Post: #126

(06-07-2016 11:23 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 11:17 PM)Burt Gummer Wrote:  Wow even Mike Cernovich just came out saying he thought it was clear cut rape.

I agree with LOZ. The media is fooling alot of people. And the boys father wrote an easily misunderstood(or propagandized) letter like a dumbass.

I just saw that tweet by Mike, and it's a bad misjudgment by him. I hope he reads this thread at some point. I've gone through a lot of material related to this case and would be able to provide many links on demand.

It's also possible, of course, that Mike doesn't want to fight every battle; the heat on this case is truly incredible, and helping Trump get elected takes precedence. But in that case it's best to just say nothing.

Cernovich is a California lawyer, has tried cases. He knows the the power of juries and jury instructions. You don't dismiss a jury verdict lightly. You gotta get 12 to agree on guilt, unanimously. The defense has a role in picking the jury, can kick off people they don't like. It's not perfect, but in a case like this, jury can sort things out, you have all ages. Juries can sort out between fooling around a bit drunk and jumping on a blotto girl, they have been there, done that.

This whole discussion shows the problem with second-guessing juries. You don't have all the facts placed in evidence. Like the fact the victim had a .24 blood alcohol content, which is three times the limit for driving in California. Even then, I don't know if that was at the time of testing or an extrapolated BAC - if it was the tested number, there could be an inference her BAC was even higher at the time of the incident.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news...r-stanford

That's pretty hammered, certainly enough for a jury to infer she was unconscious or incapable of perceiving her situation and resisting. Yes, we all know there are hard core alkies who walk around with that all day, but hard to see a college girl building up that kind of resistance. Anyways, Brock had the chance to counter that.

Turner's BAC was .17, much lower.

(06-07-2016 06:51 PM)Liberty Sea Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 10:18 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  [quote='Sp5' pid='1319252' dateline='1465308362']2. Intoxication is not a defense except in limited circumstance w specific intent crimes. If you can move your muscles, you have the general criminal intent necessary. Extreme intoxication on the border of unconsciousness makes consent impossible.

If intoxication voids the "victim's" consent, why wouldn't it also void the "perpetrator's" guilt?
… After all, it seems to me extremely clear that giving consent to sex requires much less analytical prowess and presence of mind than trying to figure out whether consent is "valid" under a given circumstance

It's a clear but subtle difference. It is the difference between intoxication of the actor and intoxication of the acted upon.

1. Every crime has elements of an act and intent to act. The act is the punch, the touch, the boost of an object, driving, pulling the trigger, etc. In most crimes the intent is general - intent to move your muscles to do the act in question. The law is that intoxication cannot be a defense of lack of general intent. In other words, if you can move your muscles to pull the trigger, you can't say you were too drunk to know what you were doing. Intoxication is a defense in specific intent crimes - you can be too drunk to have the intent to kill, to commit a felony in a break-in, etc. Intoxication can some into play as a defense in the 1st/2nd degree murder/manslaughter distinction. This is a rough sketch, there are many nuances.

It makes sense - you would not want people getting off 100% by claiming they were too drunk to know what they were doing.

2. In this case, the act was the touching, the insertion of fingers, etc. The act is objective - either he inserted fingers or not. In this case, he admitted it, not in dispute. Only general intent required, no intoxication defense.

3. In the case of the intoxication of the victim, it's not the same "intoxication." It's certainly not the same "intoxication" as in a driving while intoxicated, it's a much higher level. The mental state and awareness and intent of the victim does come into play. It's more like the intoxication of a person who is incapable of acting. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was incapable of consenting, and the jury had to unanimously agree.

4. She was a lot more drunk than he was. This probably had a lot to do with the verdict. .17 in a man and .24 in a woman can be the difference between ambulatory buzzed and blotto blackout. Or between predator and easy prey, if you will.

5. in addition to proving she was too drunk to consent, according to this jury instruction, the prosecution had to prove that Brock knew she was too drunk to consent:

https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/cal.../1002.html

Quote:1047. Sexual Penetration of an Intoxicated Person
The defendant is charged [in Count ______] with sexual penetration of a person while that person was intoxicated.

