aujeff11 6,243 Posted June 7, 2016 Author Share Posted June 7, 2016 Everyone should be aware that he was not convicted of rape, either. He was convicted of sexual assault, which carries much lighter sentences. She was raped and the guy admitted it. He should have paid the price for his twenty minutes of action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Everyone should be aware that he was not convicted of rape, either. He was convicted of sexual assault, which carries much lighter sentences. She was raped and the guy admitted it. He should have paid the price for his twenty minutes of action. He never admitted to raping her, and he was never convicted of raping her. People are making statements that the sentence is too light for rape, but he wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of three felonies, including sexual assault with the intent to rape, which carries a minimum sentence of 2 years. He was convicted of forcibly penetrating her with a foreign object, which also has a minimum sentence of three years. I agree that his sentence was too light, but people should understand what the convictions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Everyone should be aware that he was not convicted of rape, either. He was convicted of sexual assault, which carries much lighter sentences. She was raped and the guy admitted it. He should have paid the price for his twenty minutes of action. He never admitted to raping her, and he was never convicted of raping her. People are making statements that the sentence is too light for rape, but he wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of three felonies, including sexual assault with the intent to rape, which carries a minimum sentence of 2 years. He was convicted of forcibly penetrating her with a foreign object, which also has a minimum sentence of three years. I agree that his sentence was too light, but people should understand what the convictions were. I think the misunderstandings come from the fact that he has to register as a sex offender. To most, that immediately brings a rape conviction to mind in a case like this. Either way, I think we all agree, his sentence was too light. I would add especially given he has shown no remorse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Everyone should be aware that he was not convicted of rape, either. He was convicted of sexual assault, which carries much lighter sentences. She was raped and the guy admitted it. He should have paid the price for his twenty minutes of action. He never admitted to raping her, and he was never convicted of raping her. People are making statements that the sentence is too light for rape, but he wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of three felonies, including sexual assault with the intent to rape, which carries a minimum sentence of 2 years. He was convicted of forcibly penetrating her with a foreign object, which also has a minimum sentence of three years. I agree that his sentence was too light, but people should understand what the convictions were. I think the misunderstandings come from the fact that he has to register as a sex offender. To most, that immediately brings a rape conviction to mind in a case like this. Either way, I think we all agree, his sentence was too light. I would add especially given he has shown no remorse. He was charged with rape, and most people consider what he did to be rape, even if it falls outside of the legal definition of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted June 7, 2016 Author Share Posted June 7, 2016 This sentence was handed down while we were on vacation and I wasn't paying as much attention to the news. This is inexcusable. 6 months is what you get for some petty crime. It doesn't even rise to the level of a wrist slap. He should have been given a standard rape sentence (whatever that is) with perhaps a bit shaved off for having no criminal history. The minimum sentence (supposedly) was two years. Apparently, there is now an effort to recall the judge in the case. Personally I would have started with the 6 years the prosecution asked for, then maybe reduced it by a year or so for having no criminal history. It still feels like too little but the maximum is apparently 14 years, which seems like what you'd give for a more aggravated or violent assault (I realize all rapes are by definition a commission of violence, but there's definitely more violent versions of the crime). I hope the recall works. Judges are expecting to use good judgement. If they aren't able to do so, they shouldn't be judges. 6 years is still too lenient in my opinion but it would've been a start. People are being sentenced to prison for ten years and more for nonviolent crimes every day, so whenever a violent offense occurs, their sentence should be noticeably higher in my opinion. If a 20 year old consensually sleeps with a 15 year old and he easily gets ten years for statutory rape. So the guy that rapes a woman without consent should receive just as much punishment as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 21,583 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Everyone should be aware that he was not convicted of rape, either. He was convicted of sexual assault, which carries much lighter sentences. She was raped and the guy admitted it. He should have paid the price for his twenty minutes of action. He never admitted to raping her, and he was never convicted of raping her. People are making statements that the sentence is too light for rape, but he wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of three felonies, including sexual assault with the intent to rape, which