Stanford Rape Case: Victim Letter Going Viral
- Thread starter kaotic
- Start date
Chauncey said:
I can tell you why it went viral:
1. They need this to make up for the loss they took on lyin' Jackie Coakley in the UVa case -- a loss they're still smarting from.
2. It's needed as payback for TRUMP -- pretty much the fact that he still dares to exist.
That's where this story derives its energies from. The disgusting "victim statement" -- and it's nothing short of disgusting -- has instantly become a new sacred text, one that must be read in the hushed reverential tones reserved for things of the most unspeakable pathos and truth. There are thousands of cunts and white-knights canting at all times right now about how that "amazing" statement and the incredibly "light" sentence -- which in fact amounts to a LIFE SENTENCE because of sex offender registration -- is making them "physically sick".
There is serious evil afoot here. But it's not in the actions of one drunk confused kid -- the evil is in our society and the hysterical extremes it has reached in pandering to female lies. It's very important to understand this.
I'll look into the case more, but really guys here are drinking too much of the manosphere kool aid.
I went to a party school. I've been drunk off my ass and in similar situations. You're both bombed and start hooking up, the girl passes out close to sex. I sure as hell am not going to attempt to have sex with a passed out chick.
Even in my drunkest moments I had the sense to say 'you know what, this can wait until tomorrow.' It's called self-restraint, and really I never got the too drunk or drugged out defense, cause let me tell you I've been there and have tried most things under the sun in my younger days. Even in my most bombed out moments, I still had my mind, maybe other people don't.
Even if she consented, then passed out and he decided hey what the hell I'll keep having sex with an unconscious girl behind a dumpster, that's fucked up in my mind. The kid testified he remembered what happened that night so he remembered making the choice to bang a girl who was unconscious.
And some of the stretches in this thread are laughable. Now the graduate students are 'probably virgins' and were 'jealous' how do you know that? Apparently all Stanford graduate students are sexless virgins now. Generalize much?
I love this forum, but I think it's time for a break or I'm just going to stick to the lifestyle section. FRAs are despicable, and I hate SJWs and feminism as much as the next guy. But it's getting to the point where most guys perspectives are completely warped from the constant influx of 'every girl is a hypergamous slut who rides the carousel just bangs bad boys, and I can't even consider that it's possible that a real rape happened here. If something goes against my view it's a conspiracy!'
I went to a party school. I've been drunk off my ass and in similar situations. You're both bombed and start hooking up, the girl passes out close to sex. I sure as hell am not going to attempt to have sex with a passed out chick.
Even in my drunkest moments I had the sense to say 'you know what, this can wait until tomorrow.' It's called self-restraint, and really I never got the too drunk or drugged out defense, cause let me tell you I've been there and have tried most things under the sun in my younger days. Even in my most bombed out moments, I still had my mind, maybe other people don't.
Even if she consented, then passed out and he decided hey what the hell I'll keep having sex with an unconscious girl behind a dumpster, that's fucked up in my mind. The kid testified he remembered what happened that night so he remembered making the choice to bang a girl who was unconscious.
And some of the stretches in this thread are laughable. Now the graduate students are 'probably virgins' and were 'jealous' how do you know that? Apparently all Stanford graduate students are sexless virgins now. Generalize much?
I love this forum, but I think it's time for a break or I'm just going to stick to the lifestyle section. FRAs are despicable, and I hate SJWs and feminism as much as the next guy. But it's getting to the point where most guys perspectives are completely warped from the constant influx of 'every girl is a hypergamous slut who rides the carousel just bangs bad boys, and I can't even consider that it's possible that a real rape happened here. If something goes against my view it's a conspiracy!'
Neo,
You're completely wrong about this. There is no "manosphere kool aid" involved.
There is relentless and hysterical 24/7 propaganda about this case in the media right now -- it's at saturation levels. The Year Zero cadres have gone into a frenzy over it for the reasons I described.
There is no "conspiracy". It's just a case where the jury reached a bad decision based on believing typical female lies. This happens all the time and it's nothing new, unfortunately. What's new is the sacred status accorded to this slut's lying tale.
