• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Brock Turner leaves jail after serving 3 months for sexual assault

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...-turner-release-jail/index.html?client=safari

Our justice system is a ****ing joke. Hopefully someone has the good sense to kill this ****er on scene the NEXT TIME.
1. Good for Brock Turner he should never have been convicted on that evidence in the first place.

2. No the system isn't a "****ing joke".


Never mind psychological toll this takes on the victim. Never mind that she now cannot even trust the justice system to protect her. Never mind that fact that rape is one of the worst crimes a human can commit...let's look at this from the one stand point you clearly don't have the stomach for.
Beside rape not being the worst crime a person can commit, he wasn't convicted of raping anyone.





He got a light sentence because a probation report done - upon which the sentence is based - recommended a light sentence. The victim had input into the probation report and was apparently at one point fine with the light sentence though she apparently later changed her mind.
In case you want to use it.

 
While I am not the person you addressed: I am not afraid. He does not deserve the death penalty for rape.

There is little doubt that his sentence was too light. Completely leaving aside the issue of the justifiability of the death penalty, the severity of the crime in question does not mean we need to go to the most extreme penalty possible as a form of punishment.



It's a very serious crime. But its not a capital offense.



Justice is not simply about "doing what the victim wants."

More to the point, it is sadly true that she will have emotional issues as a result of this incident. Killing her attacker is not going to make that go away. It might not even improve her mental state.



Not necessarily, that depends a great deal on local laws and the situation.

In Turner's case, apparently two students approached him during the attack. He fled, and they apprehended him. They would not be justified using deadly force before they determined what was happening; or when he fled the scene; or while apprehending him, as he was unarmed.

More to the point, justice is not about finding excuses to ignore or skip due process and go straight to killing people. Even if it fails occasionally, and given that we know from the start that no system is perfect: We are much better off with neutral parties and a jury of peers making a determination of guilt and punishment, rather than encouraging vigilantism.

It is also quite evident that you're driven not by a rational approach to the situation, but an emotional reaction of "rape bad, therefore kill rapist." That doesn't sound like a particularly sophisticated or nuanced approach to the problems the Turner case presents.

All I see here is a bit of pissing and moaning about what is "right" and "justified." What is right and justified is not perform an act so vile that it can corrupt the very moral fiber of the victim. Turning them into something they are not.

Rape is a God awful evil crime. And it isn't an accident. Is willful. It is animalistic. It is VILE. It isn't some "accidental" crime. It is a crime that is truly violent. And the fact that you want to piss and moan about the death penalty in general says a lot about you. There are some truly awful people in this world. People who rape children, sell them on the black market, kidnap young girls and drug them, rape them, sell them as sex slaves. They rape their SOUL. Not just their bodies. And you want to tell me those people are worthy of breathing the same air as YOU? The person who is so kind hearted that you don't believe in the death penalty?

Not all solutions have to be "nuanced" and "complicated." Some are pretty ****ing simple really, as simple as not committing the crime really. You don't want to be killed for rape? Don't rape! Simple.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Judges have a responsibility to ensure that the punishment they mete out is commiserate with the crime. They can consider the wishes of the victim and the know-nothing probation officer but they have a greater obligation to society as a whole. 3 months is not commiserate with the crime and it is not in the best interest of society to unleash an unremorseful rapist who doesn't believe he did anything wrong.

Un Remorseful. Well said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wait...you forgot he wants them murdered at the scene. No trial.

That's the ticket.

Even better. On scene. Save us some taxpayer money when the low life is caught in the act. Not my fault you feel sympathy for a rapist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1 - Do you feel the same about victims who ask for harsh sentences? Or more to the point should the victim's wishes matter at all?

2 - Yes the probation reports looks potential for recidivism because that is a element in incarceration and judges are required to factor it into their decision.

2 - The sentence comports with the law. I'd suggest if you want harsher sexual assault sentences talk to your legislator. Personally I think he deserved much more but given my points above and the fact that the sentence met all the legal requirements I am not going hang the judge over it.

So you feel it was too short of a sentence, but it was legal. So there was nothing morally reprehensible about this incident? 3 months? For rape? Really? How can this not enrage you as a member of the human species? Rape isn't some "accidental crime." It isn't even a crime to feed yourself. Holy **** what kind of society feels 3 months is ok for rape?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1. Good for Brock Turner he should never have been convicted on that evidence in the first place.

2. No the system isn't a "****ing joke".


Beside rape not being the worst crime a person can commit, he wasn't convicted of raping anyone.






In case you want to use it.


He shouldn't be convicted of rape for fingering a passed out drunk girl? Hm. Sorry. No. **** him. He should have been convicted and she have been given a MUCH stiffer sentence.

What? You think be fell finger first into her *****?

I don't know. I seem to prefer my sexual partners to be conscious. Never had a problem with a partner being passed out during sex. Seems that would be a good time to STOP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Even better. On scene. Save us some taxpayer money when the low life is caught in the act. Not my fault you feel sympathy for a rapist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That whole innocent until proven guilty. Don't let that get in your way. No one has ever been accused of rape and it was a false accusation.
 
So you feel it was too short of a sentence, but it was legal. So there was nothing morally reprehensible about this incident? 3 months? For rape? Really? How can this not enrage you as a member of the human species? Rape isn't some "accidental crime." It isn't even a crime to feed yourself. Holy **** what kind of society feels 3 months is ok for rape?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

7 years - on average - is okay for taking a life. I don't like that either. Look I'm not saying I think 3 months is enough for a sexual assault, under the law he was charged it wasn't rape btw. What I'm arguing against is all this vitriol leveled against the judge. He did his job - he applied what discretion he has within the bounds of the law. The legislature decided that under some circumstances 6 months (and that was the actual sentence btw) is enough for certain sexual assaults. The judge felt that this case fit the bill for the shorter sentence and I have no factual basis to argue that he was wrong - and neither do you.

Your argument is with the people who drafted the law, not the guy who applied it. That's all I'm saying.
 
Turner was remorseful fwiw. It's so noted in the probation report.

What is best for society? What factors into "what is best for society"?

The punishment was 6 months. I don't think it's enough but that strictly an emotional reaction and not based on anything factual. I didn't look at the evidence, I didn't see the defendant, I didn't hear the words of the victim or the defendant, I didn't read the probation report and it's assessment of whether or not he's likely to do it again. In short I have absolutely no basis to dispute the sentence other than "well I don't think it's enough."

The judge does this for a living and, again for whatever it's worth, he is well respected and has a good reputation. Maybe he made a mistake here. I'm not in any position to judge that. Neither are you.

Protests Continue in Fight to Recall Santa Clara County Judge in Brock Turner Case | NBC Bay Area

From CNN:

Outraged by what they believed was an unusually light sentence, critics led by Stanford law professor Michele Dauber launched a campaign to recall Persky.

While examining Perksy's record, Dauber found a case involving the plumber, Robert Chain.

The 48-year-old was arrested in May 2014 and accused of downloading pornographic images of children.

Persky sentenced him to four days in jail.

According to Dauber's research, others convicted of similar crimes in Santa Clara County got at least six months in jail. Brock Turner judge recuses himself in child porn case - CNN.com
 
And there it is. You don't have the stomach for justice. Not my problem. I wonder how you would feel if you had a family member raped by their own father...only to see similar bull**** go on in the trial and watch that poor child have to be sent back to live with that bastard.

Maybe you don't have the stomach because you didn't have a best friend who went down a dark path and raped his ex wife after stalking her?

There is true darkness in this world. And it deserves to be snuffed out in a JUST society. Not my fault you lack the emotional maturity to stomach that idea.

You sir, don't know what the **** you're talking about. I mean that in both a literal and figurative sense. You also have a severely warped sense of what is just.

Just like with Constitutional law, I'm not going to spend more than few minutes on this because you either wouldn't read an at-length explanation or you wouldn't care. But here's why your opinion on this, and the opinions of everyone else who wants this guy's head is wrong.

1. You don't know the facts
2. You haven't read the arguments
3. You weren't in that courtroom to watch the case
4. You haven't read the probation officer's report
5. You don't know any of the evidence.
6. You don't know the law

So now that you know that you know none of the above, you need to calm down and stop calling for the death of someone who's been tried and convicted.

It's hysteria like this that gets bad laws passed and leads to a system that's already far more punitive than people like you realize.
 
