Posted by
Fashion Nudge
on
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
I came across this very insightful article titled 'What if my house were robbed?' by Tina Jones on Facebook, in response to the recent lenient ruling last week (6/2) of Ex Stanford Swimmer Brock Allen Turner accused of raping his victim while she was drunk and inebriated, and leaving her in a dumpster. Read the victims heartfelt letter to Brock during the sentencing here: Stanford Rape.
According to Tina, "What happened in the case of Brock Turner and his rape victim is the dreadnought example of why we need to change our social and legal views and policies when handling rape cases. It shouldn’t be that only one side is treated as credible, the one accused of rape. Nor that the other side should have to re-prove what is already obvious."
See article below and check out her Facebook page here for more: Tina Jones. PLEASE Share... Lets make this our moral responsibility to strive for CHANGE.
According to Tina, "What happened in the case of Brock Turner and his rape victim is the dreadnought example of why we need to change our social and legal views and policies when handling rape cases. It shouldn’t be that only one side is treated as credible, the one accused of rape. Nor that the other side should have to re-prove what is already obvious."
See article below and check out her Facebook page here for more: Tina Jones. PLEASE Share... Lets make this our moral responsibility to strive for CHANGE.
What if my house were robbed?
If my house were robbed...
Would it be my fault, they broke in? Because I had a nice lawn, a fountain, or nice decorations strewn about on it, or on my house? Would I be told, “You showed that you had nice things, begging to be stolen, so you asked for it”?
Would it be my fault if, instead of breaking in, they feigned friendship with me, and then took my prized possessions, or worse, one or both of my (furry) children? Because I “let them in” so there’s no proof of a break in, even though they stole from me? Would I be told, “You should have used better judgement and not been wrong about them. You were wrong for letting them in, so you asked for it.”?
Would it be my “consenting” to let them rob my house, regardless of how they got in, if they gagged me and bound my hands? What if I was drunk at the time? Because I had some wine with my dinner, before they decided to rob my house? What if they were at my dinner table, drinking wine with me? Would I be told, “You shouldn’t have drank wine with your dinner. You should have known your house would be robbed, look how nice the yard is! The decorations! Your prized possession was able to be taken, and your furry children roamed freely in your house, so again, you asked for it.” and “They were just as drunk as you, they didn’t know what they were doing - that makes their theft ‘ok.’”?
What if there were witnesses to what the robber did? What excuse would there be for dismissing their testimony to all the facts, that I did not consent to being robbed, that I was bound and gagged when they found me in my house, and the only reason they caught the robber was because they arrived late to dinner? Because they “didn’t see the whole thing from start to finish?” Would their testimony be treated as null and void? Would I be told, “Even though the witnesses saw you bound and gagged, and they came inside the house while the robbery was taking place, and the robber tried to flee because they knew they were robbing you, and they tackled the robber and held him down and got police help - you need to prove that you did not consent to being robbed.”?
What if the robber was planning a fantastic career that was still ahead of them? What if they were found guilty by a jury, rather than automatically upon submission of witness testimony and physical evidence, after all the above being done to me? Because of their future life that might be destroyed by being held accountable, because they were “young” but still an adult, and because they had not robbed anyone since they robbed me? Would they be allowed to plea for leniency in sentencing, for “good behavior” and so they could still have the plans for their future life go on, uninterrupted, while I lived in fear of being robbed again - by them or someone else, because everyone now knows that robbers will get away with robbing, or get off easy if convicted? Would I be told, “Well, it’s too bad that you’ve been put through that, but their future life matters more than yours. You need to get over it and pretend this never happened”?
Is this how we do things in America? Is this supposed to be “justice?” I remind everyone: while having one’s house robbed is horrific, it’s worse when a person is raped. And yet, we do not treat house robbers and their victims the way we treat rapists and their victims, socially or in courts of law. Is that really what we want?
What if Brock Turner winds up getting raped some day, regardless of when, or if he was at a party of drinking again, or if his rapist were at the same party and were drinking too? Would he still just blame the alcohol and “promiscuity” and not his rapist for raping him? Would he dismiss the physical damage done to him, and the feelings of anger, pain, and frustration at a system that would criminalize him for having been raped? Would he just not care about the inability to hold down a steady job, or the need for getting both a counselor and an expensive lawyer, while all the while being told, “You likely will not win this - you’re going to have to prove that you were raped even though it’s obvious”? Would the fear of telling his parents he was raped, and the anxiety from watching a sibling blame themselves, when it was absolutely not their fault - would that just not even phase him at all?
