The media narrative is that an evil white cis-gendered male jock [four things the left hates] found an unconscious woman behind a dumpster and raped her. The facts of the case, as usual, are a little blurrier. The man and the woman were at a party together, they were both very intoxicated, she left the party with him willingly and made out behind the dumpster with him, willingly, before passing out. She passed out, he kept going. The details of the physical assault are somewhat vague but the conviction indicates he penetrated her with a ‘foreign object.’ This may have fallen short of what Whoopi Goldberg would call “rape-rape” if it had been done by someone she is more sympathetic to.
This is not a defense of anything he did. Even the most charitable reading of the circumstances indicates the guy committed a form of sexual assault and earned legal consequences. It’s pretty cut-and-dried. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. One is just observing that The Narrative simply omits mitigating circumstances that might make a six-month sentence seem a little less outrageous. Or, not.
[Over/Under on the first troll to ignore the previous five or six sentences and claim that this post is defending rape?]
Anyway, the judge who passed down the sentence and his family are receiving death threats; because that’s the language of disagreement in the 21st Century.
Whoopi, by the way, has said she thinks the judge in the case was racially biased and all judges are racially biased. So, she finally agrees with Donald Trump on something.
I wonder if any of the people who are outraged over this sentence are outraged that Historic First (TM) Democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton helped a man who raped a twelve year old girl escape punishment on a legal technicality?
Probably not. That’s not how the Outrage Machine works.
Hillary’s defense of a child-rapist is not an outrage because she’s a left-wing Democrat woman.
Mitigating circumstances, one could say.