RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Stanford sex offender Brock Turner is appealing his conviction - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Stanford sex offender Brock Turner is appealing his conviction Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,962
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 02 December 2017 - 07:52 PM

Stanford sex offender Brock Turner is appealing his conviction
By Kristine Phillips December 2 at 5:52 PM


Brock Turner, the former Stanford University swimmer who served a widely criticized six-month jail sentence for assaulting an unconscious woman on campus, is now appealing his conviction and asking for a new trial.

Turner filed a 172-page brief Friday arguing that the prosecutor incorrectly told jurors during the trial that the sexual assault happened behind a dumpster — and that doing so amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, the San Jose Mercury News reported.

The latest development comes more than a year after Turner was released from jail, where he served only half of his sentence because of good behavior. Turner, once a record-setting swimming prodigy, was 20 when jurors convicted him last year.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky drew widespread condemnation when he sentenced Turner to six months in jail, three years of probation and a requirement to register as a sex offender. Prosecutors asked for six years in prison.

In his appeal, Turner argued that contrary to what Deputy District Attorney Alaleh Kianerci repeatedly told jurors, the sexual assault happened near a three-sided trash bin, but not behind it, according to the Mercury News. Saying the assault happened behind the dumpster is “prejudicial” and implied that Turner was trying to hide what he was doing.

<snip>

Turner risks a second conviction by asking for another trial, which, if granted by California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal, would be presided over by another judge.

Turner was convicted in March 2016 of three felonies, including assault with intent to rape an intoxicated woman and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. The assault happened during a frat party in the early hours of Jan. 18, 2015, when witnesses saw Turner lying on top of a half-naked, unconscious woman.

<snip>

Link

I bet it's his <censored> father behind this move.
0

#2 User is online   gravelrash 

  • I wish they all were punk rock girls
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 11,463
  • Joined: 24-June 03

Posted 02 December 2017 - 07:58 PM

What a POS.
0

#3 User is offline   Diamond369 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 9,492
  • Joined: 03-May 04

Posted 02 December 2017 - 08:26 PM

:dramaqueen:
0

#4 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,773
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 02 December 2017 - 09:22 PM

I just finished reading the whole story and a couple of more articles from various left and right wing sources.

Everyone agrees Brock raped an unconscious female. Even Brock admitted to having been on top of her. She was unresponsive, can't recall anything, so here's Brock trying to fill in the forgotten gaps. That she gave consent and enjoyed it.

His father is saying that 20 minutes of action shouldn't destroy 20 years of a good guy. Pardon me. Anyone, any man who does this, isn't doing it "by mistake". He's doing it because he's a violent bastard criminal.

There's nothing good here for the real victim - the rape victim. As a father, I am trying to learn as much as I can about violent guys like this so I can help teach my daughter to watch out (and carry her .22 to even the score a bit).
0

#5 User is online   gravelrash 

  • I wish they all were punk rock girls
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 11,463
  • Joined: 24-June 03

Posted 02 December 2017 - 10:05 PM

View Postzurg, on 02 December 2017 - 09:22 PM, said:

I just finished reading the whole story and a couple of more articles from various left and right wing sources.

Everyone agrees Brock raped an unconscious female. Even Brock admitted to having been on top of her. She was unresponsive, can't recall anything, so here's Brock trying to fill in the forgotten gaps. That she gave consent and enjoyed it.

His father is saying that 20 minutes of action shouldn't destroy 20 years of a good guy. Pardon me. Anyone, any man who does this, isn't doing it "by mistake". He's doing it because he's a violent bastard criminal.

There's nothing good here for the real victim - the rape victim. As a father, I am trying to learn as much as I can about violent guys like this so I can help teach my daughter to watch out (and carry her .22 to even the score a bit).


Kind of not in a polite state of mind right now. Something along the lines that the rapist needs a kiss on the cranium with a bat and the dad deserves an insertion with the same blood-soaked bat.
0

#6 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 46,975
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 02 December 2017 - 11:30 PM

Quote

Turner filed a 172-page brief Friday arguing that the prosecutor incorrectly told jurors during the trial that the sexual assault happened behind a dumpster — and that doing so amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, the San Jose Mercury News reported.


