Stanford Rapist Get 6 Months Sentence

I understand the judge said much longer of a sentence "Would have had a detrimental impact".

All I know of the case is what the media has allowed me to know, so I can't speak on it from anything but an emotional standpoint, which makes my opinion invalid by default. That being said, I don't think 6 months in jail was a sufficient punishment for the crime. The gavel has dropped on this case though, and nothing is going to change it now.

Too bad he wasn't a woman. He'd probably get no prison time.

Maybe some hearty laughs at the victim while feminists look the other way.

whatbogsends said:

"After midnight on 18 January 2015, Brock Turner was witnessed sexually assaulting an unconscious woman behind a dumpster on campus of Stanford University in Palo Alto.

Brock Turner, a former star swimmer at Stanford University in the US, was on Thursday sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in a county jail and probation for three felonies relating to the assault – a fraction of the potential maximum of 14 years in a state prison."

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...student-brock-turner-sexual-assault-statement

This man was caught in the act, fled when confronted, found guilty by jury of three felonies and....received a 6 month sentence.

Both the rapist and his father have contended *any* prison time was too much punishment. That he has already paid a cost by having to become a registered sex offender. As his father so eloquently put it: "for only 20 minutes of action". As a sign of contrition, the assailant has vowed to teach others about the dangers of alcohol use, but neglects to take responsibility for his actions, or speak about the harm of sexual assault.

Caught in the act, no doubt that it was a rape, and a slap on the wrists.

Click to expand...

Got to say I saw 6 months and thought there was a typo, shouldnt it be years?

Well, these are the kinds of things you can expect when you have a large portion of the population chanting the mantra of
"the criminal justice system should be about rehabilitation, not punishment"

It's cases like this that highlight the reality that everyone (and I'm not excluding myself from that list) has a certain thirst for vengeance and a certain desire to "punish people who do bad things to other people"

Many "new-age"/"avant garde" folks who pretentiously act like they've evolved past the need for petty vengeance tend to have their true human nature exposed when cases like this happen.

If we're talking about a member of an impoverished/minority community committing an armed robbery, dealing drugs etc... these folks have no problem taking the attitude of "well, them sitting in jail for 5-10 years isn't going to make them a better person...the system needs to focus on rehabilitating them and re-acclimating them to normal society".

However, when the victim is a member of a group that the new age progressive community likes to consider themselves the noble guardians of (women, minorities, gays, etc...), they have no problem flipping the script and taking the "throw the book at them!" mentality.


PS. For the record, in this case, I'm in the "throw the book at him" crowd as well. This guy should've gotten 10 years + the Singapore treatment for what he did.

Six months!
When he re-offends again after getting out there will be the inevitable excuse of, well, if the system had taken his first assault seriously we wouldn't have this problem right now.

Shame the judge didn't think of the detrimental effect this rape had on the unconscious victim.

And the rapists daddy is a real peach! Twenty minutes of action?
There's something very wrong with both men.

A rich white kid gets a slap on the wrist. It's not really surprising as it is par for the course in our currently bankrupt justice system.

Disbar the judge and throw the book at the perp. I understand that the maximum sentence he could get is 14 years. That still seems like a slap on the wrist as far as I'm concerned, but at the very least he should have to face the full treatment of the law. He's not some kid who made a drunken mistake, he knew exactly what he was doing--I'm sorry, booze doesn't make you rape someone, that's not how alcohol works.

-CryptoLutheran

Goonie said:

Got to say I saw 6 months and thought there was a typo, shouldnt it be years?

Click to expand...

That it were a typo on two counts. Years, and that missing 1 before the 6.

Blondepudding said:

That it were a typo on two counts. Years, and that missing 1 before the 6.

Click to expand...

Well 16 years does seem a bit excessive in my view. 6 years seems very appropriate though.

