The Stanford rape case
by Stevie_Wonder00 on September 12, 2016 - 9:12pm
Stanford rape case
Article: “Was The Stanford Rapist Actually A Rapist?”
After reading and hearing all about the “Stanford rape case”, I could not help to further inform myself on the controversy which seems to bring up many ethical issues. At it involves a former Stanford University student and athlete from a highly privileged and wealthy family, Brock Turner, who is now convicted as a rapist and sex offender, after he sexually assaulted an unconscious woman around the age of 23 behind a dumpster located on campus. Where he apprehended by two international who were also attending Stanford at that time. Both students testified that they had to intervene and chase him after seen Brock leave the naked unconscious woman on the ground and fled. It wasn’t so long after that the police arrived at the seen where the convicted rapist was held down by the two international student. But what harassed the public attention was the outcome of the trial, that sentenced Brock Turner to 6 months in jail with a fine of 200’000$ instead of the minimum of 10 years for attempted rape and penetration with a foreign object. Not only was the judge accused of being bias, by reducing his sentence because Brock was seen as a white male from a highly classed privileged household but it was argued by the defendant, that time in prison would ruin is future label him for life and destroy his somewhat swimming career as a potential Stanford student with dreams.
Article: “Judge who sentenced Stanford rapist to six months jails Latino man for 3 years for similar crime”
Judge Aaron perky, who was the same judge in the “Stanford rape case” and accuse of being too lenient over the 6 months sentence of the young privileged swimmer from Stanford University, Brock turner, as now imprisoned a man of Latino decent for three years for a similar crime. The newly accused rapist, Ramirez a 32 year old man from El Salvador, admitted in the year 2014 that he had sexually assaulted his female roommate. It is said, in a report made by the police that the man had inserted his fingers in her genitals against the woman free will and freedom, however once he had seen her cry, he then stop and even made apologized to the victim and the police for his previously made actions. The big controversy of this article and event, is compared to the Latino male who was charged of being guilty, had a worst sentence than Brock who was charged for sexual assault with the intent to commit rape on an intoxicated woman and sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with foreign object, meaning his fingers. After such decisions, the judge was highly criticized for not showing any interest whatsoever to somehow reduce M. Ramirez sentence, just like he previously did for Brock Turner.
Both events harasses so many moral and ethical issues. For one the case of rape and how it diminishes the person value, while at the same time taking away the freedom of one self. It is also humanly wrong to do such actions on an individual without their consent. Secondly, the security, justice and equality are put in question. In terms of security, by giving such light consequences to the rapist, the security of the victim is somewhat taking away from her, as she is showed that such actions might happen again as it can go with a minimum of consequence. Justice wise, it is not true justice as the judge made an exception to find a detour around the laws that were applied to reduce the sentence of Brock, who is from a wealthy privileged upper class in society. This comes to show that justice and law can never be truly applied to the rich and the privileged, since they are the ones in control of our society. If we also take a look in terms of equality, we can easily notice that although Ramirez and Brock Turner cases are somewhat alike, their consequence vary greatly, so those the argument defending them, as unlike Ramirez who is from a lower class and the visible minority of our population, brock is part of what we call white privileged and the wealthy. Though moral and ethical opinions on both subject might differ from one individual to the next, I find the decision of the judge unacceptable