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant committed an act of sexual penetration with another person;

2. The penetration was accomplished by using (a/an) (foreign object[,]/ [or] substance[,]/ [or]instrument[,]/ [or]device[,]/ [or] unknown object);

3. The effect of (a/an) (intoxicating/anesthetic/controlled) substance prevented the other person from resisting the act;

AND

4. The defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the effect of that substance prevented the other person from resisting the act.

Sexual penetration means (penetration, however slight, of the genital or anal opening of the other person/ [or] causing the other person to penetrate, however slightly, the defendant's or someone else's genital or anal opening/ [or] causing the other person to penetrate, however slightly, his or her own genital or anal opening) for the purpose of sexual abuse, arousal, or gratification.

A person is prevented from resisting if he or she is so intoxicated that he or she cannot give legal consent. In order to give legal consent, a person must be able to exercise reasonable judgment. In other words, the person must be able to understand and weigh the physical nature of the act, its moral character, and probable consequences. Legal consent is consent given freely and voluntarily by someone who knows the nature of the act involved.

[A foreign object, substance, instrument, or device includes any part of the body except a sexual organ.] [An unknown object includes any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, or any part of the body, including a penis, if it is not known what object penetrated the opening.]

[Penetration for sexual abuse means penetration for the purpose of causing pain, injury, or discomfort.]

<Defense: Reasonable Belief Capable of Consent>

[The defendant is not guilty of this crime if (he/she) actually and reasonably believed that the person was capable of consenting to the act, even if the defendant's belief was wrong. The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not actually and reasonably believe that the woman was capable of consenting. If the People have not met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty.]

I see a lot of guys in this discussion seeing the world through ideological glasses, which to me is just substituting one blue pill for a different set of illusions. Yes, we all know the politics, but this guy is not a victim, he had very poor judgment at the least. In the time it took to try this case, I bet 100 guys went to jail because their mug shot from a prior arrest was mistakenly ID'd by a robbery or rape victim. Again, if this guy was a townie, he'd be going to San Quentin for 5 years, not county lockup for a few months.

(06-07-2016 10:52 AM)Horus Wrote:  Sp5, if you were this guy's lawyer, what strategy would you use and what details would you focus on to get him acquitted?

Hard to say. I would have the victim and the witnesses thoroughly investigated, to include looking for psychiatric involvement, social media postings, affiliations, and prior relationships.

At the same time I would try to reach out to the complainant via the prosecution or intermediaries to mediate and explore a plea to a non-sexual offense assault and battery misdemeanor. If possible in California, might offer money damages.

It looks like the defense's choice of an expert witness was disasterous. My general preference would be to play low-key, apologetic, but "kids-will-be-kids, you know." Would try to lure witnesses into obvious exaggerations or expressions of bias on cross examination. This might have worked with the Swedes, given the political climate in Sweden.

(06-07-2016 02:33 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  THIRST among young men is dangerous

This is the only lesson which should be taken from this thread. A guy with abundance mentality would have thought "nahhh, not this girl, not tonight."

Post: #127

The media has been looking for this case for years and years to justify the "rape culture" narrative. They finally found a blond haired blue eyed jock raping a chick who then wrote their ultimate "feminist" victim letter and found a dad and a judge to throw gas on the fire.

I read the police report, and the witness statements from the Swedish guys.

This jock-- by the accounts I read outside the liberal media -- did commit the assault he was found guilty of.

Post: #128

The kid did many foolish things that night, but the most grievous mistake was talking to the police. It may not even have gone to trial if he had zipped it and waited for legal counsel to vet the best course of action.





Also, where was her sister and other friends during this encounter? Seems like someone would have had to give the mother hen nod of approval.

Post: #129

(06-08-2016 06:37 AM)Chrome Wrote:  Also, where was her sister and other friends during this encounter? Seems like someone would have had to give the mother hen nod of approval.

Guarantee her sister A. knew she was not unconsciously drunk when she left and B. was completely okay with her leaving with a guy who wasn't her boyfriend. This was probably a weekly thing for her.

She'd never admit that to the police or court though, can't say anything that might interfere with the narrative.

Post: #130

I thought it would add some depth to google the girl's friend, as named in the police report, who they initially met up with and who accompanied her to the party. I found this:

http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2012/...d-counsels

Quote:'Live now. Share deeply,' Gunn grad counsels

After battling 'deep depression,' student shares her ordeal with classmates
by Chris Kenrick / Palo Alto Weekly

Julia Maggioncalda enjoys a moment with her grandfather Ernie Maggioncalda following her baccalaureate speech at Gunn High School on Sunday, June 3. Photo courtesy of the Maggioncalda family.

Shortly after learning of her early admission to Stanford University, a Gunn High School senior last December spiraled into a "deep depression," crying without reason and feeling "empty, lost and alone."

Wearing her graduation cap and gown Sunday, June 3, the student, Julia Maggioncalda, recounted her ordeal, and the lessons she's drawn from it, for classmates and their families at Gunn's baccalaureate ceremony in Spangenberg Auditorium.
The ceremony featured poetry, humor and musical performances by a range of senior class members, including Eddie Zhou, Jack Kwan, Alena Rott, Allison Hannah, Fiona Flynn, Scott Kresie and Jeff Neff.

Maggioncalda struck a somber note, describing her weeks of depression and "total exhaustion."

The four-sport athlete, straight-A student and homecoming queen told classmates she felt "overcome by total exhaustion and a sense of sadness that I couldn't control.

"I couldn't do my homework and I stumbled through basketball practices in a daze. I slept 14 hours a night and woke up exhausted and in tears."

She missed three weeks of school.

"I would cry and I wouldn't know why. I couldn't stop. I felt empty. I felt lost. I felt alone."

This was years before that fated night. I think we know what's further down this rabbit hole.

Post: #131

Gothamist is reporting that "Brooklyn venues" (gag) have canceled all forthcoming concerts by the indie band The Good English because the drummer spoke out in favor of the accused.

She also came out against the victim of the rape in this case, saying she shouldn't have been drinking. The two apparently knew each other at Stanford.

The twist here is that the drummer is female and part of an all-female band made up of sisters. In SJW-land, no one is safe.

For an example of just how closed-minded and intolerant SJWs are, keep in mind that no U.S. venue canceled any Beatles show back in 1966 after John Lennon made his infamous "we're bigger than Jesus" comments. And that comment, at the time, was a major thing.

SJWs are now officially more intolerant than fundamentalist Christians. Seriously -- this makes it official.

Full story below. I'm not including a link because of all the above reasons.

******

Brooklyn Venues Cancel Shows By Band Whose Drummer Defended Stanford Rapist To Judge
by Miranda Katz in Arts & Entertainment on Jun 7, 2016 2:55 pm

This weekend, four Brooklyn venues were set to host The Good English, a trio of sisters from Oakwood, Ohio who've been described as "the lovechild of Nancy Sinatra and Black Sabbath" and were going to play several shows affiliated with the Northside music festival. But after it was revealed that drummer Leslie Rasmussen wrote a letter to Judge Aaron Persky defending convicted rapist and former Stanford swimmer Brock Turner, those venues were besieged by requests from New Yorkers asking them to cancel the band's appearances, and as of this afternoon, the band's Brooklyn tour has been completely scrapped.

Turner, who was recently sentenced to six months in jail after being convicted of several felonies in the rape of an unconscious woman who was visiting campus, is also from Oakwood, and graduated Oakwood High School in 2014. Rasmussen appears to have graduated in Turner's class, and, according to the letter she wrote to the judge, she'd known Turner since elementary school and was good friends with him in high school.

Like Turner's father, who argued his son was paying too steep a price for "20 minutes of action," Rasmussen defended the convicted rapist and was also quick to blame the victim, whose powerful statement has drawn considerable attention to the case:

It's pretty frustrating to see the light that people are putting him in now. It used to be 'swim star' and now it's like he is the face of rape on campuses...there is absolutely no way Brock went out that night with rape on his mind. I think he went to a party and was drinking, like almost very student at a university does, and was flirting with this girl, like he said. The woman recalls how much alcohol she drank, which was a lot. She was no doubt about to black out if not already.
[...]
I don't think it's fair to base the fate of the next ten + years of his life on the decision of a girl who doesn't remember anything but the amount she drank to press charges against him...where do we draw the line and stop worrying about being politically correct every second of the day and see that rape on campuses isn't always because people are rapists.

