience and being drunk himself.

You say that it doesn't matter what Emily was doing herself that night. You seem to believe that once she crossed over the line into black out drinking that she ceased to be responsible for her own actions. It doesn't matter if she walked behind those dumpsters with the intention of fooling around with Brock or not. But I disagree. It does matter. It matters a lot.

He claimed not to remember what happened. He only brought out the consensual fooling around story months later after he learned she didn't remember. Your devotion to his credibility given these circumstances, his history of being kicked out of a party for unwanted advances, and having been caught in the act is bizarre.

There is no evidence that Brock storm armed this girl or dragged her or jumped her. I have yet to hear the details of Brock being kicked out of a party for making unwanted advances - I agree that, depending on the details, that could indicate a significant pattern of behavior.

I also have not read anything about his story changing either.

What-you want me to come read it to you? It's a matter of public record.

Where did you see that his story changed. I seem to recall Emily Doe saying that in her impact statement but I don't remember seeing that in the police report. Obviously I haven't seen a trial transcript. So much of the info that we have is coming out post trial (via statements and rumors - like the texted photo). It's hard to know what the jury actually heard as evidence at the trial. And what is fact vs fiction. I think that must have been an extremely difficult trial to sit through.

It does seem to me that if Emily Doe was that intoxicated and that Brock Turner was physically dragging/pulling her back behind the dumpsters someone would have noticed that. This was a crowded party and the path running behind that dumpster was apparently grand central station - not as private as they thought.

Also why would a rapist carefully remove clothing and bother 'dry humping' the victim?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Or, you know, she could end up the victim of sexual assault. WTF is your point?! No, it's not a great idea to drink as much as she did. I don't think anyone else here would say otherwise. But the topic of this thread and this discussion is whether Brock Allen Turner is a dirtbag. He is a convicted felon and a creep. It doesn't matter if he assaulted a choir girl or a prostitute, he's still a criminal. That's all that matters.

Sorry, thread police, this thread has been about both Turner and Doe from page 1.

Hi! OP here. Maybe you misread my OP: BAT is a dirtbag and Emily is a good writer.

He is 100% at fault for choosing to sexually assault a woman incapable of consent. He was drunk, but he is still responsible for what he chose to do, just as he'd be 100% at fault if he drove drunk and caused an accident.