His "argument" revolves around the location?

What, it's OK to rape an unconscious woman as long as you don't do it behind a dumpster?

:scratch:
0

#7 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,380
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 03 December 2017 - 10:00 AM

Quote

...The victim didn’t wake up until three hours later and had a blood alcohol level more than three times the legal limit for driving.


I see "reasonable doubt" here a mile wide. If she's was that drunk, then she's not a credible witness as to whether or not she consented BEFORE passing out. And when EXACTLY did she pass out anyway??? 5 seconds before the witness(es) saw them? And how exactly did the witness KNOW she was unconscious at that instant, did they walk up and check her pupils?

HE SAYS she consented.

SHE SAYS....well, she's not in a condition to say if she consented or not. And SHE PUT HERSELF into that condition.

I call that "Reasonable doubt". And, yes, I think the location bolsters that he wasn't trying to hide. This guy may be a putz, and he'd be no friend of mine, but I'd like to see something MORE before saying "guilty" to something this serious.

Don't like it? Fine. Then don't go out partying to a 0.24 Blood Alcohol Level. Whatever happened to personal responsibly on BOTH sides? Yes, he's responsible for his own actions. But SHE is also responsible for HER actions. In a case like this, I think her own irresponsibility COULD BE enough of a mitigating factor to call it a "Draw" wherein each party's own irresponsibility is matched by the other party's.
0

#8 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,773
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 03 December 2017 - 10:38 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 03 December 2017 - 10:00 AM, said:

I see "reasonable doubt" here a mile wide. If she's was that drunk, then she's not a credible witness as to whether or not she consented BEFORE passing out. And when EXACTLY did she pass out anyway??? 5 seconds before the witness(es) saw them? And how exactly did the witness KNOW she was unconscious at that instant, did they walk up and check her pupils?

HE SAYS she consented.

SHE SAYS....well, she's not in a condition to say if she consented or not. And SHE PUT HERSELF into that condition.

I call that "Reasonable doubt". And, yes, I think the location bolsters that he wasn't trying to hide. This guy may be a putz, and he'd be no friend of mine, but I'd like to see something MORE before saying "guilty" to something this serious.

Don't like it? Fine. Then don't go out partying to a 0.24 Blood Alcohol Level. Whatever happened to personal responsibly on BOTH sides? Yes, he's responsible for his own actions. But SHE is also responsible for HER actions. In a case like this, I think her own irresponsibility COULD BE enough of a mitigating factor to call it a "Draw" wherein each party's own irresponsibility is matched by the other party's.

Did you read the report on the condition her body was in? Did you read that the guy was humping an unconscious body, was seen by two passing (Swedish) guys, causing him to run, be caught up with and tackled by those Swedish guys? Did you read that he was going to leave her there behind the dumpster unattended?

Besides, is that how you've hooked up with drunk women? Get a drunken "yes" to some question, and that implies consent while passed out? Since when is that "consent"? DISGUSTING.

Words fail me Adam. If you'd done this to my daughter, you wouldn't exist anymore.

This post has been edited by zurg: 03 December 2017 - 10:39 AM

0

#9 User is offline   Gertie Keddle 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Platinum
  • Posts: 20,872
  • Joined: 12-August 03

Posted 03 December 2017 - 11:16 AM

View Postzurg, on 03 December 2017 - 10:38 AM, said:

Did you read the report on the condition her body was in? Did you read that the guy was humping an unconscious body, was seen by two passing (Swedish) guys, causing him to run, be caught up with and tackled by those Swedish guys? Did you read that he was going to leave her there behind the dumpster unattended?

Besides, is that how you've hooked up with drunk women? Get a drunken "yes" to some question, and that implies consent while passed out? Since when is that "consent"? DISGUSTING.

Words fail me Adam. If you'd done this to my daughter, you wouldn't exist anymore.