Take the time to read that hysterical, LITERARY and attention whoring victim statement full of the most obvious lies and understand what it means. It's not that hard to understand it if you put two and two together.
You say "you'll read more later"; fine -- but it's a good idea to read first, and pontificate afterwards.
You're completely wrong about this. There is no "manosphere kool aid" involved.
There is relentless and hysterical 24/7 propaganda about this case in the media right now -- it's at saturation levels. The Year Zero cadres have gone into a frenzy over it for the reasons I described.
There is no "conspiracy". It's just a case where the jury reached a bad decision based on believing typical female lies. This happens all the time and it's nothing new, unfortunately. What's new is the sacred status accorded to this slut's lying tale.
Take the time to read that hysterical, LITERARY and attention whoring victim statement full of the most obvious lies and understand what it means. It's not that hard to understand it if you put two and two together.
You say "you'll read more later"; fine -- but it's a good idea to read first, and pontificate afterwards.
You want to read more about this case? Here is Turner's testimony:
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area...expected-take-stand-sexual-assault?source=pkg
One thing that no one seems to understand is that he NEVER EVEN FUCKED HER. He stuck a few fingers in her pussy -- when she was still fully conscious and wanted it.
For this, he's a sex offender for life and his life is essentially over.
Fuck. This. Gay. Earth. This is evil.
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area...expected-take-stand-sexual-assault?source=pkg
One thing that no one seems to understand is that he NEVER EVEN FUCKED HER. He stuck a few fingers in her pussy -- when she was still fully conscious and wanted it.
For this, he's a sex offender for life and his life is essentially over.
Fuck. This. Gay. Earth. This is evil.
Further. This was prosecuted EXPLICITLY as a "rape culture" hysteria case.
It was prosecuted to make an example of this kid because he stuck a few fingers in a drunken slut's cunt.
So now they have their "Haven Monahan" in the flesh.
How evil.
By the way: this lying bitch's "victim statement" was READ ON LIVE TV tonight by some CNN cunt anchor as if it was literally a new sacred text that was just discovered in the Temple.
There were thousands and thousands of US soldiers who went through worse than hell -- worse than torture -- in the Pacific theater during World War 2 and never wrote a f'ing word about it. But this whore's statement is an immediately sacred manuscript that deserves to be read to the nation.
This is straight up evil. Recognize it when you see it.
It was prosecuted to make an example of this kid because he stuck a few fingers in a drunken slut's cunt.
So now they have their "Haven Monahan" in the flesh.
How evil.
By the way: this lying bitch's "victim statement" was READ ON LIVE TV tonight by some CNN cunt anchor as if it was literally a new sacred text that was just discovered in the Temple.
There were thousands and thousands of US soldiers who went through worse than hell -- worse than torture -- in the Pacific theater during World War 2 and never wrote a f'ing word about it. But this whore's statement is an immediately sacred manuscript that deserves to be read to the nation.
This is straight up evil. Recognize it when you see it.
Wow. If his account is indeed accurate and true, not only is this the furthest thing from rape there could ever be, but it is also quite scary that men have to now worry about roving pairs of violent white knights intruding on any public lustful escapades with a willing and enthusiastic lover because they've been trained to view all males with natural virility as a threat to public safety.
What you have is in fact actually a sweet and beautiful scene, two young drunk kids slipping and falling and going at it right where they fell. Not too long ago in history someone would have walked by these kids and smirked, passing by with a smile at the thought of young lust. Now such a scene is cause to use violence to restrain the male and send him off to the gulag for societal castration.
A disgusting and sad outcome if there ever was one.
What you have is in fact actually a sweet and beautiful scene, two young drunk kids slipping and falling and going at it right where they fell. Not too long ago in history someone would have walked by these kids and smirked, passing by with a smile at the thought of young lust. Now such a scene is cause to use violence to restrain the male and send him off to the gulag for societal castration.
A disgusting and sad outcome if there ever was one.
It's extremely important to realize what happened in this thread.
We are supposed to be the ones who have drunk the "manosphere kool aid", right? We are the ones who see false rape accusations everywhere, even when "the system is working", right?
