Former Stanford Swimmer Convicted of Rape

Parent Cafe
381

This is a tough case, while I agree with Hunt about judges not being elected (judges who are elected make it a lot less likely they will act as a check and balance to heat of the moment and so forth) I also think this judge in many ways misapplied the law. While judges can and do take the status of the person committing the crime into effect, a first time offender is generally given less time (I have several ex DA’s in the family, who talked about sentencing and other aspects of what they face), the nature of the crime also comes into play.

While for something like this I can see a judge not giving the maximum, giving a 6 month sentence to me (and that is all this is, to me) the judge deciding that the person doing this was not guilty of a major felony, it sounds like he is saying “this is a boy from a good home, who made a mistake”. The crime in question was non conensual (I don’t know if legally this falls under a violent crime, since he didn’t use force, and I believe in California as in most states non consensual sex and forced sex are two different crimes, could be wrong), and arguing that the girl was drunk had any kind of relevance bothers me. I also was bothered to read that the judge allowed the defense lawyer to ask how the victim was dressed, is California in the dark ages? I know that in NYC (thanks to a sister in law who worked in the DA’s office in the sex crimes unit) and NJ such questioning is not allowed, as are questions about the victims sex life, where she was walking and the like…so we are back in the mode of “she dressed provacatively, so she was asking for it?”…if the judge allowed that kind of questioning, it tells where he was coming from and I would push to have him recalled.

My guess, fwiw, is that the Parole Board and the judge looked at the kid, this upper middle income kid, going to Stanford, and made the judgement that somehow because of his background, because of being from a ‘good family’, that he didn’t deserve to face more harsh charges (you have to wonder how long the kid really will be in jail, that 6 month sentence might turn into a couple of months, due to jail overcrowding). The judge citing the victim being drunk and the boy being drunk reminds me of what used to be common with drunk driving accidents and fatalities, where the person doing it would likely get a suspended sentence for a vehicular homicide, because “the person doing it had no intention of hurting anyone”, it took a lot to get rid of the idea that alchohol was an excuse. The judge had the right to ignore the Parole board and give the kid more of a sentence, but given the judge is likely from the same social class as the accused and his family, not surprised he didn’t, and he has cover with that.

As far as the dad’s letter, that is pathetic, it smells of privilege and in blaming the victim as well (promiscuity? His darling son’s or the girl, which implies of course she was ‘asking for it’, too in mentioning she was drinking). 20 minutes of activity? What the hell does that have to do with anything? A drunk driver can kill someone in a couple of seconds, I saw an entire family wiped out in a split second by an arrogant a-hole, so the fact that it only lasted a split second means it isn’t a big deal? I can see where the kid gets it, the arrogance and privilege is amazing, we are country club upper middle income so of course this is just a ‘mistake’? I have a son, and if he got into trouble of course I would stand behind him, that is what a parent does, but what this creep (and i am sorry, he is) is doing is minimizing what his ‘outstanding young man’ did, his going to Stanford, great swimmer, top drawer student kid, while basically saying the victim was a slut, and that is disgusting, well beyond the pale. I could see him saying that his son did something horribly wrong (instead of making it seem like he toilet papered the dean’s car in a drunken prank), apologize to the victim for what she suffered, and then saying that while his son needed to pay the price for what he did, to also ask for some leniency given his age and so forth, that as a parent I could understand. I would love to know what the mother thinks about this, if she shares the husbands view of things, if so that would be really sad.

382

Ok, first * violent * offense. It’s not really fair to compare possession of alcohol by a minor, a misdemeanor that would not likely involve jail time, with a felonious assault that almost certainly would. While leniency for a first time offense might be appropriate in a different case, and perhaps even here, there is a limit to leniency. I can’t see how it’s possible to reconcile the nature of the crimes for which he was convicted, the sentencing guidelines which contemplate years not months in prison, the DA’s recommendation of six years in state prison, the victim’s statement, and the outlier of a probation report to arrive at the conclusion the judge did.

@Hunt, someone upthread suggested that the probation officer’s report may have been coached by the judge. If I recall correctly, the poster has a family member who works in the system, and she said that this is a very common practice. In any event, I do not think you have to worry about this elected judge shaping his opinions to fit with what the public wants or expects. While I don’t think we want judges worrying about how the public will accept their decisions, I do think the outrage that this case has generated illustrates how very out of line this sentence is. Even if this had been an appointed judge, I would have been in favor of his removal. And I sincerely hope this decision does lead to the removal of this judge; that is the place where the public can and should express its disgust.

