I assume that Turner’s “winning” at the appeal would mean a new trial. That would hardly put closure to the case, until the new trial is over.
I know. It’s too bad they can’t just close this thing, but lifetime sex registry…anyone his age with any financial ability to hire a lawyer would fight it.
Quant I believe she admitted she had been a binge drinker but had ratcheted it down in recent years. Her friends testified that she did not manifest the behaviors they were used to seeing when she was “really” drunk and that they were more concerned with another friend. Not once do I recall in the trial there being discussion of her drinking lightly. But the only thing this would be applicable to would be the question about when she passed out which came up at trial.
He was charged not with rape, because in California there was a distinction at that time and the DNA tests did not live up to that charge and he was fully clothed when they were discovered so it was changed by the prosecution. He was charged and found guilty of sexual assault at the time in California: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious person, penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object and penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. The one charges dealing with unconscious only, in my opinion, tilted the judge because he may have thought that the prosecution could never prove that she was conscienceless when penetration occurred and the DNA tilted toward her probably helping remove her underwear something a drunk person might do but not an unconscious person. I believe this is something California voters might have changed since that trial?
I did not read the entire appeal but assume that somewhere in there that 3rd charge will be argued. The whole dumpster thing is strange as she was not next to the dumpster, she was between the fence around the dumpster area and the basketball courts but I don’t know if you can “appeal” legally based on prosecutorial grandstanding…they do that all the time and it was his lawyers job to repudiate that language if it was not truthful. The third guess is if the judge in anyway did not instruct the jury properly and not being a lawyer I could not say. So who knows what will happen.
While sex offender registries have in many cases been made overly broad (e.g. in Georgia, any (not necessarily sex-related) crime against a victim under 18 is a “sex offense” according to https://gbi.georgia.gov/sex-offender-registry-frequently-asked-questions#goone ), diluting their utility and increasing fear of the seemingly large number of sex offenders, Brock Turner’s conviction of PC 289 (basically rape-equivalent, since the definition of the crime is very similar to that of the PC 261 crime called “rape” with the same penalties) means that he is the type of offender whom these registries were originally intended for.
In California, “rape” is defined in PC 261, while PC 289 that Turner was convicted of defines a very similar crime that has the same penalties as “rape”.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&division=&title=9.&part=1.&chapter=1.&article=
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&division=&title=9.&part=1.&chapter=5.&article=
Note that both PC 261 and PC 289 fall within the DoJ definition of “rape”.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317#terms_def
Yes someone upthread mentioned that Cali had also cleaned up their laws and language. I happen to disagree about sex registries and their utility but that is neither here not there. I especially disagree with their utility for first time sex offenders. At least in Michigan which basically puts just about everyone on the sex registry for life at the drop of a hat. I personally would rather see first time offenders have a running scale of length of time on the registry. In Michigan which has tough laws and has been in and out of court for years The rules prohibit offenders from legally living, working or even standing within 1,000 feet of a school, a regulation that many say makes it hard for them to work, or to pick up or see their kids at school, and has forced some to give up jobs and homes plus many people on Michigan’s registry have gone years or decades without a committing any crimes and can become a real drain on society rather than being productive workers, fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, coaches, teachers, etc… So darn straight I’m a person who would fight tooth and nail and down to my last dollar to keep a family member or friend who was under the age of 30 and placed on the registry for life for a first offense.
Would you also fight tooth and nail if your daughter was a victim?
I don’t care if this was Brick Turners first offense, it was a heinous crime and he belongs on the registry.
Of course and I would hope for an appropriate sentence, but I could never see a young person be put on the sex registry for life for a first offense and especially if they had both been drinking and no one knew what really happened. I’ve never said Turner wasn’t guilty of attempting to have sex with a very inebriated woman. I just don’t think he should be on a sex registry for the rest of his life. Ten years maybe and by then he might be married, have a family and have found a construction job or similar somewhere and be able to be somewhat self supporting.
I’m conflicted about the sex registry-for-life bit. It seems cruel given its ramfications, a bit like the three-strikes-and-you’re out laws, which imprisoned people for life for stealing a pizza.
@kataliamom what would the fair length of time be to appear on the registry? I don’t know, I’m asking. Perhaps 25 years, or until the convicted person was 50, whichever was longer? Or is there another age at which they are deemed no longer a threat (75? 80?)?
Should part of the calculus be how long it takes the victim to feel safe again/recover from the trauma (which might be never)?
Again, I have no suggestions. Just thinking aloud.
ETA: I went back and re-read Turner’s statement to the judge, which is shown at this link: https://heavy.com/news/2016/06/brock-turner-full-statement-letter-judge-aaron-persky-court-victim-rape-stanford-rapist/
It makes clear that he did not take responsibility for his actions, and blamed them on the party culture at Stanford. (It’s poorly written too - many grammar errors). Should refusal to admit guilt be factored into the decision about the sex offender registry?
https://www.journal-news.com/news/crime–law/what-know-about-sex-offender-laws-ohio/t0TDGHhDfEZVnolKEpP9YK/ describes the sex offender registry laws in Ohio, referring to Brock Turner being in the most severe category (tier III).
I can see the argument about the sex offender status for some people who are convicted of certain crimes.
However,
He was not “attempting to have sex with” he was sexually assaulting a drunk woman. I admit I am puzzled by your consistent downplaying of this crime.
Not downplaying. I just believe in the inherent good of people…all people. I believe in giving first time offenders a chance to redeem themselves. Do it again and you’re off my list. I think there are people who get caught in a crime and swear up and down they won’t do it again…and do it again. They lost their one chance at redemption. I think there are horrendous, heinous crimes that happen globally…on a scale of 1 to 10 I didn’t consider this heinous. Awful, sad, and a horrific wake-up call for both kids, I cannot fathom finding myself waking up in a hospital after being found on the ground passed out with some guy I met at a college party rubbing up on me, let alone going through the grueling trial and having my life, my underwear and my photos passed out on display for the world to see, horrible, horrific if you want to use “h” words but heinous…no…there is much happening in this world that is the epitome of the use of the word heinous.
I don’t think we get to judge when something feels heinous to someone else, @momofthreeboys.
I’m curious - would you feel it was a heinous crime if one of your three sons were the one who had been raped by Brock Turner and had to go through that ordeal?
So a rape-equivalent crime (PC 289 sexual penetration) that falls under the DoJ definition of “rape” is not heinous?
I have been there. You have not. There is no fence and no basketball court.
I don’t see how anyone could think in terms of leniency due to this conviction being a first offense. I have two 17 year old daughters that are going to be starting college in a couple of months. Yes, we are doing everything in our power to make them understand the need to make good choices, because he’s not the only predator out there. We as a society owe it to my daughters - and everyone else’s daughters - to do whatever we can to ensure there is NO second offense.
“.,passed out with some guy I met at a college party rubbing up on me, let alone going through the grueling trial and having my life, my underwear and my photos passed out on display for the world to see, horrible, horrific if you want to use “h” words…”
Using this logic, no rape victim should seek justice just because the experience of being in court is worse than the crime. It is not. Shame on the perp, not on the victim.
@GnocchiB – all valid questions. I don’t know either.
I can’t help thinking about the victim. How long will she be in prison? She won’t experience a prison with bars but she will experience a prison from this rape for years. That is far worse than a registry.
A good book to read about this is the memoir “Lucky” by Alice Sebold. She was raped her freshman year at Syracuse. The next year, she spotted her rapist in town and called the police. There was a trial and he was convicted. He served a few years in prison, but it’s clear that she spent many, many, years in a mental prison due to being raped. She was finally treated for PTSD. Maybe she eventually had a normal sex life, but the book makes this seem unlikely.
She wrote “The Lovely Bones” which was inspired by her own experience (because the detective had told her she was “lucky” to have only been raped, and not killed like a previous victim). And of course, none of this was her choice or her doing.
@surfcity said:
@momofthreeboys said:
Of course you are; your statement below makes it obvious:
Brock Turner was not convicted of “rubbing up on” the victim, and you well know it.
Kadvany, Elena (March 21, 2016). “Woman testifies in Brock Turner trial”. Palo Alto Onilne. Retrieved July 12, 2016.
Brock Turner’s actions were sickening, despicable, and heinous. The fact that this woman was drunk (not merely drunk actually, completely incapacitated) does not in any way mitigate his behavior, much as some repeatedly try to insinuate.
I think we all can selectively pick what statements by what witnesses we want to pick and share. For every statement one picks, there will be a counterbalancing statement from the opposition - prosecutor/defender. Media A/Media B. This board is not for debate. We all have different POVs. Saying the crime does not fit my opinion of the word “heinous” is simply that, my POV. I’ve visited a center for Healing and Torture - those crimes afir the definition of heinous for me. I’ not going to criticize someone who thinks campus sexual assault is heinous as it is to them and fits their personal definition of heinous. Being willing to accept that people come to conclusions from differing POVs is a concept that is sadly lacking in our country these day in my opinion. We all agree Turner is/was a criminal. Disagreeing on what degree of a criminal - heinous or other - is an exercise in futility. The sad thing is I’m sure there are posters who would like to say something but are afraid of being driven away or feel bullied sometimes. It comes up enough in comments on many threads so let’s keep it a civil conversation and not rehash old arguments.