carries a minimum sentence of 2 years. He was convicted of forcibly penetrating her with a foreign object, which also has a minimum sentence of three years. I agree that his sentence was too light, but people should understand what the convictions were. I think the misunderstandings come from the fact that he has to register as a sex offender. To most, that immediately brings a rape conviction to mind in a case like this. Either way, I think we all agree, his sentence was too light. I would add especially given he has shown no remorse. He was charged with rape, and most people consider what he did to be rape, even if it falls outside of the legal definition of rape. This is true. But he was actually convicted on three counts: Assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman Sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object Sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. The total combined maximum sentence he could have gotten for the three counts was 10 years. Six months is a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Everyone should be aware that he was not convicted of rape, either. He was convicted of sexual assault, which carries much lighter sentences. She was raped and the guy admitted it. He should have paid the price for his twenty minutes of action. He never admitted to raping her, and he was never convicted of raping her. People are making statements that the sentence is too light for rape, but he wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of three felonies, including sexual assault with the intent to rape, which carries a minimum sentence of 2 years. He was convicted of forcibly penetrating her with a foreign object, which also has a minimum sentence of three years. I agree that his sentence was too light, but people should understand what the convictions were. I think the misunderstandings come from the fact that he has to register as a sex offender. To most, that immediately brings a rape conviction to mind in a case like this. Either way, I think we all agree, his sentence was too light. I would add especially given he has shown no remorse. He was charged with rape, and most people consider what he did to be rape, even if it falls outside of the legal definition of rape. This is true. But he was actually convicted on three counts: Assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman Sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object Sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. The total combined maximum sentence he could have gotten for the three counts was 10 years. Six months is a joke. Yes, I mentioned those in an above post. I completely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,809 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 "The father of a former Stanford University athlete convicted on multiple charges of sexual assault has said his son should not have to go to prison for "20 minutes of action"." I could bang my head on a wall after reading this crap. It's bad enough that the rapist POS is expected to only serve three months, down from the laughable six month sentence. All are in jail too, not in prison which is where he belongs, he will be in a local jail. http://www.theguardi...ement?CMP=fb_us Sentences of one year or less are generally served in jails rather than prisons. Overcrowding is one reason, and another is the cost of transferring an inmate to a temporary classification facility and eventually a prison. In Georgia, for example, an inmate heading to a state prison is going to first likely spend several months in the classification & diagnostic facility in Jackson (also death row), before being sent to the prison they will serve their sentence in. If the sentence is a year or less, it's more cost effective to keep them in a local jail than transport and house them in another facility or two. I would also say that the closer security levels and conditions many jails operate under are worse than if a guy such as this were sent to prison. He would have likely been sent to a low security prison, medium at most. That said, 3-6 months of actual incarceration time for this is simply absurd. I know people that were sentenced to 5 years for burglary, and 10 years for armed robbery. They stole TV's and such, or they stole money at gunpoint. This guy stole another human being's dignity. Then I hear about 20 minutes of action. Murder can take only one second. That 20 minutes of action will follow her for the rest of her life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,137 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 I was gonna ask how was he charged w/ sexual assault and not rape, and then saw the ' foreign object ' charges. Not looking for details, but doesn't such action kinda show him to be even MORE twisted and depraved than merely having sex w/ her ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,809 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 I was gonna ask how was he charged w/ sexual assault and not rape, and then saw the ' foreign object ' charges. Not looking for details, but doesn't such action kinda show him to be even MORE twisted and depraved than merely having sex w/ her ? I know I asked you not to respond to me, and you have respected that. However, this is one of those rare issues where we both agree, so I'll throw in my hypothetical. I think as far as the charges are concerned, they consider the penis to be the foreign object. I have heard nothing indicating foreign objects other than that. That said, I agree that would indeed make him even more twisted and depraved than just raping her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 