Wrong. Just the opposite is the case. The full court Year Zero media press on this -- the incredible social pressure brought to bear in support of this disgusting "victim statement" -- caused otherwise good and thoughtful forum members to instantly parrot the most grotesque lies, quite as if they were good Year Zero comrades.
IT WAS THAT EASY.
Otherwise thinking people were instantly terrorized by the Big Lie of "Campus Rape" and themselves drank the nasty YZ kool aid without even knowing it.
That's terrible.
We are supposed to be the ones who have drunk the "manosphere kool aid", right? We are the ones who see false rape accusations everywhere, even when "the system is working", right?
Wrong. Just the opposite is the case. The full court Year Zero media press on this -- the incredible social pressure brought to bear in support of this disgusting "victim statement" -- caused otherwise good and thoughtful forum members to instantly parrot the most grotesque lies, quite as if they were good Year Zero comrades.
IT WAS THAT EASY.
Otherwise thinking people were instantly terrorized by the Big Lie of "Campus Rape" and themselves drank the nasty YZ kool aid without even knowing it.
That's terrible.
Alright, after reading the opposite views, I hear you guys.
But one thing I dont get is why he ran away?
If im fingering a girl (consensually) behind the dumpster, and were both enjoying it/having a good time, and two bicycle fags approach me asking what im doing id promptly tell them to fuck off and get back to what I was doing.
Yeah you could argue that he was scared, but the fact that he ran away is a bit of an issue.
But with all these new perspectives coming to light, and some good points made by TLOZ, im not sure where I stand until I see some more facts.
But one thing I dont get is why he ran away?
If im fingering a girl (consensually) behind the dumpster, and were both enjoying it/having a good time, and two bicycle fags approach me asking what im doing id promptly tell them to fuck off and get back to what I was doing.
Yeah you could argue that he was scared, but the fact that he ran away is a bit of an issue.
But with all these new perspectives coming to light, and some good points made by TLOZ, im not sure where I stand until I see some more facts.
Couple of thoughts here:
(1) I think jumping straight to the suggestion the jury got it wrong is disingenuous given the way we talk about how rape victims should be reporting to police and then leaving it up to a court to decide, that a court is the arbiter of fact. You have to remember courts are very familiar, back to fucking Blackstone in 1760, with the idea that the horror of a crime of rape is so great is can and sometimes does overwhelm juries' reasoning, and that therefore you have to guard against false accusations.
Do juries get it wrong on rape? Yes. Did they do so in this case? If you go only on the statistical occurrence of false rape accusations, ranging from the FBI's bullshit numbers to more objective surveys, there is a 50-90% chance that they did not get it wrong in this case. The same process that produced a knockout result against Gawker for Hulk Hogan -- trial by jury -- is the same process that produced a conviction on all counts against this kid for the charges as alleged.
You can't have it both ways. If you're going to push for rape victims to report to the police and present their accusations before a jury, you have to accept the idea that generally courts know what they're doing. And you have to accept the risk of a wrongful conviction and hope that the appeal process or subsequent investigation eventually vindicates those wrongly accused. Until the Illuminati produce mind-reading gear and universal CCTV surveillance everywhere, that position is not going to change.
(2) The media hysteria over this is in part manufactured, but I think the real target is the justice system itself. The du jour change.org petition isn't calling for the state to appeal the sentence, it's calling for the judge who sentenced the guy to 6 months to be sacked.
This is the aspect of the case you should all be fucking trembling in your boots over.
You should be hoping to high heaven some government official has sufficient guts to hold his ground and respect the independence of the judiciary, because it's the one real bulwark against the rule of the mob that you have in Western civilisation. A government that folds to this campaign and dismisses a sitting judge because he didn't make a decision that the mob liked is a government that will just as happily dismiss a sitting judge who applies the law against the government simply because it's the law.
(3) Six months is a short sentence for rape, but again, you have to have faith in the judge as well. He explicitly took into account the guy's prior good record and that the media attention on this case is going to be a significant punishment in and of itself. Sentences are open to appeal by the prosecution.
