The description of his statement:
“Turner started to not feel well and decided that it was getting late. He said that he stood up to leave and was suddenly tackled by a group of guys.
When asked why he ran he stated that he doesn’t think that he ran. Turner explains that the guys approached him as he was getting up and started getting physical with him. He said he ended up near the basketball court about 10 yards away from victim.”
It was dark. They were behind a dumpster, behind a frat house, under the trees. She was unconscious when the two cyclists found her. If he admits that he inserted his finger in her vagina, that’s game, set, match, because she was unconscious.
Thank you @saintfan, for chasing that one down. It’s so easy in these “he said, she said” cases to want to believe what he said when she was unconscious. Maybe there is some other physical evidence of penetration that turned up during her time at the hospital.
In the charging documents it talks about reason to believe that there were body fluids exchanged. I don’t know that there were, only that having done swabs and whatnot I’m assuming that they have some kind of evidence of something.
Based on his statement I’m wondering if he was just planning to get up and leave her there unconscious with her underwear off and dress pulled up or what. Hmmm . . . getting late . . . thrust, thrust . . . maybe I should be heading home . . . :!!
saintfan, I want to thank you for all your posts. 
Some of you have asserted, in this thread or others, that if you knew someone who had raped someone, you’d know that person was a rapist. Not so, with this guy (from the San Jose Merc story):
He may not be convicted of rape, but Brock Turner was not being a wonderful, wonderful young man when he was with this unconscious, undressed woman. There’s no way to spin his behavior; it was despicable and lacking in moral character even if he wasn’t raping her.
I was struck by that too, CF. This makes it hard on victims. The perp was a very gifted swimmer with the world at his finger tips. He had both amazing academic and athletic opportunities. He’s been to the national team trials and was on the way up. People often put that on the victim’s shoulders as if in bringing charges the victim would be throwing his life away or stealing opportunity. Yes, he stands to lose a great deal but she is not doing that to him. It is too bad for him that somehow along the way he missed that critical lesson and is having to learn it the very hard way.
My opinion that I have voiced before is that abstinence only sex ed contributes to to things like this - not exclusively, but I think it’s got to be about having conversation and really talking about situations that might come up. If you just say that sex will never come up people are less prepared when it does.
http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2013/04/18/Plan-calls-for-stricter-sex-ed-guidelines.html
I also think this sort of thing can often reflect what a male learns or observes at home. A father who treats the women in his family with respect, and through those actions communicates that women are to be valued, has a better chance of producing a son that is not going to exploit them. And yes, I believe that due to the physical differences between men and women that fathers should also teach their sons that at times a woman may need his help or even his protection. Certainly those 2 bikers at Stanford understood this.
You don’t see men taking advantage of other men by stealing their wallets or other belongings when they are unconscious or otherwise compromised from alcohol. In fact it is more likely that they would help them out. Why take advantage of a woman in those same circumstances? I think men who do this simply do not value women and think of them as “less than” or something to be “used.”
He does seem to have been thinking of her as a thing for him to use, rather than a person. If you’re interacting with a person and suddenly they go unconscious, you’re concerned. You want to help them, not stick your ***** in them.
Unless you are sick with intoxication, and like your victim, barely know what is happening.
We don’t let someone say they are sick with intoxication and barely know what is happening, so, oops, sorry for getting behind the wheel and running over that kindergarten class, but it wasn’t my fault. We should be equally contemptuous of someone who is discovered assaulting an unconscious woman and who claims that they were drunk. The Stanford guy has made no public claims that he was too drunk to know what was going on. According to the witnesses, he wasn’t too drunk to run away.
It sounds like you’ve got the case all figured out, CF.
It sounds like you think his being drunk would be an excuse, Bay.
No, I just prefer to try to examine the facts in an unbiased way.
The court records for the Stanford case are at http://www.scscourt.org/online_services/efiles/file2.pdf . One of the accounts mentions Turner’s pants were “disheveled”, and it looked like he had an erection under his pants. Another mentions “it definitely looked like Turner was having sex with…” It sounds like there are some inconsistencies between the statements made by Turner and some of the witnesses.
When I was at Stanford, I wasn’t into parties. Nevertheless, I did attend parties soon after I arrived on campus to get a feel for the social events of the school. I recall one party where students who had drank too much to be functional were dragged on to the lawn outside. Of course there were many other parties with a much safer atmosphere.
this isn’t too shocking…I went to a local college for 7 years…i saw people sexually harassed and stalked on more than one occasion…
Re #891
Your example isn’t applicable because the kindergarten class isn’t also wasted. When 2 equally, and very, drunk people commit any other act against each other the authorities take into account how impaired both parties were. Why don’t they do that with two very drunk people who have sex? I AM NOT SAYING THAT WAS THE CASE AT STANFORD! I am taking about other cases where 2 drunk youngsters go at it, why is the male accused of rape but the female isn’t? Is it because a guy would rarely file a complaint? What do you think would happen if the guy went to police and said that he was too drunk to consent and was therefore raped?
ETA- I will also address your earlier post about trends when I get a chance since it is completely wrong.
The problem with this case is that the victim doesn’t remember if the perp penetrated her, and no one saw him penetrate her. He claims he didn’t penetrate her with his penis. So unless there is forensic evidence that he penetrated her, or unless he admits that he penetrated her with something (and he is not required to testify), all the prosecution really has is his statement that he “fingered” her. I don’t know if anyone would be willing to sentence him to prison for that, without more.
A portion of one of the witness accounts is below. It mentions some relevant information. Of course they may be presenting a biased view,.