Sorry about May Zhou.

Plenty of cases where perpetrators of rape just got 6 months jail time and any layman could see, there is gross negligence of justice being served on all these crimes. So why now? It's troubling to see so many rape cases get zero attention but when something happens at Stanford, it blows up.

I was investigated by District Attorney Rosen's staff several years ago. I found them, and him, polite, careful, and transparent in the investigation. His attitude regarding the judge is again balanced, and transparent. We should support him in his judgement.

I think all the attacks on Judge Persky are misguided. It is the VERDICT that is offensive. He may have made his best judgment, but it's the judgement that needs to be vacated. Hopefully another judge could apply more appropriate criteria and reach a more palatable sentence. I'm willing to give a judge the occasional poor judgement, but only if it can be corrected.

Rapists and molesters are rarely caught and prosecuted. The DA brought one Stanford case and is disappointed that the lying defendant did not get a harsher set of penalties. This disposition seems light but Turner is subject to many penalties beyond incarceration. In general, judges are supposed to moderate prosecutors who would send most everyone to prison - were there more room and were they doubling as judges. In any event, this whole topic of discussion is long overdue. And finally we will get a woman as President who may expect the next Attorney General to use federal law to crack down on rapists and molesters (assuming First Lady Bill Clinton is not just one of them).

The non-lawyer Stanford law professor mis-stated the remorse expressed by the defendant. She has lied about him. Even this publication mischaracterized the assault as rape. The probation officer recommended probation after a jail term for the defendant. Judge Persky relied upon the victim's statements and the probation officer's report in coming to his decision to sentence the defendant to 6 months in jail.
Regardihng the dismissal, the DA clearly failed to prove all the requisite elements of the case. It would be illegal to deny the defense motion to dismiss. The DA failed to prove the case!
Examine Judge Persky's 13 years on the bench and service as a deputy District Attorney before you jump on the bandwagon to recall this independent Judge. Do you want the DA's lackey?
And before you pillory an accused person, as you did the kaiser nurse, read the complaining witness' various stories. She gave three or four different ones and said the case is gold. GOLD!

You know what tees me off about Brock Turner defenders such as yourself? You have a way of creating an alternate reality that so far removed from the actual facts of the case, it isn't even funny.

Why do you people have to be that way?

I'm glad to hear the DA is bypassing this poor judge. It's understandable that the DA is not calling for him to be removed. The DA may still have to present other cases to him in the future and presumably doesn't want to burn that bridge.

When the recall petition first went around, I was unsure if I should be second-guessing a judge. I didn't follow the trial, so maybe there's an important detail I missed. Also, people talk about the importance of judicial independence from popular opinion, and a recent event in my childhood home state shows why: Web Link . So I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Then I read what a Stanford law professor had to say. Web Link Web Link In short, the factors the judge used to decide on such a lenient sentence apply to essentially any Stanford campus rape: alcohol, youth, no prior convictions, prior academic success. That's unacceptable; it says that not only was this campus rape a serious crime, but also that almost no campus rape would be.

That made my decision easy. I signed the petition, and I donated to the recall campaign. Let's get rid of him.