(4) It's armchair quarterbacking, but this guy had a retarded attorney, or an attorney who didn't have any experience handling sexual assault defence in the glare of publicity. For a start, the attorney was male. Bad idea. Jian Ghomeshi's smartest move was to hire a woman to defend him on these cases. Second, if the attorney made the sort of stupid remark that "he got an erection because it was cold" (and I accept that's coming from the 'victim', not the trial transcript) then it belies the sort of attorney who doesn't ask how a jury is going to perceive the allegation made.
(5) More generally, I always roll my eyes on the idea of "victim impact statements". They've only become popular in courtrooms in the past fifteen years or so, and they are slaps in the face of every judge who's required to hear them. Their very existence is stating to the judge "You are an ivory tower intellectual and not a human being, you can't appreciate the effect this event had on me, me, me, and I'm going to harangue you with how this event affected me, me, me because I am an infant who can't accept the idea of the rule of law and that a judge generally isn't put in that position for his fucking charm." More practically, you can't cross-examine on their content, so -- as with this case -- it's open to the victim to crap on with any amount of unverified or questionable assertions in the hope of influencing the judge into a harder sentence.
(6) It would not surprise me if that victim impact statement was not the woman's own work. 7,200 words, and from beginning to end the same tone, flow, and rhythm to it of an xojane article -- that is, written by an English graduate. Compare that with the father's victim impact statement which is about 300 words or so and has nothing near the same level of professionalism to it.
(1) I think jumping straight to the suggestion the jury got it wrong is disingenuous given the way we talk about how rape victims should be reporting to police and then leaving it up to a court to decide, that a court is the arbiter of fact. You have to remember courts are very familiar, back to fucking Blackstone in 1760, with the idea that the horror of a crime of rape is so great is can and sometimes does overwhelm juries' reasoning, and that therefore you have to guard against false accusations.
Do juries get it wrong on rape? Yes. Did they do so in this case? If you go only on the statistical occurrence of false rape accusations, ranging from the FBI's bullshit numbers to more objective surveys, there is a 50-90% chance that they did not get it wrong in this case. The same process that produced a knockout result against Gawker for Hulk Hogan -- trial by jury -- is the same process that produced a conviction on all counts against this kid for the charges as alleged.
You can't have it both ways. If you're going to push for rape victims to report to the police and present their accusations before a jury, you have to accept the idea that generally courts know what they're doing. And you have to accept the risk of a wrongful conviction and hope that the appeal process or subsequent investigation eventually vindicates those wrongly accused. Until the Illuminati produce mind-reading gear and universal CCTV surveillance everywhere, that position is not going to change.
(2) The media hysteria over this is in part manufactured, but I think the real target is the justice system itself. The du jour change.org petition isn't calling for the state to appeal the sentence, it's calling for the judge who sentenced the guy to 6 months to be sacked.
This is the aspect of the case you should all be fucking trembling in your boots over.
You should be hoping to high heaven some government official has sufficient guts to hold his ground and respect the independence of the judiciary, because it's the one real bulwark against the rule of the mob that you have in Western civilisation. A government that folds to this campaign and dismisses a sitting judge because he didn't make a decision that the mob liked is a government that will just as happily dismiss a sitting judge who applies the law against the government simply because it's the law.
(3) Six months is a short sentence for rape, but again, you have to have faith in the judge as well. He explicitly took into account the guy's prior good record and that the media attention on this case is going to be a significant punishment in and of itself. Sentences are open to appeal by the prosecution.
(4) It's armchair quarterbacking, but this guy had a retarded attorney, or an attorney who didn't have any experience handling sexual assault defence in the glare of publicity. For a start, the attorney was male. Bad idea. Jian Ghomeshi's smartest move was to hire a woman to defend him on these cases. Second, if the attorney made the sort of stupid remark that "he got an erection because it was cold" (and I accept that's coming from the 'victim', not the trial transcript) then it belies the sort of attorney who doesn't ask how a jury is going to perceive the allegation made.
