HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Judge who said rape victi...

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:21 AM

Judge who said rape victim should have 'put up a fight' is rebuked

Source: LA Times

The state agency that monitors judicial misconduct has publicly admonished an Orange County judge, saying his remarks in a sexual assault case breached judicial ethics and created an impression of bias against the victim.

At a June 2008 sentencing hearing, Superior Court Judge Derek G. Johnson denied a prosecutor’s call to impose a 16-year prison term on Metin Gurel, who had been convicted of rape, forcible oral copulation, domestic battery, stalking and making threats against his former live-in girlfriend.

Johnson decided to impose a six-year sentence.

“I’m not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something,” the judge said, according to documents released Thursday. “If someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage in inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case.


Read more: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/12/judge-slammed-for-outdated-and-biased-remarks-on-rape.html



The article says it took four year for them find out about this..why the hell didn't anyone report this sooner? And why isn't his ass being disbarred?

41 replies, 5407 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply Judge who said rape victim should have 'put up a fight' is rebuked (Original post)
SpartanDem Dec 2012 OP
GiaGiovanni Dec 2012 #1
HankyDub Dec 2012 #5
GiaGiovanni Dec 2012 #7
RC Dec 2012 #6
Deep13 Dec 2012 #2
defacto7 Dec 2012 #3
HankyDub Dec 2012 #4
Skittles Dec 2012 #16
Bozita Dec 2012 #8
Judi Lynn Dec 2012 #9
alittlelark Dec 2012 #10
progressoid Dec 2012 #11
Kablooie Dec 2012 #12
freshwest Dec 2012 #13
Justin_Beach Dec 2012 #14
cecilfirefox Dec 2012 #15
DeSwiss Dec 2012 #17
ashling Dec 2012 #18
TorchTheWitch Dec 2012 #19
niyad Dec 2012 #25
TorchTheWitch Dec 2012 #39
niyad Dec 2012 #41
lunatica Dec 2012 #34
Odin2005 Dec 2012 #20
Crow73 Dec 2012 #21
niyad Dec 2012 #24
Gormy Cuss Dec 2012 #27
skypilot Dec 2012 #28
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #22
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #23
question everything Dec 2012 #26
okaawhatever Dec 2012 #29
niyad Dec 2012 #31
okaawhatever Dec 2012 #32
daleo Dec 2012 #33
lunatica Dec 2012 #35
octothorpe Dec 2012 #36
Hosnon Dec 2012 #38
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #30
KatyMan Dec 2012 #37
myrna minx Dec 2012 #40

Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:29 AM

1. Sounds like the Aiken biology seminar made its way to California

 

Amazing how ignorance can have serious consequences

Edited to remove a poor singer from the mix.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GiaGiovanni (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:34 AM

5. Todd Akin

 

Clay is the singer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HankyDub (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:35 AM

7. Oops!

 

I'll go change that. Poor Clay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GiaGiovanni (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:35 AM

6. Todd Akin

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:30 AM

2. Are you fucking kidding?

I guess he did not feel it was a legitimate rape.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:33 AM

3. a slap on the wrist?

BS!

This is Scalia mentality judicial conduct. Pull him off the bench and disbar the guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:34 AM

4. I'm a boy and all, but

 

I don't know where these guys are getting the idea that women's bodies have an "off" switch that "shuts the body down."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HankyDub (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:33 AM

16. chances are you don't hate females, HankyDub

that is the number one requirement for men to have those, er, "ideas"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:39 AM

8. And THIS is not an activist judge?

He creates his own reality and makes his judgments based on his very own fictitious world?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:01 AM

9. AP: Calif. judge says victims' body can prevent rape

Calif. judge says victims' body can prevent rape
(AP) – 2 hours ago

SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) — A Southern California judge is being publicly admonished for saying a rape victim "didn't put up a fight" during her assault and that if someone doesn't want sexual intercourse, the body "will not permit that to happen."

The California Commission on Judicial Performance voted 10-0 to impose a public admonishment Thursday, saying Superior Court Judge Derek Johnson's comments were inappropriate and a breach of judicial ethics.

"In the commission's view, the judge's remarks reflected outdated, biased and insensitive views about sexual assault victims who do not 'put up a fight.' Such comments cannot help but diminish public confidence and trust in the impartiality of the judiciary," wrote Lawrence J. Simi, the commission's chairman.

Johnson made the comments in the case of a man who threatened to mutilate the face and genitals of his ex-girlfriend with a heated screwdriver, beat her with a metal baton and made other violent threats before committing rape, forced oral copulation, and other crimes.

~snip~
Johnson said he believed the prosecutor's request of a 16-year sentence was not authorized by law. Johnson sentenced the rapist to six years instead, saying that's what the case was "worth."

More:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hNWcej44GD13f7vVSxr5S9soPh9Q?docId=b30bca62118c48cb9ec994d9b72f8e8a

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:04 AM

10. Hope his is an elected seat!

POS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:24 AM

11. breached judicial ethics ??

Hell, he breached ALL ethics.

What an ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:32 AM

12. He was rebuked! That'll show 'em! They can't say stuff like that without getting rebuked!

Or was that a typo.
Maybe he was repuked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:08 AM

13. Same sources for his reasoning as Akin and that came from the Third Reich testing women in their

concentration camps to see at what level of abuse a woman could not concieve despite being raped. Remember we have a thread here somewhere of the bunker in SoCal intended for Adolf to hide away in, it seemed almost like a prank. Also we've had threads of NeoNazis running for office. tIt really is the recycling of the 1930s, as if it is some kind of natural repetition. This guy needs to be disbarred and investigated for every other case he rule upon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:16 AM

14. Sadly, this is Orange County

It's the heart of Reagan country ... they may elect him to congress over this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:17 AM

15. As a law student I'm appalled. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:43 AM

17. Pissants are afraid to fire him themselves.....

...so they don't lose their own conservatard credentials. So they make his ass so toxic that every defense attorney that faces him can win appeals just by claiming the bias they just certified his is guilty of. They're hoping he'll fire himself.

- Man and woman up, dammit! Stand for something......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:29 AM

18. I'm not a judge, but I can tell you something,

this jurist needs to have his ignorant misogynistic ass removed from the bench.

And then the bench and judges chambers need to be steam cleaned

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 04:59 AM

19. how amazing, I never noticed those invisible doors on any of my entrances/exits!

Who knew that no one can be raped because if you don't want anything in your entrances/exits there's a magic invisible door with a deadbolt that the body all by itself slams shut and locks against intrusion! I'd love this guy to explain how all his prostate exams were only physically accomplished because he was sexually aroused... well, by his own words if he wasn't than his magic invisible door would have instantly been slammed shut against such an intrusion.


This asshole needs to be fired and every sexual assault/rape case he ever judged be re-examined. I seriously cannot believe how anyone can even think something so totally absurd much less say it and actually use it to rule in judgment.


Nobody but nobody is this stupid. Period. These insane excuses are purely victim blaming and always were. Even neanderthals new they had no magic doors on any of their entrances/exits, and nobody but nobody is fooled by this outrageously colossal nuttery. It's nothing but the most utterly ridiculous of all victim blaming excuses.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TorchTheWitch (Reply #19)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:42 AM

25. not just the cases he judged. don't forget, he was part of the orange county da's sex crimes

unit.

can you imagine what he was like in those situations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to niyad (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:43 AM

39. oh holy crap!

Why is it that we don't have three arms when a double face palm just isn't enough???

And all he got was a damn finger wag for this assholery.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TorchTheWitch (Reply #39)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:43 AM

41. I was thinking more in terms of shakti

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TorchTheWitch (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 09:44 AM

34. What these assholes are doing in their own roundabout way is denying that rape ever happens

It's most likely a reflection of their own sex lives. If you think your wife should submit to your every sexual whim then you believe raping her is OK. Thus rape is non-existent.

Do you follow the logic? It's kinda hard to do as a woman because we have only half the brain men have and it's usually non-functional anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:29 AM

20. WTF? This asshole must have went to school with Akin!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:07 AM

21. Same Judge Cites Festivus to Justify Inmate's Special Meals

 

Judges are people too. Which means that, on occasion, they can exercise compassion and/or display a sense of humor.

Judge Derek G. Johnson of the Orange County (Calif.) Superior Court did one or both of those when faced with an inmate's renewed request for "double-portion kosher meals" while incarcerated in the County's Theo Lacy jail. As reported by the Orange County Register (via the ABA Journal), the judge initially signed off on the request in April. But county officials weren't having it; kosher food is apparently more expensive than salami (though the two are not mutually exclusive, as any kid from New York knows).

When questioned, the inmate, Malcolm Alarmo King, candidly admitted that he wasn't Jewish. He just didn't think the oft-served salami sandwiches were healthy enough, and needed more calories to "maintain his physique." Thus, when asked by jail officials about his religion, he replied that he was an adherent of "Healthism."

King then appeared before Johnson for sentencing, and pleaded guilty to one of the counts against him. Since he realized he would be spending more time on the inside, he renewed his request for the double-kosher meals. The judge, realizing that "Healthism" wasn't gonna fly, called counsel to the bench and asked what religion he could put down on the necessary paperwork to legitimize King's meal choice.

King's lawyer, Fred Thiagarajah, suggested Festivus. Festivus, of course, is not a religion, per se, but rather the holiday made famous by the Costanza family on one of the undisputably greatest episodes of Seinfeld ever produced.