Not saying Turner's not a scumbucket. But the most important thing to teach your daughter is not to put herself in such a situation, i.e., don't get drunk enough to pass out at a frat party. Should she be safe in that situation? Of course. Would she be? Hell no, because the boys are drunk off their asses, too. Her .22 is no help in that situation.
0

#10 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,773
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 03 December 2017 - 11:32 AM

View PostGertie Keddle, on 03 December 2017 - 11:16 AM, said:

Not saying Turner's not a scumbucket. But the most important thing to teach your daughter is not to put herself in such a situation, i.e., don't get drunk enough to pass out at a frat party. Should she be safe in that situation? Of course. Would she be? Hell no, because the boys are drunk off their asses, too. Her .22 is no help in that situation.

I'm not denying that. I'm saying that to use her poor decision of getting drunk and passing out as justification for "consent" is disgusting.

Of course it's better not to put yourself into a vulnerable state in the first place. But I want my daughter to learn enough about scumbag character to maybe be able to tell, should she become vulnerable, that it's never around these types of guys. Not all young guys will hump an unconscious girl. It takes special wickedness to do that.

There's nothing, absolutely nothing in my view that's defensible about Brock Turner's actions.

This post has been edited by zurg: 03 December 2017 - 11:34 AM

0

#11 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,380
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 03 December 2017 - 11:57 AM

View Postzurg, on 03 December 2017 - 10:38 AM, said:

Did you read the report on the condition her body was in? Did you read that the guy was humping an unconscious body, was seen by two passing (Swedish) guys, causing him to run, be caught up with and tackled by those Swedish guys? Did you read that he was going to leave her there behind the dumpster unattended?

Besides, is that how you've hooked up with drunk women? Get a drunken "yes" to some question, and that implies consent while passed out? Since when is that "consent"? DISGUSTING.

Words fail me Adam. If you'd done this to my daughter, you wouldn't exist anymore.


I'm not saying the guy is a perfect gentlemen. And, as I posted, he'd be no friend of mine. but I DO see "reasonable doubt".

What we have is "he said / she said" PLUS a couple of eyewitness who merely have an opinion that she appeared to be unconscious when he was on top of her. And it's been proven time and time again how unreliable eyewitnesses CAN be. especially in "heat of the moment" situations like this.

Sorry, but in a case this serious, 1st degree and/or potential Capital, "he said / she said" plus (mere) eyewitness just isn't enough for me to say "Guilty BEYOND a reasonable doubt".

NOW, if the victim herself - the best witness of all - had been a credible witness, my opinion would almost certainly be different. But she put herself in the position of being an unreliable witness; I just can't overlook that.

And I trust that you've raised your daughter not to go to Frat parties with a 0.24 BAC.
0

#12 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,773
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 03 December 2017 - 12:52 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 03 December 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

I'm not saying the guy is a perfect gentlemen. And, as I posted, he'd be no friend of mine. but I DO see "reasonable doubt".

What we have is "he said / she said" PLUS a couple of eyewitness who merely have an opinion that she appeared to be unconscious when he was on top of her. And it's been proven time and time again how unreliable eyewitnesses CAN be. especially in "heat of the moment" situations like this.

Sorry, but in a case this serious, 1st degree and/or potential Capital, "he said / she said" plus (mere) eyewitness just isn't enough for me to say "Guilty BEYOND a reasonable doubt".

NOW, if the victim herself - the best witness of all - had been a credible witness, my opinion would almost certainly be different. But she put herself in the position of being an unreliable witness; I just can't overlook that.

And I trust that you've raised your daughter not to go to Frat parties with a 0.24 BAC.

Capital? She's not dead. The prosecution recommended 6 years. Law said minimum 2 years. Jury convicted him, judge sentenced to a reduced 6 months.

Here you go again, thinking there's reasonable doubt after a jury of 12, found him guilty of three felony counts.