383

The 47% of American families who cannot come up with $400 do not have that option. Even many of the other 53% cannot afford what lawyers cost.

384

Those are relatively minor (and often considered “victimless”) crimes. Turner was convicted of three felonies, sexual penetration of unconscious victim, sexual penetration of intoxicated victim, and assault with intent to commit rape or sexual penetration. Normal sentencing specified in the California Penal Code for these crimes are 3, 6, or 8 years for each of the sexual penetration crimes, and 2, 4, or 6 years for the assault with intent to commit rape or sexual penetration.

385

Taking a first offense into account is fine, but not to reduce the sentence for three felonies below the suggested minimum for one.

But many people can and do pay whatever they can (second mortage, sell everything) to defend their child. I believe Amanda Know’s family, for example, drained their retirement accounts, sold homes, and the grandma took a hefty loan to defend her. Of course, many people can’t afford a high priced lawyer, but the comment was to “spend whatever they could afford”.

386

^^Remember it’s the total of probation + jail time when judges sentence, this thread is getting long, but this was covered mid-thread. I believe it was determined that 3 years 6 months was slightly above the recommended minimum guideline of 3 years served consecutively for the charges. Technically it could have all been probation which is what the defense lawyers were going for and of course the prosecution attorneys were going for more - I don’t recall but I think prosecution recommended 6 total years (as opposed to 3 1/2 which was the final decision).

I don’t disagree at all with discussion around minimum sentencing guidelines, but the people of California should be having those discussions and singling out this one judge who has actual experience as a prosecutor and judge doesn’t change the sentencing guidelines in California.

387

Re whether he’s going to be a registered sex offender for his entire life – I’m kind of hesistant to say this because I don’t know the facts with these kinds of offenses, but in California there are all sorts of mechanisms for getting felony convictions expunged. This comes up in my practice as a civil lawyer because we will discover through newpaper reports that a witness for the other side has past felony convictions for, say, fraud, that normally can be used to impeach a witness but then we will find out that the convictions were expunged after the sentences were served. This seems to happen a lot.

I’ve never looked into the rules for when a conviction can be expunged, but I wonder how that works with sexual assault felonies. To the California criminal lawyers out there, do you have any idea as to whether and under what circumstances sexual assault felonies can be expunged under California law? Does the length of the sentence play into that at all? ( I believe it does for other felonies. I think it is easier to expunge a felony fraud conviction if only probation is imposed, for example). And does expunging the underlying conviction mean that the person no longer has to register as a sex offender (I assume it does)?

To be clear, I’m not asking for someone with no criminal law experience to find one of the myriad expungement statutes and quote it out of context. I’m asking whether the criminal lawyers think that might be a risk here, and if so, whether the lenient sentence enhances the risk.

388

I, too, believe his sentence is much too light. I only hope the sex offender listing and the court of public opinion make up for some of it.

389

The family, though the attorneys they hired, attacked the victim in an attempt to discredit her, in spite of what looked like pretty convincing evidence of Turner’s guilt. I can’t feel sorry if there is push back. LionsMum explained to us this is part of the public record. They should have expected that it would be made public. The amazing thing, to me, is they didn’t anticipate the consequence of it being made public.

Feeling sorry for the white, middle class, college boy rapist, instead of focusing on the woman who was raped, has been the norm in the past. When I was in college in the 70s, this would not even have been understood as rape. It would just have been seen and described as yet another woman who had a bad experience after being irresponsible. I am glad that has changed. The media in recent days shows how we may be moving beyond that mindset.

I guess I think it is important to discuss the letters, so people thinking this way have the opportunity to learn others are horrified by their world view.

I feel a bit differently about his friend who wrote the stupid letter being ridiculed all over the place, even though she slams the victim. On some level, I see her as a victim as well. She is so young, and this is what she has been taught.

390

Anyone care to hypothesize on future civil suits? Who will be named – the perpetrator, the school, the fraternity? Could the victim point to what was written in the support letters for the perpetrator as defamation of character? Could anything the family does not spend on lawyers for the perpetrator go towards compensation for the victim?

What made me wonder was this article published today. It’s not he said, she said. It’s she said, the school said. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/06/06/college-says-rape-victim-partly-blame/kdx2Wv5c8kHqYniA6a7jTI/story.html?p1=Article_Trending_Most_Viewed

391

@nottelling,

What do you think might happen in a civil case with Brock?

392

I can see complaining about the sentence being too short and I also can see why most people would find what the dad said to be horrible, But lets be honest, most parents are going to defend their kid no matter what, regardless of what they do. They are going to hire the best lawyer they can find and try to limit any punishment. Some of you are saying oh I would let him go to jail and tell everyone you were sorry for what your son had done. Well maybe some would but I bet there are others that would do just about anything to protect their kid. The family is appealing the conviction. I’m pretty sure admitting to the public that their son did what he did wouldn’t help his case at all. In fact it might hurt it. That’s not saying that the letter his dad is going to help… just that unless you are in that situation you really can’t say for sure what you would do. Hopefully no one on this forum ever will be in that family’s situation.

393

While it is sport these days to try cases in public by denigrating friends and families I find it distasteful. The victim’s name is not public and she can control what is released or not released. The victim is not what I am discussing here. With the exception of victim-less crimes there is always a victim. What is being discussed publicly is the relative wealth of the family, speculation about what the parents “must be thinking”, pictures of his family including his sisters and their names…I find this in extremely poor taste.

394

If we are going to accept that parents do anything to protect their kids… and that parents will do anything to protect their rapist son, then we also need to accept the survivor’s parents will do anything to protect her, including being sure information damaging to this family shows up in the media.

I guess people will argue the family is being defamed. They are being defamed by their own words. imho.

The survivor just has a whole lot better words to put out into the world. She is an amazing writer.

adding:
It becomes difficult, even for me, reading all these posts to remember that Turner is in this situation because of his own actions. He is responsible. He created this situation. He is at fault. While it may be regrettable, he has to live with the consequences.

The survivor has to live with the consequences also. She was not at fault. She needs to be our focus and the object of our concern and sympathy. imho.

395

I find it very encouraging that the public is taking a stand and making it known that their son’s right to “eat steak” does not trump a woman’s wish to not be raped, and to see her rapist face justice. When the legal system fails, shouldn’t someone step up?

396

@momofthreeboys You are absolutely wrong that the victim can control what is and isn’t released. Yes, there are rape shield laws regarding her name (and those don’t often work – I’m sure her name has been released somehwere) but beyond that, she has very little control over what information about her (and her family) is released in the context of a criminal trial and appeal. Look, there is a reason why criminal trials are public – they are meant to be part of a robust public discussion about how we (the people) want our justice system to run. At a minimum, discussions of wealth (since wealth impacts the absolutely critical matter of mounting a defense) is fair for public discussion. On some level, we all want the criminal justice system to be fair and equitable, and that means talking about it. Are some discussions going to cross a line? Sure. But this is not just “sport” to talk about something like this. It is only through discussion that sexual assault laws have changed at all – marital rape used to be legal, for example.

397

Almost embarrassed to admit I was not aware of this story until yesterday, but in all fairness, we were in the process of moving in February/March, and I saw little if any news for many weeks (not that I watch that much to begin with).

I am beyond outraged that my daughters still have to read about this kind of stuff in this day and age. And when I say ‘this kind of stuff’, I am referring to the blaming the victim, which is what is going on here (not CC here… people in general, here).

D shared a link to another situation which has lots of parallels to the Stanford case - WPI is partially blaming the woman for the rape. I don’t know if this link will work; if not, google Boston Globe and WPI says rape victim partly to blame. At least in this case, the criminal is serving a 20-year term in Puerto Rico.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/06/06/college-says-rape-victim-partly-blame/kdx2Wv5c8kHqYniA6a7jTI/story.html

398

Slut shaming was used to silence my generation. I so admire this new generation of women. They just will not be silenced.

399

I actually think hearing the family and friends viewpoint is helpful if we want to understand how we have a culture in which too many people think it’s acceptable (or a minor error) to take advantage of others. The perpetrator in this crime and those who continue to support, excuse and minimize his actions are representative of a greater number.
That’s something we all need to be aware of, I think.

400

There are ways to defend your child. One would be to encourage your child to apologize to the victim, to take responsibility, to show real remorse and to serve the six (more likely three) months in county jail.

This family has made the choice to act in a way that encourages outrage. Frankly, I haven’t wasted time or emotion on them. I don’t know or care whether they are rich or not rich, or what they are thinking. I’m too consumed with my outrage over the judge’s decision and my concern for the victim’s well being to pay much attention to theirs.