Posted on 06/08/2016 2:51:51 PM PDT by ErikJohnsky
It is easy to look at these questions and conclude the defense lawyer is a victim-blaming sleaze. Certainly the woman here has good reason to despise him. The rest of us, though, shouldn't be calling for his head. Instead, we should be rethinking American rape law, and the legal profession should be having tough conversations about the competing ethical obligations in sexual violence cases.
The questions Turner's lawyer asked were aggressive enough to serve as the art for the BuzzFeed post on the victim's letter. They're there at the top, in red: How old are you? How much do you weigh? What did you eat that day? Well what did you have for dinner? Who made dinner? Did you drink with dinner? No, not even water? When did you drink? How much did you drink? What container did you drink out of? Who gave you the drink? How much do you usually drink?
And on and on and on, questions that hurt your heart when you imagine them being asked of a young woman whose only crime was having the bad luck to be at a party with this particular man.
(Excerpt) Read more at cosmopolitan.com ...
Wait, weren't black men usually the victim of that kind of thing? Or will libfags make their new laws only harsh on white people?
True enough.
Author jad to get the “White Privilege” thingee in.
Don't go to parties alone. Make sure your "friends" who go with you are really your friends. Look out for each other. Do not drink from anything which is already open. Do not drink any drinks that are made for you. Watch out for sweet drinks that may mask the alcohol content. Watch out for kids at the party who are not students. Etc................
This is just a general list I told my Daughter and does not necessarily apply to this case.
Banks said that the consideration for the negative impact on the rapist only deepens the suffering of the victim and diminishes her voice in the case. He’s pictured in 2012 after his conviction was overturned:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3630119/Brian-Banks-wrongfully-convicted-rape-teen-cites-privilege-Stanford-rape-case.html
like the US legal profession didn’t have serious concerns before?? Oxymoron: honest attorney or, honest politician
He raped her.
For the record, I’ve read into this case, and the woman in question didn’t violate any of those rules.
yea but the columns and feminist writing emanating about it, are problematic, particularly the ones like this article that seek to rip up the constitution.
there you go. This is what they do. Everything is about race/class, etc. Pure Karl Marx at its worst.
Rip up larger sexual morality. They’re trying to keep protections against unwanted sex while at the same time trying to mow down everything that used to militate against it. For the right for a wife to accuse a husband of rape, they’ve thrown away the exclusivity of marriage and ended up with an unenforceable morass of momentary self-will.
Agree 100%. It is not blaming the victim to read this story and say (quietly) to girls/women you care about, “Don’t drink alcohol on an empty stomach; don’t drink more than one drink every, say, 90 minutes with (again) food; make sure at least one member of your group of friends is stone, cold sober the whole evening and that that friend keeps an eye on the rest of you.”
I know very little about this case, except that she was "unconscious." How did she become unconscious without violating any of those rules?
The Law is a scam - people’s personal preferences dressed up in abstractions and weasel words that can be twisted any old way to justify whatever the lawyers and judges want at any given minute - just ask Roberts about how he rewrote Obamacare to make it “legal”.....
Don’t go to parties alone.
She went with her sister.
Make sure your “friends” who go with you are really your friends.
Can’t get too much closer than your sibling.
Look out for each other.
According to her letter, there was a lot of this (until there wasn’t).
Do not drink from anything which is already open.
She drank beer from fresh cans.
Do not drink any drinks that are made for you.
See above.
Watch out for sweet drinks that may mask the alcohol content.
See above
Watch out for kids at the party who are not students. The rapist was a student, a freshman in fact, younger than her.
One other “rule” that you might’ve added that she did apparently violate, was “don’t drink too much”. But very few of us have ever gotten through our youth without making that mistake at least once or twice.
Don’t get my wrong, I read his letter too. I can see how the judge saw it as a youthful mistake also tied to excessive alcohol consumption. But the jury found that it was a rape, and that does require a finding of intent, so it doesn’t seem that they bought the, “I was drunk, didn’t know what I was doing” line of argument.
At some point the Washington Post put together a list of stories of college women who claimed to have been raped. In about a third of the stories, the women did not communicate lack of consent in a manner that I would expect an inebriated 20-year old man to understand.
For example, one woman was at a party and started talking to a male friend who had a reputation for promiscuity. Both of them were drinking and eventually started to make out. She said that she enjoyed this. They eventually went to his dorm room and continued to make out, then sat on his bed, continuing to make out. He then started to undress her, at this point she froze, but did nothing else. He then proceeded to get what he wanted from her.
In this, the only she did to communicate lack of consent is to freeze, but I would not expect an inebriated 20-year old man to know what this meant if he even noticed.
After reading the list of stories, I was left with the conclusion that a large number of the women in question did not communicate lack of consent properly. I wonder if a large portion of college women who are claiming rape just failed to communicate lack of consent in a manner that an inebriated 20-year old man could understand.
Note: I am not familiar with the details of the case linked in the above article, and am accepting the jury’s opinion on the matter.
The Title 9 reinterpretation several years ago by Obama’s minions is truly a violation of the Constitution.
* Rape tribunals are run by commissions that are judge, jury and investigator. We separate judges from police to minimize evidence in interviews and evidence collection
* Rape tribunals are usually done by women’s studies departments - that’s biased against men.
* Accused parties rarely know the charges against them, a right that goes back to the Magna Carta.
* No right to legal defender, and often insufficient notice that this is a legal hearing so you rarely can invite a friend who IS an attorney
* Limits or flat out denial of right to cross-examine, in the name of not hurting the feelings of the accuser
* Limits or refusal of evidence that proves someone’s innocence, regular refusal to let someone bring in multiple witnesses
* A barely 50%+.01 standard of guilty that is less than the courts
* If the accused is found innocent, the accuser can appeal - violation of double jeopardy
* They can kick you out of housing, jobs and the university for minor infractions that are not violations of the law
* Anyone can report a sexual misconduct, and tribunals go forward with investigations; already case where a woman said it was consensual but a female friend reported a hickey, another man investigated because he looked like a girl’s rapist a thousand miles away, another where a female academic was investigated for writing a paper criticizing rape culture stats
Justice is not the aim of the criminal justice system, especially in the court.
Defense lawyers view it as a game, something to “win” regardless of how evil their client is.
I read the letter written by the victim to her rapist. If it is to believed (and I remember it correctly) she had pine straw in her vagina and rectum. Also, one of the guys that caught the rapist said he wouldn’t talk about what he saw but that it was very unpleasant.
I think the “rapist” was guilty of a violent assault. That is a crime whether or not rape is involved.
Who gives a flying donut hole what the effect is on a rapist? Those bullshyt treatment programs make them worse. Stop categorizing sex crimes as an illness. Bury them under the jail.
I’d be checking the oh so lenient judge out for similar crimes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.