Despite the county attorney's "airing of grievances," Festivus was a good enough answer for Johnson, and he again ordered that King was to be given non-salami meals. According to The Associated Press, the Sheriff's Department was, eventually, able to get the judge's order overturned.

So score one for Frank Costanza. King may need to start thinking about some feats of strength pretty quick, as he's been transferred to federal custody and is awaiting deportation.

http://legalblogwatch.typepad.com/legal_blog_watch/2010/12/california-judge-cites-festivus-to-justify-inmates-special-meals.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crow73 (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:40 AM

24. so big deal, he can exercise compassion when it comes to an inmate getting a certain kind of

meal, but is an ignorant, woman-hating monster when it comes to rape. do you honestly think that balances the scales? or did you forget the sarcasm thingy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to niyad (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:37 PM

27. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to niyad (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:41 PM

28. I think that Crow73...

was just trying to point up the fact that this judge is a dumbass--to say the least. The first line in the post about judges being people and exercising compassion and all is actually the first line of the article that Crow73 links to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:32 AM

22. Kick (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:36 AM

23. I say ...

Let's put the judge's theory that to the test and I'm certain this judge will be eager to volunteer to prove his theory:

Judge's Theory:


Putting up a fight during an assault will trigger the mechanism that indicates that if someone doesn't want sexual intercourse, the body "will not permit that to happen."



Experiment:


Put this judge in GenPop of just about any prison in the nation with "Judge" stenciled to the front and back of his prison-garb for one week with the same level of protection provided to the typical trans-gendered detainee.


Judge's Anticipated Findings:

Judge will emerge rape-free because his body will certainly response as he presents ... doubly so, because any intercourse related to this experiment would be HOMOSEXUAL intercourse!



Experiment Findings:

???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:35 PM

26. This happened in 2008! What took them so long?

I wonder whether the rapist is now out of jail for "good behavior."

http://www.ocweekly.com/2008-10-30/news/moxley-confidential/#livefyre

After the verdicts, Superior Court Judge Derek G. Johnson not only dismissed the sentencing request by prosecutors, but he also mocked the crime in open court by calling it “a technical rape.”

“To treat this case like the rape cases that we hear about is an insult to victims of rape,” Johnson said moments after declining to punish Gurel on six of the seven guilty verdicts. “I think it trivializes rape.”

Johnson, who once worked as a sex-crimes prosecutor, gave Gurel 251 days pre-prison credit for time served in the Orange County Jail and handed him a relatively soft six-year sentence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 04:59 PM

29. I may feel differently than most of you, but from what I read he wasn't saying the rape didn't

happen, as in, he never penetrated her because her magic shield should have come down and stopped it. What the judge said was, "if someone doesn't want to have intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless A LOT OF DAMAGE IS INFLICTED, AND WE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT THAT IN THIS CASE." I think what he was referring to was that if there is no excitement on the woman's part (no lube), then the rapist would have to use alot more force for penetration, causing bruises, tears etc. Now, I'm not for a second saying he was correct. He should be removed from the bench. But, I think we need to shift the focus of the discussion to the idea that a judge would use no vaginal tearing/bruising as a means to determine whether or not a rape actually occured. It seems from his ruling that is the difference between real rape, and "technical rape." If he believes this, how many other judges, cops, prosecutors etc. believe this crap also? It's become increasingly clear lately that alot of individuals are grossly misinformed about rape. Maybe it's time we take a harder look at the information that's out there and try to enlighten the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #29)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 05:31 PM

31. I am not aware of a category of crime called "technical" rape, as opposed to "real rape"==this

Last edited Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:31 AM - Edit history (1)

is the nonsense that the reichwing pukes spew. this isn't misinformation, this is woman-hating, blame the victim crap.

welcome to DU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to niyad (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:16 PM

32. you're absolutely right. I put technical in quotations because the judge used that term. Apparently

the judge feels that rape where the woman isn't entirely mutilated is a different "level" of rape. Like misdemeanor rape or something. What a loser. But again, how many idiots believe that sort of thing? And how many of those idiots are lawmakers (we know there was atleast one) and how many are cops, judges, pastors, etc?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #29)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:08 AM

33. His argument is like saying someone wasn't really beaten or tortured

If there are no visible scars or broken bones.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #29)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 09:48 AM

35. Wow!

A rape apologist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #35)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:17 AM

36. there is no way that person youre replying to is a rape apologist...

Unless I'm missing something. Where did he/she give any excuse for rape? To me, it seems the poster was merely pointing out the flawed logic of the judge...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #35)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:14 PM

38. Please read before making stupid comments.

It's hard enough to have an honest conversation on this website without posts like yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 05:01 PM

30. That's not an impression of bias; that is bias, full stop. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:51 AM

37. Umm,

happened in blue California. Thought this only happened in red states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:55 AM

40. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread