1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Stanford swimmer, the rape, and the letter the victim read in court

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Double Down, Jun 3, 2016.

  1. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I'm not such a big fan of these victim statements as inputs into the sentencing phase. What if the victim isn't so articulate? So sympathetic? Do we just chalk it up to good rapist luck if his victim is a heavily tattooed gum-smacking hairdresser rather than a quasi-Ivy Leaguer?
     
  2. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    It didn't matter here. She did everything right and he all but walked.
     
  3. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    I was in his inbox. I used words like asinine and reprehensible. His response was "Thank you for your thoughts." Good man, I don't envy him either.

    That kid got six months after being found guilty on three counts including rape from a judge who went to Stanford. I can't help but wonder how the sentence would have differed had he been a black or Mexican kid from East L.A. who was caught raping an unconscious drunk college girl behind a dumpster. I imagine his parents making 150k didn't hurt his chances either.
     
    Donny in his element likes this.
  4. cjericho

    cjericho Well-Known Member

    Yes. And especially if it's a family member or friend. Would have to be real proud if that happens.
     
  5. Tweener

    Tweener Well-Known Member

    Some judges are the worst. Looking out for the defendant even more than the victim.
     
  6. Tweener

    Tweener Well-Known Member

    “A prison sentence would have a severe impact on him," Persky said at Turner's sentencing on Thursday. "I think he will not be a danger to others."

    I thought criminal trials were also about justice for victims, not merely ensuring safety for the public.

    Of course he won't be a danger to others, now that he knows he's cooked if he so much as crosses the street outside of a crosswalk. But that doesn't do anything for the victim. This is some serious bullshit.
     
  7. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    I'm not sure, in the context of what was happening in that courtroom, she did "everything right."

    She wrote a powerful letter that journalists and victim advocates love. Heck, I think it's an extraordinary letter, and something worth really meditating on. Few people have ever been so articulate with their rage, and there's real value in that. We can learn from that.

    But the letter also makes assertions about the legal process - specifically, how she was cross-examined, and a defendant's right to claim whatever a defendant wants to claim in the pursuit of acquittal - that I could imagine a judge being less than amused by. After a punishing trial, to excoriate the defense, probation officers and the media - more or less, people doing their jobs, I coild see a judge hardening against that. Putting myself in the judge's shoes, I could see myself, weary after a year of legal macinations, going with probation's recommendations, which at least seem to stem from conversations with the woman that she claimed, in the letter was misinterpreted.

    As for the Mercury-News column, it was a bit short for my taste, and not necessarily the most impassioned, eloquent piece of writing I've seen.
     
  8. ThomsonONE

    ThomsonONE Member

    This is why mandatory minimums were created, so corrupt, stupid or negligent judges couldn't give ridiculous sentences like this. No one should ever have lifetime job security, the few irresponsible ruin it for the responsible majority. There is no question of guilt or innocence here, no chance of an innocent defendant being convicted. This judge needs to be removed, but we all know nothing will happen. People will complain, then go back to their facebook or twitter feeds and move on.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    That'll show me! That would be sweet!
     
  10. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    No.

    Mandatory minimums were created years ago to deter the drug trade - they didn't, in the least - and as ways for state politicians to seem tough on crime by standing behind some parent of a child victim while they passed a law that had unintended consquences.

    Mandatory minimums are a complete boondoggle - miscarriages of justice far beyond what you think may have happened here. It crowds prisons and costs us a shitload of money. They are generally a pox on the American justice system.

    But they are often borne of the emotional empathy for the victim that you've just described.
     
  11. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    We may chalk it up as good luck.

    Again: I'm not entirely sure this victim impact statement had its intended effect - if, in fact, it was intended to effect sentencing. At some point, that letter went from describing the victim's impact to something larger.
     
  12. Donny in his element

    Donny in his element Well-Known Member

    There is some confusion regarding order of operations. Some reports I've read say she read the statement after the sentence was read, which is how I interpreted it.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page