Father Of Stanford Rapist Defends Son In Letter To Judge, Describes Rape As ’20 Minutes Of Action’

The father of recently-convicted rapist Brock Turner, a former Stanford University swimmer, has come to his son’s defense. Brock was convicted for raping an unconscious woman near a dumpster, an unconscionable and incomprehensible act to many. However, the Stanford rapist’s father seems to think his son is being unduly punished for his crimes.

As Us Weekly reports, the Stanford rapist has been in a the news a lot recently. First and foremost for his senseless, scarring crime. Then again for his incredibly lenient sentence. The Stanford rapist blew up social media last week following his June 2 conviction. That’s because the judge in the case sentenced him so lightly that the term “slap on the wrist” seems to be going overboard. Brock Turner was sentenced to a mere six months in jail, followed by three months of probation.

The reason for the leniency? Because the judge felt bad for the Stanford rapist. According to the judge, a longer sentence would have a “severe impact” on Turner.

As if being raped doesn’t have a severe impact on victims. As if convicted rapists’ feelings should be spared during the sentencing process.

Check out the social media backlash.

Now, the father of the Stanford rapists is making headlines in his son’s name. Dan Turner addressed Judge Aaron Persky with a letter defending his son’s despicable actions, calling the senseless, life-altering rape “20 minutes of action.” The letter was published to social media by Stanford law professor Michele Dauber.

Apparently, the Stanford rapist’s father thinks that it’s okay to rape a woman once every twenty years, particularly if you spend 20 minutes or less in the process. And if you’re a good student and drunk, it cancels out destroying a woman’s life, especially if you’re willing to educate your fellow students about the dangers of binge drinking.

Gross.

Not surprisingly, social media has had a field day with the Stanford rapist’s father’s defense of his son’s indefensible acts.

Somewhat surprisingly, his father isn’t the only one who’s come to the Stanford rapist’s defense.

The Stanford rapist’s father is particularly upset that his convicted sex offender offspring will have to be added to the sex offender registry. He’s also pretty sad that the Stanford rapist isn’t getting as much enjoyment from mealtime as he did before he was publicly dragged through the mud for raping an unconscious woman back in 2015.

The rape took place back on January 18, 2015. That’s when two grad students were walking by a frat party and saw the Stanford rapist on top of an unconscious female near a dumpster. Brock tried to run away, but the two male graduate students weren’t having it. Rather, as he tried to run away from the scene of his violent sex crime, the Stanford rapist was tackled by the pair and held by them until the police, who they’d contacted, arrived on the scene.

The reports from the scene of the rape indicate that the rib-eye steak loving Stanford rapist only feels strong enough to assault unconscious females; in the cross-hairs of a couple of angry men, he ran away like a frightened child.

While the Stanford rapist’s father has inexplicable (and some say unforgivably) come to his son’s defense, his victim has spoken out publicly against his actions. Identified only as “Emily Doe,” the Washington Post reports that the 23-year-old rape victim addressed the court as part of the Stanford rapist’s trial.

Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen called the Stanford rapist’s victim statement, which she delivered in person in front of a packed courtroom, “the most eloquent, powerful and compelling piece of victim advocacy that I’ve seen in my 20 years as a prosecutor.”

“You took away my worth, my privacy, my energy, my time, my intimacy, my confidence, my own voice, until today. The damage is done, no one can undo it. And now we both have a choice. We can let this destroy us, I can remain angry and hurt and you can be in denial, or we can face it head on, I accept the pain, you accept the punishment, and we move on.”

The Stanford rapist was ultimately convicted of three counts: assault with the intent to commit rape, sexual penetration with a foreign object of an intoxicated person, and sexual penetration with a foreign object of an unconscious person.

Despite his victim’s heartfelt plea that he accept his punishment, his light, light, punishment, the Stanford rapist’s father seems intent on preventing his sex offender son from doing even that much, making excuses for inexcusable behavior and attempting to garner sympathy for a violent rapist rather than demanding justice for his victim.

What do you think? Did the judge get it right? Was the Stanford rapist’s sentence appropriate or too short? Should the father of the Stanford rapist have refrained from defending his son?

[Image by Shutterstock]