Words of Advice:

"Never Feel Sorry For Anyone Who Owns an Airplane."-- Tina Marie

"
If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

"
Flying the Airplane is More Important than Radioing Your Plight to a Person on the Ground
Who is Incapable of Understanding or Doing Anything About It.
" -- Unknown

"There seems to be almost no problem that Congress cannot, by diligent efforts and careful legislative drafting, make ten times worse." -- Me

"What the hell is an `Aluminum Falcon'?" -- Emperor Palpatine

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

Sunday, December 3, 2017

Brock Turner, the Dumpster Rapist, is Back!

From BadTux comes news that the Preppy Swimming Dumpster Rapist, Brock Turner, is appealing his conviction.

The thrust seems to be a combination of "it was her fault" and "the court was mean to me!" Yep, the same court that could have sent the Swimming Rapist to prison for years (instead of three months in the county jail).

If he gets a new trial, maybe he might get to do some hard time.

Still, the truth of the matter is that, thanks to the Internet, Brock the Convicted Rapist will never outrun what he did.

7 comments:

3383 said...

I saw this on sfgate Friday. I think it said he wants a new trial, which is a colossally risky move to just remove the sex offender registry requirement. Take your chips and go home.

dinthebeast said...

Interesting time for him to want to bring this up. Does he, or his attorney, believe he'll get a better jury this time? It's partly because of him that this sort of bullshit isn't flying as much now as it once was.

-Doug in Oakland

hans said...

back in the day I did a lot of work for the public defender... seemed as if each new client was dumber than the one before... the lucky atty that gets to rep mr. dumpster better get all fees n expenses up front

BadTux said...

This is definitely one where the lucky attorney needs to have gotten the funds up front. Because the criteria here in California needed to even hold an appeal hearing is "would the outcome had been different if all the issues they allege with the trial were true?" If what they allege would have made no difference to the outcome of the trial, appeal is denied on summary judgement without even a hearing.

This is one of those cases that's so open and shut, especially in today's climate, that I can hear the eyeballs of the appeals judges rolling all the way in Sacramento...

Comrade Misfit said...

All of his character witnesses don't count for squat. He was caught in the act of having sex with a woman who was not able to give her consent. That's rape any which way it's spun.

The Swimming Rapist wins on appeal, they'll try him again. And then he runs the risk of going to a CDCR greybar hotel for three to eight years.

BadTux said...

Exactly. Based on the facts found at trial, none of what they're whining about would have made a lick of difference. My guess is that the appeal won't last past the prosecution's motion to dismiss due to lack of material effect of the alleged misconduct.

Comrade Misfit said...

It's a scenario that I've seen play out a number of times. It goes like this:

Client says: "At the hearing, I want you to ask for X, Y and Z."

Lawyer: "You're not going to get that, the facts don' support it at all."

Client fires lawyer, finds a new guy who answers "If that's what you want, I will fight for you."

So it goes to the hearing. The new lawyer demands X, Y and Z. The judge looks at him as though he's crazy. Or the lawyers meet with the judge, in chambers, for a conference, where they make a short summation of their cases. The judge looks at the guy's lawyer and explains that, while the judge hasn't heard the evidence and witnesses, it doesn't look good for his side.

So the client gets about what the first lawyer told him he'd get, only it's cost him an additional five figures or more to get there.

But in the Swimming Rapist's case, he's gambling the risk of spending up to eight years in prison. On the other hand, a lifetime brand of being a sex offender is no small beer. So maybe, to him, it's worth the bet. If you throw enough money at the trial, you can prevail even with a horrible set of facts. OJ, Robert Blake. On the other hand, Phil Spector.