Brock Turner
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment