I have no idea why the sentence in this case was so skewed, but I think it is just wrong.

The New York Magazine posted an article on Friday about the sentencing of Brock Allen Turner. Brock Allen Turner was convicted on raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster on the Stanford University campus. He was sentenced to six months in the county jail and probation.

The story reports:

“A prison sentence would have a severe impact on him,” Persky (Judge Aaron Persky)said at Turner’s sentencing on Thursday. “I think he will not be a danger to others.” Meanwhile, the 23-year-old victim in the rape case, who had had a blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit at the time of the rape and who had no memory of the attack, gave important testimony at the trial.

“You took away my worth, my privacy, my energy, my time, my safety, my intimacy, my confidence, my own voice, until today,” she said, reportedly directly to Turner. “I am a human being who has been irreversibly hurt.” And yet it’s Turner who would be severely impacted in his sentencing? Right.

Does anyone else have a problem with this? I agree that the woman was drunk, but that still does not excuse the young man’s behavior. There is no doubt about his guilt, the assault was interrupted by two other students who chased him down and held him until the police arrived. I don’t understand why the judge feels that this man will not be a danger to others–he obviously has a problem with respecting women and their privacy. This behavior belongs in jail for at least five years. Otherwise, you are sending a message to all young men that it is okay to rape a woman if she is drunk–the penalty will be minor.