Would it not matter to him that the entire course of his life was altered forever by a complete stranger who attacked and raped him, while that stranger was treated as innocent even with clear testimony and evidence against that stranger, and then given a reduced from sub-minimum sentence in a county jail instead of prison, all because that stranger claims they have a great life ahead of them that would be too much to give up? Would he just not feel it at all, knowing that he was not only still effectively being raped without a voice in American sexual and legal politics, but through no fault of his own, his entire value and self-worth had been put on the chopping block by that complete stranger, who had no remorse and never took responsibility upon themselves alone for raping him?
How would he feel if his rapist blamed their having drank alcohol and been “promiscuous” for their actions of rape against him, instead of blaming themselves alone, for not only drinking and being “promiscuous” but also for RAPING?!
Would that matter to him at all?
Does it matter to you?
Is that the kind of America you want to live in, where just anyone out there can target you for doing things that do not automatically equate to deserving rape as a result, and then wait until you are the most vulnerable and the least able to speak up for or protect yourself, and then rape you, possibly until you die from the assault?!
Brock Turner’s rape victim could have died if the two Swedish bikers who came upon him raping her, behind a dumpster, had not happened to be there when they were, or otherwise notice what he was doing as he was on top of her non-responsive body, treating it like a blow up doll rather than like a beloved woman who he had great respect for.
Brock Turner showed no intent to stop raping her. He could have killed her. That makes him an attempted murderer. And, perhaps she should have charged him with that instead. Perhaps then he would have gotten his due. Victims of attempted murder are not asked to prove that their attacker was attempting to murder them, when there are witnesses and/or evidence to support their charge against their attacker. Nor are they asked to prove that they did not consent to having their lives attempted being taken from them. Nor are their “moral characters” required to be proven as puerile. Those charged with attempted murder, and those who rob houses, or who commit other non-rape crimes, when there is witness testimony and evidence to support the charge, are not treated as “innocent until proven guilty” because the proof of their guilt is already there, under lock and key, and brought out in court to show that they are guilty if they claim they are not guilty.
And yet, somehow, we let rapists, effectively “off the hook,” because, even in cases of rape, we assume that the sexual act was consensual, even when there is clear witness testimony and evidence that it couldn’t have been consensual. And we don’t dare take a woman’s word for anything - we treat that as if it were a “he said/she said” and yet we take the accused rapist’s word as if it were gospel truth, in a court where the rapist is presumed innocent, thus making the victim of rape presumed a liar.
The victim who, in this case, is treated as if they had some “motive” for lying about a complete stranger, someone they did not know, did not remember until finding out after-the-fact who that person even was, because they were too drunk and then unconscious the whole time to be able to remember their own attacker... The victim who, in this case, was clearly attacked and raped by their accuser, by all counts, and who has had to spend an entire year going through legal and personal hell, all caused by their attacking rapist who won’t take personal responsibility, but instead, looks for excuses to cover up their guilt in what they did - to blame what they did on anything or anyone else but themselves... We treat that victim as if they are lying, when the testimony and evidence points directly to the contrary, and we treat their sexual deviant attacker, a true pervert, as some sort of angelic saint.
Because this is America, and that’s just what we do here.
What happened in the case of Brock Turner and his rape victim is the dreadnought example of why we need to change our social and legal views and policies when handling rape cases. It shouldn’t be that only one side is treated as credible, the one accused of rape. Nor that the other side should have to re-prove what is already obvious.
It should be that, instead of “innocent until proven guilty” or “guilty until proven innocent,” we would treat all those accused of rape as “charged.” In other words, all those accused of rape would go to trial. The guilty who claim guilt to avoid a trial should not be allowed to skip over having the evidence thrown in their and their families’ faces, for all to see. The innocent should have the right to prove their innocence and that their accusers are lying or are wrongfully deflecting blame onto circumstances that do not automatically cause rape, if they can. But more than that, the accusers should be given the right to prove that the defendants did indeed rape them, and that they are not lying when they say their rapists raped them. That’s not what happens with “innocent until proven guilty.” The way it’s done today, the accuser is treated as a liar and the accused is treated as innocent. The burden of proof is solely on the victim. In the case of rape or other violent attack, that is unjust to the victim who has already suffered enough.
The burden of proof should be on both parties, not just one. Who ever makes the better case and defends their related actions better, should win the case. But see, all actions taken into account have to be direct causes of the crime, and only if they committed a crime. Rape victims are not the ones who did the raping! And they should not be criminalized in court or anywhere else, if they did not commit any crime. They should not be required to defend themselves or their own actions when their proven actions are all lawful.
But see, this is America, where we don’t have a just system for handling rape cases. “Get used to it?” I don’t think so. If that’s not the America you want to live in, please pass this Note along, and give everyone a chance to realize what kind of America they are creating when they act like it doesn’t matter to them, or when they try to “stand up for” the “victim of rape allegations” etc.
Comments
Post a Comment