Rasmussen's letter, originally posted to Twitter, got a fair amount of press yesterday, at which point some people began to realize Rasmussen's connection to The Good English, and her intentions to perform across Brooklyn this weekend. Last night, Northside Festival's Facebook page received an onslaught of angry posts, as did Bar Matchless, which is hosting the festival on Thursday and Friday; The Rock Shop, which is hosting an unofficial showcase that would have featured The Good English on Friday; Industry City Distillery, which was also hosting an unofficial showcase on Saturday; and Gold Sounds, which is hosting a separate showcase of women in music on Sunday that would have featured the band.

By this afternoon, all five shows had been cancelled, with Industry City Distillery and Bar Matchless making public statements condemning rape culture while The Rock Shop and Gold Sounds quietly removed The Good English from their lineups.

Northside announced the removal of the band from the festival on its social media accounts, but didn't respond to a request for further comment, nor did The Rock Shop or Gold Sounds. In a statement, Bar Matchless said that "Good English will not be playing Matchless. We do not support victim blaming or rape apologists of any kind."

"It all kind of came as one big whirlwind last night," said Ronak Parikh, who runs sales and operations at Industry City Distillery. "We got notifications on our page about the band, which is when I first heard about the story, and it kind of hit us all at once. We have zero tolerance for the act itself, for anyone that would seek to defend that act, and certainly for the sentencing, which seems incredibly light."

Since cancelling, Parikh said, Industry City Distillery has received an overwhelmingly positive response, and was pleased to hear that the other venues scheduled to host the band had cancelled, as well.

"I'm just really happy that instead of it being about censorship or protest, it's more about having real life consequences for your actions," said Danielle Guercio, who helped spur the social media campaign against the band. "It's about sending a message that if you're a woman, we protect you. Especially in New York and in the music scene in Brooklyn, you can't just come here with this kind of shit...you're coming to New York! People with that kind of small-town sexism have no place trying to make money off or our independent infrastructure. She stands to get fame, opportunities, things that local Brooklynites have to fight to get in those festivals, so why should New York welcome somebody with that kind of attitude?"

Neither The Good English nor their manager responded to a request for comment, but we'll update if they do. The Brooklyn shows are still listed on the tour page of their website, but their Facebook page was taken down some time between the onslaught of last night's outrage and this afternoon.

Post: #132

(06-07-2016 11:11 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  By the way, to all those posters preaching how you should never get with drunk girls, how it's "extremely poor judgment" to do so, how everyone should realize this etc:

Please understand that sloppy drunken hookups are literally the main way that dudes and sluts get with each other on American college campuses, and have been for MANY YEARS. It's just a part of reality.

I can't speak for others, but I am referring to drunk out of their mind women. There's a big difference and it's easy to spot once you have some more experience. I maintain it's a really bad idea still.

I think I'm probably being thrown what you're writing because what you describe is behavior as which we in Northern Europe already know in our high school teen days. These kinds of drunk to oblivion hookups. It's behavior common to 16-18 year olds, not 18-21 year olds. It's high school culture, not university culture.

If that is the case, that America simply postpones this phase until college, then I better understand your argument.

Post: #133

(06-08-2016 04:30 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  This whole discussion shows the problem with second-guessing juries. You don't have all the facts placed in evidence. Like the fact the victim had a .24 blood alcohol content, which is three times the limit for driving in California. Even then, I don't know if that was at the time of testing or an extrapolated BAC - if it was the tested number, there could be an inference her BAC was even higher at the time of the incident.

0.24 what is that in thousands? 2.4?

That is definitely a high level. At that point you'd be really drunk.

Wikipedia describes it (0.2-0-3):


Severe motor impairment
Loss of consciousness
Memory blackout

And

Emotional swings
Anger or sadness
Partial loss of understanding
Possibility of stupor

Yeah, but this is why girls should not drink until they have a BAC of .24, you are basically not thinking clearly at that point.

In comparison a BAC over 0.3 would almost certainly lead to being unconscious and pissing yourself.