(5) More generally, I always roll my eyes on the idea of "victim impact statements". They've only become popular in courtrooms in the past fifteen years or so, and they are slaps in the face of every judge who's required to hear them. Their very existence is stating to the judge "You are an ivory tower intellectual and not a human being, you can't appreciate the effect this event had on me, me, me, and I'm going to harangue you with how this event affected me, me, me because I am an infant who can't accept the idea of the rule of law and that a judge generally isn't put in that position for his fucking charm." More practically, you can't cross-examine on their content, so -- as with this case -- it's open to the victim to crap on with any amount of unverified or questionable assertions in the hope of influencing the judge into a harder sentence.
(6) It would not surprise me if that victim impact statement was not the woman's own work. 7,200 words, and from beginning to end the same tone, flow, and rhythm to it of an xojane article -- that is, written by an English graduate. Compare that with the father's victim impact statement which is about 300 words or so and has nothing near the same level of professionalism to it.
Neo - I agree with some of the things you say about the "manosphere kook aid" and I've got a history on this forum of pointing things like that out but you are making statements that aren't consistent with what is being reported. He didn't have sex with her. It was digital penetration. He was convicted of sexual assault, not rape, even though the media spins things into him being convicted of rape.
I don't think the sentence isn't light. He has to register as a sex offender which lasts for his entire life. He was very remorseful and said things such as "I can never forgive myself" although the media tries to spin that also. He has no prior convictions or problems in his past that suggest this night was anything more than a young kid who was so wasted that he couldn't think.
The media tries to make it look like he only got six months in jail for rape. The truth is that he got six months in jail and a lifetime of being a registered sex offender for sexual assault. There is a difference.
Also, the girl and her letter are disgusting. Perhaps the judge was smart enough to take the girl's character into consideration. I know a lot of people won't get this but that letter says a lot about the girl's attitude and the judge may have more of an understanding of this attitude since he witnessed the trial. People need to cut this kid some slack for being young, foolish and wasted drunk or they need to talk about what a drunken cheating skank the girl is. The double standard of expecting him to behave as if he was sober but treating the girl as if she did nothing wrong because she was drunk is bullshit.
I don't think the sentence isn't light. He has to register as a sex offender which lasts for his entire life. He was very remorseful and said things such as "I can never forgive myself" although the media tries to spin that also. He has no prior convictions or problems in his past that suggest this night was anything more than a young kid who was so wasted that he couldn't think.
The media tries to make it look like he only got six months in jail for rape. The truth is that he got six months in jail and a lifetime of being a registered sex offender for sexual assault. There is a difference.
Also, the girl and her letter are disgusting. Perhaps the judge was smart enough to take the girl's character into consideration. I know a lot of people won't get this but that letter says a lot about the girl's attitude and the judge may have more of an understanding of this attitude since he witnessed the trial. People need to cut this kid some slack for being young, foolish and wasted drunk or they need to talk about what a drunken cheating skank the girl is. The double standard of expecting him to behave as if he was sober but treating the girl as if she did nothing wrong because she was drunk is bullshit.
I'm still undecided on what I think happened because there are conflicting stories. Does anyone know if the bicyclists testified in the trial? Turner running away from them means a lot less if he did this after stumbling away from the girl and after the guys confronted him. The other stories I've read make it seem like those guys saw him and he jumped up off the girl and started running.
He ran away because he was drunk and scared. Read the testimony I posted above.
This has no bearing on guilt or innocence. It's up to the prosecution to prove guilt -- beyond a reasonable doubt.
The idea that a reasonable doubt standard was met in this case is self-evidently ludicrous. And that's why it was prosecuted as a show trial.
Again, this is from the prosecutor's statement:
What more is there to say?
This has no bearing on guilt or innocence. It's up to the prosecution to prove guilt -- beyond a reasonable doubt.
The idea that a reasonable doubt standard was met in this case is self-evidently ludicrous. And that's why it was prosecuted as a show trial.
Again, this is from the prosecutor's statement:
What more is there to say?
Can we make one thing crystal fucking clear in this thread since guys want to jump in with their opinions even though they haven't read a damn thing about this case other than headlines?
There was a not a rape. He was not charged with rape. He was not convicted of rape. He fingered the girl and was convicted of sexual assault.