IMHO, if a rapist refuses to accept responsibility for their actions and create circumstances that retraumatize their victim (ie. guide their lawyer to call the victim's character into question), their sentence should be MUCH closer to the maximum allowable.

rambot said:

IMHO, if a rapist refuses to accept responsibility for their actions and create circumstances that retraumatize their victim (ie. guide their lawyer to call the victim's character into question), their sentence should be MUCH closer to the maximum allowable.

Click to expand...

My argument would be that a crime should stand on its own in terms of punishment, and outside behaviors should not affect it. All rapes of similar types should have the same sentence regardless of who the offender is (be it his race, creed, or level of a**holeishness)

yasic said:

My argument would be that a crime should stand on its own in terms of punishment, and outside behaviors should not affect it. All rapes of similar types should have the same sentence regardless of who the offender is (be it his race, creed, or level of a**holeishness)

Click to expand...

Of course you're right....but, I could only hope.

whatbogsends said:

As his father so eloquently put it: "for only 20 minutes of action".

Click to expand...

What an out there, desperate comment.

It only takes a split second of "action" to shoot someone to death, so by those standards, murderers should pretty much just go free.

Goonie said:

Got to say I saw 6 months and thought there was a typo, shouldnt it be years?

Click to expand...

Many. Three Felonies? But, by all means, a violent rapist who despicably raped her while she was unconscious shouldn't have to experience anything detrimental. What about the victim?????????? It's unfathomable how the rapists get all the sympathy and concern. Seriously. Do people actually think what he did is no big deal?

You gotta love how everyone in this thread uses the issue to rail against his own enemies, no matter how unrelated.

Thanks to his face and name being plastered all over the internet, this guy probably had a better shot at survival behind bars.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Thanks to his face and name being plastered all over the internet, this guy probably had a better shot at survival behind bars.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that lol.

Typically guys who commit these kinds of crimes (or crimes against children) tend not to fair so well in lockup.

They usually get a taste of their own medicine.

ViaCrucis said:

A rich white kid gets a slap on the wrist. It's not really surprising as it is par for the course in our currently bankrupt justice system.

Disbar the judge and throw the book at the perp.

Click to expand...

This kind of ties into my earlier post
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/stanford-rapist-get-6-months-sentence.7950326/#post-69713467

Out of curiosity, if this case where about another person who wasn't so rich, or wasn't so white, would you still be taking the "throw the book at them" mentality? ...or would you be on the side that preaches "it should be about rehabilitation, not punishment/vengeance" Not saying you would or wouldn't, I haven't ever really interacted with you before on CF so I'm not sure of your attitudes toward that. Just trying to gauge where you're at...

There are a few folks on here (and I'm not going to name names since that would be a violation of CF rules) who seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouth a little bit when comparing their responses here to their responses in other threads about the criminal justice system.

For example, a few months back, there was a thread going on about how a non-white guy got 10 years for armed robbery, and there were people claiming that it was "excessive" and that locking someone up for that period of time just makes them into a worse criminal when they get out, yet appear to be taking a different approach now that the aggressor was a white male, and the victim was a female.

Now, is a person who's willing to point a gun at someone's face to forcibly intimidate them into giving up their property any more or less dangerous than a person who's willing to commit sexual assault? Not really...both are extremely dangerous individuals.

So the difference in response from some of these folks is either because... A) their response is being partially dictated/constrained by their (completely justified) anger over disproportionate enforcement of the law ...or B) they perceive crimes against women as worse due to the fact that women are typically in a position of physical disadvantage.

yasic said:

Well 16 years does seem a bit excessive in my view. 6 years seems very appropriate though.

Click to expand...

This sexual predator raped his unconscious victim behind a dumpster for twenty minutes! Assault with intent to rape, convicted of 3 felonies, and he gets six months. Will his victim forget the horror she woke up to in six months?

Sentenced not to prison but county jail! Expected to serve but three months?
Rich, white, privileged. Rapist!

Brock Turner's victim's impact statement that she bravely read in court should be piped into his prison cell and looped in full 24 hours a day every day he is there.


Full victim impact statement of Brock Turner's victim