All I see here is a bit of pissing and moaning about what is "right" and "justified."
1) Your initial argument was that people were "too afraid" to admit they did not think rape is a capital crime. Thanks for not bothering to acknowledge that you were wrong.

2) The reason why I am discussing what is justified is because that is a critical part of determining whether or not something should deserve the maximum possible sentence.

3) Your response is basically to stamp your foot, and make a bunch of emotional appeals. That's not impressive.


What is right and justified is not perform an act so vile that it can corrupt the very moral fiber of the victim. Turning them into something they are not.
Thanks for the nonsense.

Yes, rape can have major psychological effects, as I acknowledged in my post. But it does not "corrupt the moral fiber of the victim."


Rape is a God awful evil crime. And it isn't an accident. Is willful. It is animalistic. It is VILE. It isn't some "accidental" crime. It is a crime that is truly violent.
I never EVER said that this incident, or rape in general, is an accident. Nor is that any part of my claim.

I am simply pointing out that it is not the worst possible crime, and does not deserve the maximum possible penalty.


And the fact that you want to piss and moan about the death penalty in general says a lot about you.
The fact that you did not read my post says far more about you, and your position.

I specifically OMITTED any discussion about whether the death penalty is valid. Read closer next time.


There are some truly awful people in this world. People who rape children, sell them on the black market, kidnap young girls and drug them, rape them, sell them as sex slaves. They rape their SOUL. Not just their bodies. And you want to tell me those people are worthy of breathing the same air as YOU?
:roll:

First of all, you've now lumped together 5 separate crimes, each of which would draw separate charges and punishments:

• pedophilia
• kidnapping
• human trafficking
• involuntarily drugging a child
• raping a child

That has NOTHING to do with this case. In this instance, Turner and his 22 year old victim were intoxicated. Two other students bumped into them behind a fraternity, and realized that Turner was on top of her while she was unconscious. Subsequent tests showed some type of penetrating trauma.

There is no question that he raped her, as she was absolutely incapable of consent. Nor am I in any way minimizing his crime. There is also no question that what Turner did was completely different than someone who kidnaps, drugs, rapes and traffics a child.


Not all solutions have to be "nuanced" and "complicated." Some are pretty ****ing simple really, as simple as not committing the crime really. You don't want to be killed for rape? Don't rape! Simple.
Simple? OK then, here is simple:

There is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime. None, zero, nada, zip zilch.

Next time, try to present a rational argument that shows a passing familiarity with the facts of the case, ktxh
 
He shouldn't be convicted of rape for fingering a passed out drunk girl? Hm. Sorry. No. **** him. He should have been convicted and she have been given a MUCH stiffer sentence.
iLOL
No he should not have been convicted of such as there is a separate law that covers rape and there is no evidence that he engaged in said criminal act.


What? You think be fell finger first into her *****?
You like creating straw-men don't you?
While they were both intoxicated she can not remember what happened while he can. The only evidence that exists is that she consented, and nothing exists to say she didn't.


I don't know. I seem to prefer my sexual partners to be conscious. Never had a problem with a partner being passed out during sex. Seems that would be a good time to STOP.
This is you accepting an unproven narrative.
Not being able to remember what occurred does not mean she was passed out before or during the act.





Two other students bumped into them behind a fraternity, and realized that Turner was on top of her while she was unconscious.
According to the police report, which is based on their initial statements.

Two students, Jonsson & Arndt, rode by on their bikes, thought they saw hip thrusting by Turner, and "they both talked about it and thought it was a mutual interaction ... and continued riding." Then one of them got a weird feeling and wanted to check because it appeared to him that she wasn't moving. They then got off their bikes ten yards away. (Which is weird that they didn't just turn around.)
Their accounts start to differ at this point.
One says he yelled "hey" and then Turner got up and ran, where he then checked on the girl before pursuing Turner.
The other says as he approached, Turner got off and ran away while his friend pursued him. He then checked on her and noticed she was breathing but not responding.



There is no question that he raped her,
No. There was no evidence of any rape.
 
Murder all rapists! That's the ticket!!!!

Well, he did accidentally stumble on a kernel of truth: as a general matter, you may be entitled to an instruction on justified use of deadly force in defense of a third party to defend them from rape.

Of course, everything turns on the facts.
 
Back
Top Bottom