Court Today Hears Arguments for Brock Turner’s Appeal of 2016 Sexual Assault Conviction

Brock Turner’s lawyer is set to appear in court today to appeal the former Stanford University swimmer’s 2016 sexual assault conviction, which resulted in a few-month jail stay and the ouster of the judge who sentenced him.

The case catapulted Turner and Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky into the global spotlight, with the high-profile judicial recall campaign branding the men as the faces of rape culture.

Turner, an Ohio native who’s now 22, was found guilty of assault with intent to rape a blacked-out woman after a 2015 incident on the university campus. When Persky in June of 2016 sentenced him to six months in jail and a lifetime as a registered sex offender, the victim’s heart-wrenching statement went viral and sparked intense outrage.

The disgraced college athlete walked out of San Jose’s Main Jail after three months, which victim advocates called far too lenient for the offense. California legislators have since passed a law that would mandate prison time for the same crime.

Attorney Eric Multhaup, representing Turner, will try to persuade a three-judge panel in the Sixth District Court of Appeals today that the disgraced college athlete was robbed of a fair trial and doesn’t deserve his lifetime status as a registered sex offender.

Deputy Attorney General Alisha Carlile will argue on behalf of the state.

8 Comments

  1. It’s hard for me to think of someone who shot himself in the foot worse than this guy. If he’d stayed on the swim team and graduated so many doors would have opened for him. Now what’s he doing? Community or on-line college in Ohio and working for a landscaping company (last I heard) and a sex offender for life.

  2. > Attorney Eric Multhaup, representing Turner, will try to persuade a three-judge panel in the Sixth District Court of Appeals today that the disgraced college athlete was robbed of a fair trial and doesn’t deserve his lifetime status as a registered sex offender.

    I would say that bullying and intimidating the trial judge and threatening a recall could qualify as robbing the accused of a fair trail.

    https://ballotpedia.org/Aaron_Persky_recall,_Santa_Clara_County,_California_(2018)

    “As of May 5, 2018, the committee to recall Persky had raised more than $1 million. It raised $322,785.38 in 2016, $365,159.78 in 2017, $273,206.04 from January 2018 to April 21, 2018, and at least $232,000 in late April and early May 2018.”

    $1.193 million dollars can buy a LOT of bullying and represents a HUGE thumb on the scales of justice.

    • Unless they raised enough money buy a time machine, I’m not sure how the recall campaign could have influenced the trial. The recall campaign didn’t launch until after verdict + sentencing were complete.

      • > The recall campaign didn’t launch until after verdict + sentencing were complete.

        How do you know? The answer is: you don’t.

        If someone whispered into Judge Persky’s ear that the gender warriors were so upset that they will recall any judge who doesn’t give them “justice, and . . . .

        If the gender warriors made the case that their threats were “credible” (look at the result), then there is a clear case that extraordinary pressure may have been brought to bear on Judge Persky to influence his decision.

        This case stinks to high heaven, and if serious investigators took a serious look at it, I think they would find shocking pressure, coercion, bias, and lawlessness.

        In fact, I think the instigator of the Persky recall, Stanford “Law Professor” Michele Dauber could be exposed to disbarment for her conspiracy to obstruct justice . . . IF she were a member of the bar, which apparently she is not.

        • So someone whispered into Persky’s ear during the trial effectively enough to make Persky deny Turner a fair trial, but not effectively enough to make Persky impose something greater than the 6-month post-trial sentence that ultimately got Persky recalled???

          Not taking a position one way or the other on the recall. It’s just that your latest conspiracy theory makes even less sense than usual, Bubbles.

          • > So someone whispered into Persky’s ear during the trial effectively enough to make Persky deny Turner a fair trial, but not effectively enough to make Persky impose something greater than the 6-month post-trial sentence that ultimately got Persky recalled???

            I have heard REAL lawyers explain that the law on “obstruction of justice” does not require the obstruction to be successful in order to unlawful.

            And, by the way, I suspect that fans of the Stanford gender bullies in the local court system were not the least bit shy about volunteering their opinions about what Judge Persky’s rulings SHOULD be in the Persky case.

            I was called up for jury duty a number of years back and the female judge opened the proceedings by calling attention to the fact that she was a woman judge, and that she was a pioneering gender warrior fighting the system and a role model of how women’s voices need to be heard in the justice system yadda yadda yadda.

            Yes, I suspect that the Stanford gender bullies signaled what decisions were “expected” in the Brock Turner case as well as signaling the negative consequences to the reputation and career of any judge who failed to provide the “expected” outcomes.

            Obstruction of justice.

  3. Yeah, I don’t think Persky was thinking about the possibility of a recall during the trial–why would he? There hadn’t been a recall of a sitting judge in like 80 years in CA.

    I do agree that his recall is an outrage and will lead to judges making rulings based on fingers in the air instead of a more independent interpretation of the law.

    I’ll still never understand what will satisfy people. Brock Turner is not the most sympathetic character to be sure, but he’s paying a heavy price for his actions. I think this appeal is less than a Hail Mary though as these judges will surely not want to lose their jobs over it.

  4. What does the Sam Sheppard case tell us about the trial of Brock Turner and the recall of Aaron Persky?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sheppard

    “The U.S. Supreme Court determined that the “carnival atmosphere” surrounding Sheppard’s first trial had made due process impossible; after ten years in prison he was acquitted at a second trial.”

    I would say that “community organizer” Michele Dauber and her bullhorn bullies created a “carnival atmosphere” around Brock Turner’s trial and Judge Persky’s recall.

    http://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/765AE4DB-3B9ACA00-1-33873807_10105908127971014_7087145553972166656_o-772×350.jpg

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: