I’m not trying to be obtuse, but could someone explain what a Dear Colleague Letter is?
@GnocchiB it’s the letter from the Department of Education to colleges providing guidelines for the college tribunal system. Here’s a link to it:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.pdf
Brock Turner has registered as a sex offender in Ohio. His parents were with him, his mother tried to protect him from the cameras with her sweater.
His mom gives a pretty good death stare at the camera in this video of Brock arriving at his hotel after he was sprung. Eagle-eyed viewers will also notice how his dad swats his mom’s hand away from the elevator button panel at the end of the clip as the elevator doors were closing.
http://www.tmz.com/2016/09/02/brock-turner-hotel-parents-reporters/
I feel a little sorry for them having to deal with the cameras, but as I think about it more, my sympathy dissolves.
“My analogy about the accident and % to blame was on what happens in the real world”
In a lawsuit, the responsibility among the parties has to add up to 100%. In our personal judgment, it doesn’t. We can hold the criminal 100% responsible for the crime and also look at the environment for contributing factors – like universities that allow on-campus frat parties where 18-year-old freshmen can get wasted. Since I’m not on a jury, I can think both that this wouldn’t have happened if the university observed the law on its own property, AND that Brock is 100% responsible for his own choices.
Yes.
The law is a little weird on responsibility, since by implication the more people involved in a crime the less responsible each is. I’d tend to think the opposite, that when people get together to commit a crime they’re more responsible. More opportunity for someone to speak up.
The law does it to prevent windfalls to plaintiffs. Responsibility in law is really about how to carve up the damages award. I don’t have the same issue so I’m free to think multiple people can be fully (or partially) responsible.
This article states what I have been trying to state…“We all know a Brock Turner”.
So, is what Brock Turner did going to effect future “Brock Turners”?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/we-all-know-him_us_57cf09abe4b0eb9a57b65fcc
I will admit that just LOOKING at Brock Turner in the recent videos evokes feelings of sympathy for his parents and their ordeal. Even for him, especially because he looks very much like boys I’ve known and cared about. Then I remember what he DID. And my sympathy evaporates completely.
I love that the crazies outside his home are calling their little protest a “militant feminist statement” that just helps soooo much (sarcasm intended). Let’s see…try to have a national conversation about violence against women and what do we get…stupid people who advocate violence. It’s time for the media to shut off there TV cameras and their computers on this.
@EllieMom: It is possible to have empathy for people who do bad things, though I agree sympathy is a tough sell.
@dstark:
I don’t buy the alcohol made me do it line, either, and Turner’s actions from what came out at the trial strike me that he would have taken advantage sober, too. When I commented about the dangers of getting drunk, it is that when drunk you can make a seemingly rational decision that if you weren’t drunk you wouldn’t have done it, and with sex if you are drunk it might appear a girl is okay, while when sober you would know she wasn’t…and could end up paying for that lack of judgement, because there is no place, and should not be, in the law that excuses behavior while drinking. Again, I don’t think this applies to Turner, he sounds to me like too many guys I knew growing up where it came to sex, they were going to get it anyway they could…
@hanna:
That is my understanding, that in civil cases the guilt has to add up to 100%, but that people often try to apply the same logic to a crime. For example, from what I know of criminal law, someone involved in an armed robbery where someone is killed is culpable whether or not they were the one who pulled the trigger or whatnot, they don’t say “well, he was 50% responsible so only gets 50% of the sentence”…
And obviously, there can be both criminal and civil actions with something like Turner. If there was a lawsuit over Turner’s actions, and the defense introduced into the trial that Stanford (this is hypothetical, folks, not an indictment of Stanford) contributed to what happened by having lax controls or enforcement of sexual abuse cases, couldn’t Turner’s lawyers then argue that Stanford shared X% of the blame (I ask because I think they could, but i am not a lawyer). Or Stanford could potentially face a seperate suit from the victim, or perhaps the Federal Government, if they had been found to be lax…but that I do know has zip to do with Turner’s guilt or level of punishment, in a criminal trial they can’t say “well, Stanford didn’t do anything to stop Turner from drinking or didn’t stop him from assaulting the girl, so he can’t be guilty”…
“from what I know of criminal law, someone involved in an armed robbery where someone is killed is culpable whether or not they were the one who pulled the trigger or whatnot”
That’s right. If you have ten participants in an armed robbery where one person gets killed, all ten of them could be convicted of first-degree murder. It doesn’t matter who drove the getaway car vs. who tied up the security guard, etc.
Positive results have come from this light sentence.
Woohoo!
He is now literally a poster boy…
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Brock-Turner-Cal-Poly-poster-sexual-predator-Safer-10418012.php
^^^ wish one would be done with Owen Labrie on it.