Outrage at sentence may open new era

The slap-on-the-wrist sentence for Brock Turner in the attempted rape of an unconscious woman outside a Stanford frat party last year set off an explosion of national outrage, including a movement to recall the judge.

Could it be a turning point? Could this be the kind of pivot that Mothers Against Drunk Driving brought about a few decades ago -- the shift from giving drinking and driving a winking pass (unless you killed someone) to the broad social rejection of drunk driving as not only illegal but also just plain wrong?

That is the societal shift needed to reverse the trend of campus sexual assault, date rape -- all the nuances of the behavior that now leaves one in five women saying she’s been sexually assaulted during her college years.

We’re not quite there. But we are closer.

What got us to this point is a harmonic convergence of circumstance and eloquence.

Circumstances include the incident itself -- happening at Stanford, the assailant a star athlete, the witnesses courageous enough to stop the crime.

And then, the court proceeding -- the jury that got it right and the judge who, emphatically, did not: Judge Aaron Persky sentenced Turner to a few months in county jail rather than the two to 14 years in state prison Turner’s felony convictions usually call for.

The main reason this case has resonated in social media and beyond, however, is the eloquence of the victim.

Her statement in the courtroom was both rational and absolutely heartbreaking, a rare combination.

We don’t see how the judge remained unmoved.

Also stoking the viral outrage were the words of Turner’s defenders, including his father.

The other thing that elevates this case is that it hits not one but two flashpoints of American justice today: the difficulty of prosecuting sexual assault, even in the rare cases like this when there are witnesses; and the societal factors of race and privilege that influence sentencing.

The witnesses who stopped the rape probably made the felony convictions possible, both by testifying and by enabling police to immediately gather evidence at the crime scene.

But when it came to sentencing, the champion swimmer’s upbringing, reputation and so on persuaded Persky to excuse the crime as an aberration, declare Turner no danger to others and send him to county jail for what probably will amount to three months.

Yes, Turner’s life expectations have changed because of, in his father’s words, “20 minutes of action.”

But here’s the thing about using good upbringing as a reason for a light sentence.

Shouldn’t it maybe be the opposite? Should criminals who had all the advantages in life be held to a higher standard?

Or, we would argue, at least the same standard?

So many questions as the discussion progresses.

At least we hope it progresses. Mothers Against Drunk Driving were taken lightly at the start.

But not anymore.