There are only three possible reactions to coming upon someone who is hurt, injured, or otherwise incapacitated...ONLY ONE of them is "the right, or HUMAN thing to do," and that would be seeking to aid that person, whether injured, sick, or otherwise incapacitated.
The other two are lesser responses to a human dilemma. BOTH are, in effect, varying degrees of a failure of character, the least of those other two is just ignoring that incapacitated person and simply passing on by, or "doing nothing." That MIGHT be termed, "the neutral response," but it too fails to live up to any HUMAN standard.
Then there is the vulture/scavenger response...taking advantage of that stricken person. THAT is truly horrific and absolutely subhuman.
Brock Turner, Stanford Swim Team asshole and, now, convicted rapist earned that worst possible distinction when he came upon a woman who'd passed out drunk and decided to...rape her!
There's a word to define that kind of lowlife....something like, "Piece of shit SCUMBAG!" Yeah...THIS SCUMBAG (http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/06/05/brock_turner_s_dad_s_defense_proves_why_his_victim_had_to_write_her_letter.html)
Worse still, BOTH Brock's father, Dan Turner and Judge Aaron Persky have shown themselves to be pretty much the equals of Brock, with "Dad" writing a letter to the judge explaining why his son "has suffered enough" for a mere "20 minutes of action," and proving that the "Brock acorn" didn't fall too far from the "Turner tree."
Dan Turner's letter also includes the memorable, fictional line, "As his father, I know incarceration is not the appropriate punishment for Brock. He has no prior criminal record and has never been violent to anyone, including his actions on the night of January 17th, 2015..."
Brock Turner was convicted of THREE felonies in this case; "Assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious person, sexual penetration of an intoxicated person and sexual penetration of an unconscious person." The 1st & 3rd counts are obviously "violent."
For his part, judge Aaron Persky is rightly under fire for buying into Dan Turner's defense of his son and overlooking completely the impact this attack will have on the victim going forward and sentencing this subhuman scum to just 6 months in a County jail (no hard prison for this kid) and probation.
As a result, the judge is facing a Statewide recall, and a petition for his removal that has garnered over 100,000 signatures in just the first two days. (http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/petition-seeking-removal-of-stanford-rape-case-judge-draws-wide-support/)
The judge's rationalization that Brock Turner's lack of a criminal record and his athletic prowess merited such a grossly reduced sentenced is proven wrong by the way the court system treated Brian Banks (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/wrongfully-convicted-brian-banks-disgusted-brock-turner-ruling-article-1.2663595). Banks a teen football star, who was wrongly convicted in a rape hoax perpetrated by Wanetta Gibson.
In that case, Wanetta Gibson and her mother Wanda Rhodes sued the Long Beach Unified School District, claiming the Poly campus was not a safe environment, and won a $1.5 million settlement.
However, in March 2011, Gibson contacted Banks on Facebook, met with him, and admitted she'd fabricated the story. Banks secretly recorded Gibson's confession, but she refused to tell prosecutors that she'd lied so she wouldn't have to return the settlement monies that she and her family had been awarded in court. Despite that refusal, Gibson's taped admission, along with help from California Innocence Project attorneys, led Los Angeles County prosecutors overturned Banks' conviction on May 24th, 2012.
On April 12th, 2013, the Long Beach Unified School District announced it was suing Wanetta Gibson for $2 million in an effort to recoup the $1.5 million she received, along with attorney's fees and punitive damages. On June 14th, 2013, the school district won a $2.6 million judgment against Gibson, which includes the $750,000 settlement initially paid to her along with attorney's fees, interest, and $1 million in punitive damages.
In that case, Brian Banks made life-altering mistake...he had consensual sex with a scheming "Crybully," a predatory victim who saw that false charge as a potential lottery score. (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/25/local/la-me-rape-dismiss-20120525)
In the Brock Turner case, the 23 y/o victim's own 8,000+ Victim's Impact Statement, has already gone viral with nearly 10 MILLION views over the first few days that it's been up. (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/06/stanford-sexual-assault-case-victim-impact-statement-in-full)
Without question, it IS reckless and irresponsible for anyone to put themselves in such a vulnerable, incapacitated condition voluntarily, via drugs &/or alcohol, BUT the prosecutor had already taken that into account. Brock Turner faced 14 years on all three charges he was convicted of. The prosecutor asked for only 6 years.
AND while it's true that Brock Turner's family's wealth doesn't make him "more guilty," it SHOULD have him held to a slightly higher standard than the one we hold poor, uneducated miscreants to, as MORE should be expected from those to whom more has been given. In this case, if anything, Brock Turner SHOULD HAVE been held to a higher standard than the one we hold "the lowest of the low" to.
THIS is one of the reasons why I strongly support the idea of "A Complete Mutual Responsibility to Society," the doctrine used by many Arab nations to justify amputating limbs and stoning certain violent offenders to death.
YES, a monster who'd rape a helpless, unconscious woman really deserves to be stoned to death. In a better world ANYONE doing business with Dan Turner ("Dad"), would consider that person to be radioactive and cease all dealings with him...in a better world.
Contrary to the views of KC Johnson, a professor at Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center and Stuart Taylor Jr., a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution the system failed in THIS case, as it afforded someone who DIDN'T deserve more leniency than already extended, excessive leniency.
Now that’s a rarity and while Johnson and Taylor are absolutely right that, “Contrary to campus conventional wisdom, the Turner case shows that the best way to deal with a campus sexual assault problem is to rely on law enforcement professionals to protect women and to pursue justice, not on campus disciplinary systems run by amateur sex bureaucrats,” this judge’s actions NOT “the system” are the issue here.
Johnson and Taylor are also right that, “The backlash against Turner’s sentence is being exploited by a powerful but misguided movement to delegitimize law enforcement as the best way to handle campus sexual assaults. The accusers’ rights group Know Your Title IX has claimed that even reporting an assault to police could harm campus victims. “#copsoffcampus,” the group recently tweeted,” and ALL of that is misguided and misanthropic and MUST BE dealt with separately.
Ultimately ALL such on-campus tribunals and all those amateur sex bureaucrats must be decommissioned. Although again, that’s a separate issue.
In THIS case, the Police AND Prosecutors handled Brock Turner’s crime professionally and appropriately...ONLY judge Persky screwed up. Brock Turner’s criminal act would've garnered a 15 year sentence absent his lack of a criminal record and the alcohol involved, the Prosecutor asked for only 6 years.
In delivering that ridiculous 6 month sentence, it failed to hold a person who'd been given so much in life, to even the absolute minimum human standard.
THAT is truly disgusting.