I find your position entirely unreasonable. I find it disgusting that your focus is her level of intoxication. I guess in your world that means she was asking for it.
0

#13 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,962
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 03 December 2017 - 01:30 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 03 December 2017 - 10:00 AM, said:

I see "reasonable doubt" here a mile wide. If she's was that drunk, then she's not a credible witness as to whether or not she consented BEFORE passing out. And when EXACTLY did she pass out anyway??? 5 seconds before the witness(es) saw them? And how exactly did the witness KNOW she was unconscious at that instant, did they walk up and check her pupils?

HE SAYS she consented.

SHE SAYS....well, she's not in a condition to say if she consented or not. And SHE PUT HERSELF into that condition.

I call that "Reasonable doubt". And, yes, I think the location bolsters that he wasn't trying to hide. This guy may be a putz, and he'd be no friend of mine, but I'd like to see something MORE before saying "guilty" to something this serious.

Don't like it? Fine. Then don't go out partying to a 0.24 Blood Alcohol Level. Whatever happened to personal responsibly on BOTH sides? Yes, he's responsible for his own actions. But SHE is also responsible for HER actions. In a case like this, I think her own irresponsibility COULD BE enough of a mitigating factor to call it a "Draw" wherein each party's own irresponsibility is matched by the other party's.

The were two witnesses that saw him on top of her and chased him off, because she looked unconscious. Those two heroes then chased him down and caught him for the police. If it wasn’t for those two, homeboy might be on Americas next Olympic team.
Sure the girl is a twit for allowing herself to get this loaded, but she could not consent, which is rape. Maybe parents, along with teaching their daughters about alcohol effects, also should be teaching their boys that an unresponsive girl does not mean she’s willing.

His father’s affidavit stating this rape as just “20 minutes of action” tells me everything where the kid got his attitudes. I wonder if he also has a daughter.,
0

#14 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,773
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 03 December 2017 - 01:44 PM

View PostLadybird, on 03 December 2017 - 01:30 PM, said:

The were two witnesses that saw him on top of her and chased him off, because she looked unconscious. Those two heroes then chased him down and caught him for the police. If it wasn’t for those two, homeboy might be on Americas next Olympic team.
Sure the girl is a twit for allowing herself to get this loaded, but she could not consent, which is rape. Maybe parents, along with teaching their daughters about alcohol effects, also should be teaching their boys that an unresponsive girl does not mean she’s willing.

His father’s affidavit stating this rape as just “20 minutes of action” tells me everything where the kid got his attitudes. I wonder if he also has a daughter.,

I'm totally in agreement with you here.
0

#15 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,380
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 03 December 2017 - 07:32 PM

View Postzurg, on 03 December 2017 - 12:52 PM, said:

Capital? She's not dead. The prosecution recommended 6 years. Law said minimum 2 years. Jury convicted him, judge sentenced to a reduced 6 months.

Here you go again, thinking there's reasonable doubt after a jury of 12, found him guilty of three felony counts.

I find your position entirely unreasonable. I find it disgusting that your focus is her level of intoxication. I guess in your world that means she was asking for it.


"Asking for it"? No. I'd put it more in the category of "Didn't do all that a reasonable and prudent person would have done to prevent it".

Look, I have plenty of sympathy for someone who comes into harm through no fault of their own. But there's enough of that out there in the world that I just don't have much left over for someone who puts themselves in harm's way.

The author George V. Higgins once said, in the 1970 novel Friends of Eddie Coyle on which the 1973 film was based, "Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." Well, this girl was stupid and learned the hard way how tough life can be. I'll save my sympathy for someone just a little less stupid. As far as I'm concerned, she should chalk it up as "lesson learned" and thank the Almighty that it only went that far and that she's not now a member of the Darwin club.


The example I've used more than once on this board is, suppose I walk into a biker bar and mouth off to the wrong person(s) and get the crap beat out of me. YES, the biker(s) would be the ones guilty of beating the crap out of me. But I think most here would be saying, "Smithee, you were a dumbass for doing that". and if the DA were to let the Bikers off lightly on the grounds that, but for me acting stupidly, the whole fight wouldn't have happened in the first place, and who would I be to argue with that? Why is this case any different?