Post: #134

(06-08-2016 08:11 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 11:11 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  By the way, to all those posters preaching how you should never get with drunk girls, how it's "extremely poor judgment" to do so, how everyone should realize this etc:

Please understand that sloppy drunken hookups are literally the main way that dudes and sluts get with each other on American college campuses, and have been for MANY YEARS. It's just a part of reality.

I can't speak for others, but I am referring to drunk out of their mind women. There's a big difference and it's easy to spot once you have some more experience. I maintain it's a really bad idea still.

I think I'm probably being thrown what you're writing because what you describe is behavior as which we in Northern Europe already know in our high school teen days. These kinds of drunk to oblivion hookups. It's behavior common to 16-18 year olds, not 18-21 year olds. It's high school culture, not university culture.

If that is the case, that America simply postpones this phase until college, then I better understand your argument.

We have a much more serious drinking culture here in Northern Europe. The US does seem to start much later, and be much more restrained generally when it comes to boozing. As only an occasional drinker, I view about 10 double measures as a standard night out, where I would expect to drink considerably less than my friends who think of themselves as proper drinkers.

I suspect part of the problem in the US, and why we have not yet had this 'campus rape epidemic' ourselves here, is that we are much harder drinkers from a much younger age. You can see from the US drinking culture (which looks much more fun than our own), that there is a degree of naivety and innocent joy to it that is long since dissipated at an equivalent age here in the UK.

I lived with a bunch of Americans for a few months when I was 18, all of whom were mid 20s or older, and ex-city types who'd done plenty of blow and partied pretty hard. I was easily able to match their drinking, even then, and as I say I'm not and never have been a drinker by British standards.

Post: #135

Here's a fun game to play: if any of your friends bring up this case, feign ignorance and ask them

"Oh, what was the crime?"

100% guaranteed every answer will be "rape."

Post: #136

I was sitting at a restaurant here in the Philippines today when this story came up on the big TV screen. Two tables of cute carefree young Filipinas got to hear all about the evil white rapist. Didn't exactly make my day.

Post: #137

(06-08-2016 09:05 AM)RawGod Wrote:  I was sitting at a restaurant here in the Philippines today when this story came up on the big TV screen. Two tables of cute carefree young Filipinas got to hear all about the evil white rapist. Didn't exactly make my day.

Worldwide exposure.

Elites are desperate. Trump looming in the distance makes them force their hand, like with the Russia provocations.

Post: #138

Sp5 made a very important post which should be read carefully by everyone.

In short, according to Sp5, a professional attorney:

Even if the boy did ask the girl to go to his dorm, and permission to finger her, at that point she was already too drunk (0.24) for her consent to be valid, suffering from significant cognitive impairment and bordering on unconsciousness (the sign being her unable to utter to complete sentence). The boy’s level of intoxication at that point, however, was under 0.2 (0.17, to be exact), much less drunk than she was, which, at any rate, does not seriously impair his judgment or null his intention. He made the decision to (digitally) penetrate a woman whose mind was unclear while his mind was still more or less clear (certainly clearer than hers). The girl made the argument that since she could not utter a complete sentence, it should be clear to him that she was too drunk to consent - which the court seemed to have acknowledged, and which would make him guilty as charged.

The key is the BAC level and its relation to the cognitive capacity of each party involved.

Did I get anything wrong?

Post: #139

Sp5 - thanks for your posts in this thread. I don't agree with everything in the legal process but I have a much better understanding of what happened after reading your posts. The media's articles are so biased that they create more confusion than anything else.

I have 2 questions please.

First, I don't completely understand:

(06-08-2016 04:30 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  4. She was a lot more drunk than he was. This probably had a lot to do with the verdict. .17 in a man and .24 in a woman can be the difference between ambulatory buzzed and blotto blackout. Or between predator and easy prey, if you will.

There is a significant difference between .17 and .24 but does the person's gender also play a role? I would think that .2 in a man and .2 in a woman is exactly the same. Also, I think the girl said she had been blackout drunk before and I know the girl's sister left her shortly before the incident took place because she didn't think she was too drunk (this was part of the defense). Perhaps I'm playing devil's advocate but it is conceivable to me that there isn't a big difference between a 22 year old woman with more binge drinking experience at .17 and a 19 year old man at .24.