There was a not a rape. He was not charged with rape. He was not convicted of rape. He fingered the girl and was convicted of sexual assault.
Agreed with LOZ. This case smells like bullshit.
I'm wondering how the jury decision went down.
He was convicted of "sexual assault."
How is sexual assault defined? Sexual advances without consent. Feminists argue since she was drunk, she therefore couldn't consent. That's all they convicted this young man for. The jury had to agree, however, that drunk women cannot give consent.
Knowing California, the jury was stacked with low-T betas and brainwashed feminist women. Must have been a nightmare for his defense team. The defense had to go in fighting against the dogma of drunk women being unable to give consent.
The idea that a drunk women cannot be responsible for her actions is beyond absurd. Coddling women from their retardation means sending innocent young men to prison? Broken.
I'm wondering how the jury decision went down.
He was convicted of "sexual assault."
How is sexual assault defined? Sexual advances without consent. Feminists argue since she was drunk, she therefore couldn't consent. That's all they convicted this young man for. The jury had to agree, however, that drunk women cannot give consent.
Knowing California, the jury was stacked with low-T betas and brainwashed feminist women. Must have been a nightmare for his defense team. The defense had to go in fighting against the dogma of drunk women being unable to give consent.
The idea that a drunk women cannot be responsible for her actions is beyond absurd. Coddling women from their retardation means sending innocent young men to prison? Broken.
Wow. It seems that Lizard of Oz is highly triggered by this and he's going in for the kill! Sometimes we need someone like him to fully analyze cases like this where things seem fishy, but it's not immediately obvious what is wrong.
I can think of a direct example in my own life where I was the victim in the same way that this girl was a victim. About 10 years ago, I went home with a slut while extremely drunk. By her own admission, she was only moderately drunk. I have absolutely no recollection of the sexual encounter. While I was fucking her in my state of blackout drunkenness she stuck her finger up my arse. How do I know this? She complained the next day that she got some shit on her finger.
I didn't ask her to finger my arsehole, and I'm fairly certain I wouldn't have enjoyed it. Yet I was able to play it off as collateral damage of getting that shitfaced drunk.
I can think of a direct example in my own life where I was the victim in the same way that this girl was a victim. About 10 years ago, I went home with a slut while extremely drunk. By her own admission, she was only moderately drunk. I have absolutely no recollection of the sexual encounter. While I was fucking her in my state of blackout drunkenness she stuck her finger up my arse. How do I know this? She complained the next day that she got some shit on her finger.
I didn't ask her to finger my arsehole, and I'm fairly certain I wouldn't have enjoyed it. Yet I was able to play it off as collateral damage of getting that shitfaced drunk.
Paracelsus said:
First, no "rape" occurred here, he was convicted of three counts of "sexual assault." Next, there are no "statistics" and no need for "statistics" when one has access to the crucial testimony. And it is publicly available. The girl is an obvious and histrionic liar. And I don't "push" for anything. "Rape" victims are few and far between, and real rapes, violent drag into the bushes rapes, are vanishingly rare on college campuses, and not committed by young white male college students. The whole campus rape lie is as manufactured as the lunatic McMartin "pedophile" witch-hunt that destroyed so many lives, and is no less outrageous.
Samseau said:
In many jurisdictions, "sexual penetration without consent" is charged rather than rape. Putting your fingers or your dick inside a person in these circumstances would fit that particular charge.
Scoundrel
Kingfisher
She was drunk. He was drunk. Everyone at the party was drunk.
Drunkedy drunk-drunk. Welcome to Drunko World, where nothing makes sense, and everyone is mentally retarded.
How can you decide a case like this? From his statements and hers, I call it a wash. They're all morons.
Stay away from booze & drugs, kids. The shit just isn't good for you. And keep a very far distance from girls who like to get loaded. They're really not good for you.
HonantheBarbarian said:
As he said in his own words, the men started to put him in a headlock and try to restrain him.
Imagine of you're rolling around on the ground fingering a girl who's loving it and the next thing you know two guys are choking you and restraining you.
The kid was screaming "help", the only thing he knew was that two random guys were attacking him, it's perfectly reasonable that he'd try to get away.