Why is this case
0

#16 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,962
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 03 December 2017 - 08:18 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 03 December 2017 - 07:32 PM, said:

[/b]

"Asking for it"? No. I'd put it more in the category of "Didn't do all that a reasonable and prudent person would have done to prevent it".

Look, I have plenty of sympathy for someone who comes into harm through no fault of their own. But there's enough of that out there in the world that I just don't have much left over for someone who puts themselves in harm's way.

The author George V. Higgins once said, in the 1970 novel Friends of Eddie Coyle on which the 1973 film was based, "Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." Well, this girl was stupid and learned the hard way how tough life can be. I'll save my sympathy for someone just a little less stupid. As far as I'm concerned, she should chalk it up as "lesson learned" and thank the Almighty that it only went that far and that she's not now a member of the Darwin club.


The example I've used more than once on this board is, suppose I walk into a biker bar and mouth off to the wrong person(s) and get the crap beat out of me. YES, the biker(s) would be the ones guilty of beating the crap out of me. But I think most here would be saying, "Smithee, you were a dumbass for doing that". and if the DA were to let the Bikers off lightly on the grounds that, but for me acting stupidly, the whole fight wouldn't have happened in the first place, and who would I be to argue with that? Why is this case any different?

Why is this case



Some guy flashes a few dollars at a local bar, stuffs his fat wallet in his back pocket and strolls down the street. Should the person who lifts his wallet be punished for robbing him or be excused because the victim did not act prudently? Making a mistake is human. Taking advantage of that by stealing or raping that person is still criminal. Rape is a crime. Maybe you don't see it as rape because she was out cold?
0

#17 User is offline   Tea Party Hooligan 

  • I kick puppies
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 16,629
  • Joined: 27-May 03

Posted 04 December 2017 - 12:41 PM

Quote

In his appeal, Turner argued that contrary to what Deputy District Attorney Alaleh Kianerci repeatedly told jurors, the sexual assault happened near a three-sided trash bin, but not behind it, according to the Mercury News. Saying the assault happened behind the dumpster is “prejudicial” and implied that Turner was trying to hide what he was doing.


With this statement, he isn't denying the sexual assault, just that he wasn't trying to hide it, as the prosecutor claimed. Well, that makes it all better.
0

#18 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,380
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 04 December 2017 - 02:34 PM

View PostLadybird, on 03 December 2017 - 08:18 PM, said:

Some guy flashes a few dollars at a local bar, stuffs his fat wallet in his back pocket and strolls down the street. Should the person who lifts his wallet be punished for robbing him or be excused because the victim did not act prudently? Making a mistake is human. Taking advantage of that by stealing or raping that person is still criminal. Rape is a crime. Maybe you don't see it as rape because she was out cold?


I'm saying there may be reasonable doubt because we don't know WHEN she went "out cold".

Let's look at it scientifically:

I don't know her actually height/weight, so for the sake of discussion let's assume a typical 20yo college girl of about 5'3"-5'4" and 130-140 lb.

Report says her BAC was 0.24. This BAC Calculator says it would take a 140# female 7-8 shots (roughly 1/2 bottle) of 80 proof alcohol in the space of 1 hour to get there. 8 shots in an hour, or roughly 1 every 7.5 minutes? It's well within the sort of thing that happens at house parties.

But it's not going to hit immediately. Depending on physiology, metabolism, what she'd eaten and when, it won't even begin to hit for at least 30-60 minutes. She'll be on at least the 4th one by the time the 1st starts to hit. Which will then lower her inhibitions against having the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th one. Assuming she stops at 8, it with then peak at 0.24 BAC approximately 30 to 60 minutes after the 8th and then be back down to 0% BAC approximately 16 hours after that, "burning off" at approximately 1/2 drink per hour for a 140# female.

During that time, there will be a window before the alcohol fully hits that she appears reasonable coherent, even appears capable of given consent and even "getting things started". And THEN the alcohol hits. Like a ton of bricks. Or a freight train. Though the freight train analogy is probably best saved for the morning after.