Second, I understand the convictions on assault more than the conviction on attempted rape. Again, it is very difficult to understand what happened through the biased media articles but I think we know that Turner got up off of the girl before he knew the Swedes were there. After they questioned him he ran away. Also, I've heard nothing about his clothes being off so I assume he was fully clothed. It seems that he had disengaged from the situation therefore I don't understand the conviction on attempted rape.

Post: #140

Sp5, thanks for the great posts in this thread. It's really valuable having your legal expertise on the board.

Post: #141

(06-06-2016 05:04 PM)kaotic Wrote:  The man was convicted of rape and sentenced to 6 months....

just saw this on my facebook feed. . .shared by a female friend who I`ve talked to about false rape accusations targeting white guys, things is she agreed that it happens a lot and is fucked up etc etc. . .but then she turns around and shared that stupid video.

This is why you can never take what a woman says seriously, she`ll say one thing then do another.

Post: #142

A general question; not necessarily related to the case.
If he romantically touches her lip with his finger which is short of "penetrating orifice with an object"; does it still makes his action a rape attempt?

Post: #143

Having read what sp5 put though, in what case could one EVER have sex with a woman that had drunk any amount of alcohol? We don't have BAC measurements in 99% of cases, so it all becomes ... bullshit argument after the fact.

Sounds like thousands of things going wrong in a stupid, insane culture ... but possibly the biggest thing is that whatever happened was in public.

If not in public, wouldn't the time lapse, lack of so-called witnesses, etc. all have made this impossible?

Post: #144

(06-08-2016 11:33 AM)FebGun Wrote:  A general question; not necessarily related to the case.
If he romantically touches her lip with his finger which is short of "penetrating orifice with an object"; does it still makes his action a rape attempt?

Sexual Abuse or Attempted Sexual Abuse. Nonetheless, that shit is felonious.

Post: #145

Has anyone else said this yet?

I think this case is a false flag.

It fits the "rape culture" narrative just a little too well to be true.

We all know the media is not above lying baldfacedly and making shit up. Who's to say they aren't making this up too?

Post: #146

(06-08-2016 08:10 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  Gothamist is reporting that "Brooklyn venues" (gag) have canceled all forthcoming concerts by the indie band The Good English because the drummer spoke out in favor of the accused.

Why on earth doesthis band lady's opinion matter? Why in the world did she write a letter to the judge???

Did the judge take her letter into consideration when determining this kids sentence?

If so, this case needs to be retried by another judge.

This whole thing is a bunch of bullshit.

Aloha!

Post: #147

As bacan said, thanks to Sp5 for providing his expert opinion on the case. To answer your question:

Quote:Like the fact the victim had a .24 blood alcohol content, which is three times the limit for driving in California. Even then, I don't know if that was at the time of testing or an extrapolated BAC - if it was the tested number, there could be an inference her BAC was even higher at the time of the incident.

http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/...sault-case (courtesy of LoZ)

The .24 BAC was an extrapolated number. She tested at 0.127 or 0.129 at 7 am in the morning. The expert witness speculated that her BAC could've been higher than .24 due to blood dilution from an IV.

(To put that into perspective, Tucker Max blew a .09 the morning after his "sushi pants" story - a night which he referred to as one of his five drunkest ever.)

Post: #148

There is a Stanford Law Professor that keeps showing up everywhere in this case. The media has referred to Michele Dauber as a friend of the victim and as a family friend of the victim in several articles. However, there is no indication of when they became friends.

Dauber was the first to release the letter from Turner's father.
https://twitter.com/mldauber/status/739320585222660096/

Dauber started the process of getting the Victim Impact Statement released in the media.
http://www.adweek.com/news/press/how-buz...ral-171870

According to Dauber's bio on Stanford's website she helped revise Stanford's policy on sexual assault a few years ago.
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/miche...is-dauber/

Dauber is frequently mentioned as a critic of Stanford's assault policies which seems unusual since she lead the process that revised Stanford’s policy on sexual assault. Perhaps this is a contradiction or maybe she didn't get everything she wanted in the policy revisions.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/...s-recourse

Dauber launched the recall campaign against the judge in the Turner case, because of the 6 month sentence in county prison, even though the judge was following a recommendation made by the county probation department.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/...dge-recall
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/...-probation

(06-06-2016 09:28 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  Further. This was prosecuted EXPLICITLY as a "rape culture" hysteria case.

