Brock Turner Vs. Raul Ramirez case does NOT indicate racism

I apologize, I know that the topic itself is rather old, but the comparison has been circulating my facebook feed for a few weeks now and I find it ridiculous how quickly people are jumping to conclusions on the whole fiasco.

The comparison I'm referring to is, of course, that between Raul Ramirez and Brock Turner by the same judge for what some call the "same case".

-Aaron Persky is the judge who sentenced Brock Turner to six months in jail
-Turner, a white Stanford athlete, was guilty of three sexual assault charges
-Persky is now expected to solidify a three year sentence for a Latino man
-The man, Raul Ramirez, 32, is a 'very poor' El Salvadorian immigrant
-Ramirez pleaded guilty and apologized for sexual assault of his roommate
-Critics have fired back at the judge saying he has shown a racial bias

Source

The first major thing I'd note is that the charges are not the same, and neither were the pleas.

Turner was being charged with Sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object, and originally pled not guilty; claiming that the woman had consented to the deed. His testimony seems to add up -- he never forcefully penetrated, and her DNA was found on his fingers only. The female involved was, however, found to have unidentified male DNA in her underwear which did not belong to Turner or her boyfriend. Lastly, the allege victim in this case claims to have blacked out nearly the entire night, with a blood-alcohol level of .24, and does not have a testimony beyond waking up in the hospital the next day after two young men called the police.


Ramirez was charged with forceful sexual penetration, and immediately pled guilty, later accepting a plea bargain, which is pretty typical of cases like this.

In the Ramirez case, Persky could only offer certain sentences due to the felony conviction

This already becomes a completely different scenario, as there is no doubt on the lack of consent in the situation. The woman was fully conscious and called the police herself, and the man immediately admitted guilt and apologized.

I don't think that this is the poster story for latent institutionalized racism that many are making it out to be...?

Nobody ever pleads innocent.

In the U.S. one pleads not guilty.

Oh and also I agree with your point about there not being a double standard and the overwhelming differences in the cases.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
Nobody ever pleads innocent.

In the U.S. one pleads not guilty.

Oh and also I agree with your point about there not being a double standard and the overwhelming differences in the cases.

Good catch , I'm off my game today; fixed it.

Two of the charges were dropped when he was found to be innocent on a charge of raping an intoxicated person and raping an unconscious person, as the DNA test returned that there was no genital-to-genital contact.

Isn't it a sad society that any sexual assault can have some sort of value of which wasn't quite as bad as another? Both were wrong and both should be punished severely and to the fullest extent of the law.

originally posted by: MaMaa
Isn't it a sad society that any sexual assault can have some sort of value of which wasn't quite as bad as another? Both were wrong and both should be punished severely and to the fullest extent of the law.

Well the thing here being that Turner's case was far less absolute, relying mostly on witness testimony and with no credible testimony from the victim you're going to have to offer the guy a plea bargain to get anything to stick to him.

Otherwise we'd have a lot more innocent people serving rape sentences, which is certainly no better of a situation.

originally posted by: DeadFoot

originally posted by: MaMaa
Isn't it a sad society that any sexual assault can have some sort of value of which wasn't quite as bad as another? Both were wrong and both should be punished severely and to the fullest extent of the law.

Well the thing here being that Turner's case was far less absolute, relying mostly on witness testimony and with no credible testimony from the victim you're going to have to offer the guy a plea bargain to get anything to stick to him.

Otherwise we'd have a lot more innocent people serving rape sentences, which is certainly no better of a situation.

Is Turner the spoilt little sh!t who's father said his sons life shouldn't be ruined for one 'little mistake'? I think the phrase is either scum or vermin.

a reply to: MaMaa

Come on.. there can be degrees of severity.

Some guy could take advantage of someone drunk that won't even remember it.

Another guy could forcibly penetrate a conscious person while also beating the hell out of them.

I mean, there are any number of things that could make such a situation even worse. A criminal could rape a mother in front of their child. How graphic do we need to get here? You get my point.

originally posted by: TheLaughingGod
a reply to: MaMaa

Come on.. there can be degrees of severity.

Some guy could take advantage of someone drunk that won't even remember it.

Another guy could forcibly penetrate a conscious person while also beating the hell out of them.

I mean, there are any number of things that could make such a situation even worse. A criminal could rape a mother in front of their child. How graphic do we need to get here? You get my point.

You do know you're in the 21st century don't you? Do you think a man violating a drunk unconscious woman is somehow less severe than any other rape? Sex that is not consensual is rape.................... hope that doesn't disappoint you.

Rape that includes violence would have that additionally taken into account.

a reply to: uncommitted

I don't think anyone is implying that it is fine to go around fingering unconscious people.

There was no evidence of forced penetration in the Turner case, though, so I would tend to consider that less severe than forcefully jamming your member into someone who is willfully resisting.