NO, I can't say it went down like that. But I can't rule it out either. Hence, "Reasonable Doubt".

Because, that's what "Binge Drinking" is like. A phenomenon not exactly unheard of on college campuses.
0

#19 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,962
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 04 December 2017 - 03:03 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 04 December 2017 - 02:34 PM, said:

I'm saying there may be reasonable doubt because we don't know WHEN she went "out cold".

Let's look at it scientifically:

I don't know her actually height/weight, so for the sake of discussion let's assume a typical 20yo college girl of about 5'3"-5'4" and 130-140 lb.

Report says her BAC was 0.24. This BAC Calculator says it would take a 140# female 7-8 shots (roughly 1/2 bottle) of 80 proof alcohol in the space of 1 hour to get there. 8 shots in an hour, or roughly 1 every 7.5 minutes? It's well within the sort of thing that happens at house parties.

But it's not going to hit immediately. Depending on physiology, metabolism, what she'd eaten and when, it won't even begin to hit for at least 30-60 minutes. She'll be on at least the 4th one by the time the 1st starts to hit. Which will then lower her inhibitions against having the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th one. Assuming she stops at 8, it with then peak at 0.24 BAC approximately 30 to 60 minutes after the 8th and then be back down to 0% BAC approximately 16 hours after that, "burning off" at approximately 1/2 drink per hour for a 140# female.

During that time, there will be a window before the alcohol fully hits that she appears reasonable coherent, even appears capable of given consent and even "getting things started". And THEN the alcohol hits. Like a ton of bricks. Or a freight train. Though the freight train analogy is probably best saved for the morning after.

NO, I can't say it went down like that. But I can't rule it out either. Hence, "Reasonable Doubt".

Because, that's what "Binge Drinking" is like. A phenomenon not exactly unheard of on college campuses.

I know what binge drinking is. Believe me. I was a puker, meaning my body automatically hits the eject button (once into a washing machine) long before passing out or dying. But I have picked a friend off the sidewalk that was 30 seconds away from ending up like the girl in this story, barely concious with two meat heads standing over her.
After the witnesses shouted at Turner, he didn’t say “what do you think we’re doing? Mind your business!”. He took off. He knew what he did was wrong and wanted escape.
There’s a scene in Animal House (that would never be made today) of a similar situation. Unlike Kroger, Brock Turner chose the devil on his shoulder. He did three months in jail and should be grateful.

This post has been edited by Ladybird: 04 December 2017 - 03:08 PM

0

#20 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,508
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 04 December 2017 - 04:36 PM

View PostLadybird, on 03 December 2017 - 01:30 PM, said:

The were two witnesses that saw him on top of her and chased him off, because she looked unconscious. Those two heroes then chased him down and caught him for the police. If it wasn’t for those two, homeboy might be on Americas next Olympic team.
Sure the girl is a twit for allowing herself to get this loaded, but she could not consent, which is rape. Maybe parents, along with teaching their daughters about alcohol effects, also should be teaching their boys that an unresponsive girl does not mean she’s willing.

His father’s affidavit stating this rape as just “20 minutes of action” tells me everything where the kid got his attitudes. I wonder if he also has a daughter.,



Time and again we have found ourselves at polar opposites on various issues and things have gotten a touch heated. BUT, on this we are in complete and total agreement. Putting yourself in a bad situation may indicate a lack of good judgement or stupidity but that's it. The fact that this P.O.S. ran when confronted indicates he knew he did something wrong and was trying to avoid potential consequences. People run for two main reasons, fear of getting caught or simply fear. Why we he run from something if he was surrounded by people who would come to his aid if he had done nothing wrong?

I have two daughters, to say that this person would have dissapeared or been found in an 'altered state' is putting it mildly. I also have a feeling this little P.O.S. has a history and his parents had the money to make things simply go away. Those types are just as bad as any street thug, one has the means to buy their way out of trouble and it only escalates, the other simply uses the system. In the end it's we the people who suffer either way.


Oki
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users