We are not re-hashing old arguments. Referring to what happened to this poor girl as being “rubbed on” most definitely is downplaying what happened to her. At that point, it is a matter of fact, not opinion. Call it heinous or don’t call it heinous, fine, but don’t call violent sexual penetration of an unconscious person being “rubbed on” if you don’t want to appear to be downplaying it.
The sex offender registry and some of the laws associated with it can cause unintended consequences, but the suggestion that a person should get one “free” rape without having long term consequences fits my personal definition of heinous.
It’s also part of why rape victims hesitate to report the crime - they’re viewed as responsible and the actions of the rapist are minimized.
I can certainly understand why many don’t report. Those that do are often bullied mercilessly (Owen Labrie’s victim comes to mind), called liars, accused of simply having “remorse” after sex, criticized for prior sexual history (as though that somehow eliminates their right to consent at a later time), accused of trying to ruin someone’s life, told that “they own it” because they had too much to drink, etc. It’s actually amazing that any person reports a rape in our culture.
However, we know that Turner was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt in court of sexual penetration (not just “rubbed on”, which would be the lesser crime of sexual battery), so the weight of the evidence is rather strong against him.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
The conversation is getting a bit circular. Per the forum rules:
http://www.collegeconfidential.com/policies/rules/
Make your point, defend your point, and then, if needed, agree to disagree.
Wait, is this being asserted in the appeal, or is this just an individual interpretation?
“Wait, is this being asserted in the appeal, or is this just an individual interpretation?”
It would be pretty cheeky to include in the appeal since Brock’s own written statement to the judge (linked in an earlier post) has Brock describing in his own words that he removed her underwear.
It is in the appeal. There was no conclusive matching dna from Brock turner found on her underpants. This was part of the trial. Everyone can formulate their own opinion on why. He said she lifted her hips.
He said in his 11 page statement to the judge that he pulled down her underwear.
Yes, that has never been disputed by anyone. There was no identifiable Dna on her underwear from Turner. His legal team says that is because there was no struggle to get her underwear off (unlike if she was passed out dead weight) because she was not passed out and helped Turner by lifting her hips so her underwear came off easily and no Dna was transferred.
Rehashing all this is getting ugly. I can’t wait for his appeal to be denied so that part can hopefully be over.
Or merely that the relatively large amount of her DNA on her underwear masked whatever small amount of Turner’s DNA may have gotten there.
The Brock Turner’s of the world are the exact reason we have a sexual predator registry. He came across a powerless person. The reaction of a normal person is to help and protect. He chose to isolate her from her friends and rape (DOJ definition) and abuse her.
Someone whose default is not “help and protect” should not be allowed to be alone around powerless or vulnerable people, thus the registry. It’s an easy but not foolproof way to keep predators away from those the rest of us want protected.
New people jump on who probably only knew what they read in media. So are curious about the appeal. It was, after all, a media circus field day. The appeal shouldn’t garner that much attention especially after the recall of the judge unless there was some misconduct on the part of someone that gathers media interest.
I disagree about the sexual offenders registry. Once the offender has paid their debt to society, they should not be further punished.
I don’t know; I have mixed feelings about it. Certain proclivities, pedophilia for example, show extremely high rates of recidivism. I can see a registry being useful for that.
“Once the offender has paid their debt to society”
I’m not picking on your response, but I’ve always found this common phrase to be very odd. Almost no criminal of any kind - and especially not a sexually violent criminal - does any sort of paying or remuneration to society. At best, many of them cost us more per year to incarcerate than Ivy league tuition, to be followed by further resources used administering probation and other services. I see no payment of debt in any of this. The victim receives nothing of benefit from any of these things and the best that society can hope for is that the person behaves him/herself in the future but nothing is actually paid in any way, shape or form.
A “debt to society” is not a monetary thing.
I understand it’s not monetary. My point is that the phrase implies the offender is undertaking actual steps to atone, give recompense or otherwise repay society for his/her wrongdoing. That’s not remotely what happens. Generally society spends a lot of money and time making things miserable for the offender in hopes s/he chooses to avoid that misery in the future by not re-offending. The process more resembles a “time out” for adults than any sort of giving back to society.
Simply sitting in a cell and refraining from shanking your cell mate isn’t paying any sort of debt to anyone. Let’s not gild the lily on what is happening. Unless the offender voluntarily undertakes some sort of work, volunteering or actual payment of funds, simply existing during their incarceration, parole, probation, etc does not in any way benefit society.
There’s simply a waiting process. There is no repayment of debt and it’s inappropriate to give that type of credit.
It’s well proven and documented that sex offender registries do not reduce recidivism. It’s also well proven and documented that past behavior does not directly predict future behavior. The original purpose was to prevent pedophilia type people from being near children, but has grown to become a feel good measure that does little to address prevention and intervention/treatment. In Michigan you can get thrown on the registry for peeing in public. This week I drove by a woman peeing next to her car on the side of the road pretty much in full view. I thought oh my, she must be pregnant and couldn’t make it to the next rest stop but immediately thought about the sex registry since I had just posted something. Now that’s a real threat person you don’t want in your neighborhood…sarcasm intended.