(06-08-2016 05:27 AM)achromaticmike Wrote:  The media has been looking for this case for years and years to justify the "rape culture" narrative. They finally found a blond haired blue eyed jock raping a chick who then wrote their ultimate "feminist" victim letter and found a dad and a judge to throw gas on the fire.

I think Turner is probably guilty of assault but I agree that there is a lot more to this case. Dauber has done everything possible to publicize this case and use it as an example to change policies and public opinion. It's possible that Dauber and the victim were introduced to each other by the prosecutors. Turner was prosecuted in court by the prosecutor and prosecuted in the media by Michele Dauber.

I bring all of this up for a few reasons.

First, I think the county probation department and the judge had good reason to sentence Turner to only 6 months. They know a lot more than we do and they didn't want to send him to San Quentin State Prison when they knew his life was already being destroyed by the media. He might be guilty of assault but I don't think this 19 year old kid deserves to be vilified in the international media as a cold-blooded rapist for fingering a girl who wanted to hook up with him but was too drunk and passed out.

Second, I've had a professional writer prepare a speech for me and I thought of that the first time I read the Victim Impact Statement. It just seems a little too good to be true. I think it was professionally written with the purpose of going viral in the media. Dauber may have also helped write the statement to ensure that all of the rape culture talking points were covered.

Finally, I don't understand how a Stanford employee can get so involved in this case and still teach classes about sexual assault and influence university policies on assault. It is a conflict of interest now that she is personally involved in this case.

Post: #149

(06-08-2016 01:20 PM)Peregrine Wrote:  As bacan said, thanks to Sp5 for providing his expert opinion on the case. To answer your question:

Quote:Like the fact the victim had a .24 blood alcohol content, which is three times the limit for driving in California. Even then, I don't know if that was at the time of testing or an extrapolated BAC - if it was the tested number, there could be an inference her BAC was even higher at the time of the incident.

http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/...sault-case (courtesy of LoZ)

The .24 BAC was an extrapolated number. She tested at 0.127 or 0.129 at 7 am in the morning. The expert witness speculated that her BAC could've been higher than .24 due to blood dilution from an IV.

(To put that into perspective, Tucker Max blew a .09 the morning after his "sushi pants" story - a night which he referred to as one of his five drunkest ever.)

I'm pretty sure you mean 0.9 not 0.09. 0.09 is not very intoxicated at all, a 0.08 is a DUI. 0.9 is ridiculously drunk and I have a hard time believing that number. I saw Steve-O once IV a shot of vodka and he was plastered at 0.4

Zero chance that one of Tucker Max's 5 most drunken nights was a 0.09, unless he was 5 years old.

Post: #150

(06-07-2016 10:18 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 10:10 PM)Neo Wrote:  Because we have everybody jumping on board saying he's definitely not guilty and it's one big conspiracy cause they're all out to get us.

Who said that it was "one big conspiracy" and "they're all out to get us"?

Are you interested in finding out what happened in this case, or would you rather caricature and misrepresent the many detailed, sensible and informative posts in this thread? Did you even bother reading any of them?

It was implied by your posts and others in this thread who are rallying around this kid with their red pill only ideological view point. You're trying to claim that this is a made up case and clearly you got support from the majority of the forum because all of your lenses are tainted. I don't mind being in the minority here, what the kid this was predatory and alcohol is not an excuse.

I don't disagree that the media is manipulative, and I even got the facts wrong. Apparently I interpreted the witness as seeing him 'thrusting his hips' as sex, yet the charge was rape by fingering her.

You have attorneys supporting the verdict, even guys part of this community. The kid was found guilty and was convicted of rape under the law. You have two witnesses who you and your posse claim are just white knight losers who are doing this out of jealousy. Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? The kid decided to then run away I'm sure that's because he didn't feel he was doing anything wrong. Her tone in her letter is completely irrelevant here.

There IS a victim here and it clearly isn't this kid who's a sorry excuse for a man.