I was gonna ask how was he charged w/ sexual assault and not rape, and then saw the ' foreign object ' charges. Not looking for details, but doesn't such action kinda show him to be even MORE twisted and depraved than merely having sex w/ her ? Yep. But if you read the victim's full statement, apparently he did both (object and what I could see as traditional rape). I believe the "object" was sticks that were around the dumpster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,809 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 I was gonna ask how was he charged w/ sexual assault and not rape, and then saw the ' foreign object ' charges. Not looking for details, but doesn't such action kinda show him to be even MORE twisted and depraved than merely having sex w/ her ? Yep. But if you read the victim's full statement, apparently he did both (object and what I could see as traditional rape). I believe the "object" was sticks that were around the dumpster. I hadn't heard such, but damn. So he raped her himself, and then continued with sticks that were handy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 I was gonna ask how was he charged w/ sexual assault and not rape, and then saw the ' foreign object ' charges. Not looking for details, but doesn't such action kinda show him to be even MORE twisted and depraved than merely having sex w/ her ? Yep. But if you read the victim's full statement, apparently he did both (object and what I could see as traditional rape). I believe the "object" was sticks that were around the dumpster. I hadn't heard such, but damn. So he raped her himself, and then continued with sticks that were handy? Sounds like it. Also, she was told she would need to take another HIV test which is why I also assume it wasn't just objects or fingers. From her statement: Never mentioned me voicing consent, never mentioned us even speaking, a back rub. One more time, in public news, I learned that my ass and vagina were completely exposed outside, my breasts had been groped, fingers had been jabbed inside me along with pine needles and debris, my bare skin and head had been rubbing against the ground behind a dumpster, while an erect freshman was humping my half naked, unconscious body. But I don’t remember, so how do I prove I didn’t like it. Her full statement that she read in court: https://www.buzzfeed.com/katiejmbaker/heres-the-powerful-letter-the-stanford-victim-read-to-her-ra?utm_term=.fdGyMwpNRn#.nma4ODr7Zk After reading the statement yesterday, I was even more amazed at the sentence he was given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,137 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 Then he raped her ... What the hell ? It should be rape + assault + ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 Then he raped her ... What the hell ? It should be rape + assault + ... Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. She doesn't contend that he raped her, neither did the evidence suggest it. Read her letter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. She doesn't contend that he raped her, neither did the evidence suggest it. Read her letter. I did. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. She doesn't contend that he raped her, neither did the evidence suggest it. Read her letter. I did. Thanks. Okay, then you understand what I'm saying. I'm not defending him, I'm just correcting misinformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted June 8, 2016 Author Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. She doesn't contend that he raped her, neither did the evidence suggest it. Read her letter. Here is what the guy that chased the pervert down had to say:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3630103/Student-came-rescue-Stanford-rape-victim-speaks-judge-let-attacker-light-sentence.html Commendable couple guys. Glad to have some heroes who care in this world. One of them said he noticed that he was on her and she was lifeless so he checked, causing him to run. So he probably dry humped the girl, fingered her and was getting ready to stick his dick inside her before the Heroes showed up and CHASED the guy down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. She doesn't contend that he raped her, neither did the evidence suggest it. Read her letter. I did. Thanks. Okay, then you understand what I'm saying. I'm not defending him, I'm just correcting misinformation. We can agree to disagree on the minor details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,153 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The foreign object in this case were his fingers. They were the only thing inside her. Not his penis. Not a stick. Only his fingers. Sorry, just relating the facts. Well the fact that she had dirt and pine needles inside her body is a fact. They could have gotten there by his hands, either way, I think we are splitting hairs. Not really. There is a big difference between using fingers, or using a stick or using your penis. The foreign object in this case were his fingers. He still raped her though. If it was just his fingers there would be no reason for 2 HIV tests. She doesn't contend that he raped her, neither did the evidence suggest it. Read her letter. I did. Thanks. Okay, then you understand what I'm saying. I'm not defending him, I'm just correcting misinformation. We can agree to disagree on the minor details. Except the details you are talking about aren't minor at all. You guys were insinuating that he fingered, raped and used a stick to sexually assault her. Those aren't minor details. Certainly you see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.