[TreesAndBirds]

I’m putting this out there so people know about it. Seems odd to me, but maybe having a physical reminder is good. Quote seems really odd.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/brock-tu...21460.html

[TreesAndBirds]

I’m putting this out there so people know about it. Seems odd to me, but maybe having a physical reminder is good. Quote seems really odd.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/brock-tu...21460.html

[fullmetal]

A memorial (for one person?) feels strange here.  But done tastefully, it could work.  That quote, on the other hand, just doesn't work at all.  Ignoring Jane Doe's wishes is unconscionable given that she was the sole victim.

[fullmetal]

A memorial (for one person?) feels strange here.  But done tastefully, it could work.  That quote, on the other hand, just doesn't work at all.  Ignoring Jane Doe's wishes is unconscionable given that she was the sole victim.

[2006alum]

That quote is bizarre and the worst form of irony.

[2006alum]

That quote is bizarre and the worst form of irony.

[JustAnotherFan]

Wow. Shameful.

[JustAnotherFan]

Wow. Shameful.

[Hurlburt88]

Very strange. And Provost Drell approved this approach?

[Hurlburt88]

Very strange. And Provost Drell approved this approach?

[CardinalSagehen]

“I’m okay, everything’s okay.”  How “monumentally” tone deaf.  They might as well have erected an obelisk adorned by a keg on each side.

I can only surmise that the Administration’s intent was to evoke strength and survivorship.  But the most obvious and direct interpretation is dismissiveness, Polyannism, acceptance.  How could any semi-literate gaggle of Stanford people settle on such an utterly moronic quote?!

I’d like to believe the story has been misreported, but at a minimum, the brain-dead quote speaks for itself. 

[CardinalSagehen]

“I’m okay, everything’s okay.”  How “monumentally” tone deaf.  They might as well have erected an obelisk adorned by a keg on each side.

I can only surmise that the Administration’s intent was to evoke strength and survivorship.  But the most obvious and direct interpretation is dismissiveness, Polyannism, acceptance.  How could any semi-literate gaggle of Stanford people settle on such an utterly moronic quote?!

I’d like to believe the story has been misreported, but at a minimum, the brain-dead quote speaks for itself. 

[qwerty49]

A shining example of poor judgment. What imbecile chose that quote? Jeez - Why don’t they just rename it Harvey Weinstein Garden?

[qwerty49]

A shining example of poor judgment. What imbecile chose that quote? Jeez - Why don’t they just rename it Harvey Weinstein Garden?

[winflop]

The quote is utterly shameful. Everything is absolutely not OK. A woman's life has been all but destroyed and the rapist is out of jail after serving less than a year

I don't know why a memorial is needed in the first place unless it is to draw attention to sexual assault more broadly. If I were the University I wouldn't build any kind of monument to what has become a pretty unflattering episode in its history, especially as more stories about how other cases of sexual assault and rape have been mishandled. I really wish the school would get out of the business of administering justice and refer these matters to the local police & DA's office.

[winflop]

The quote is utterly shameful. Everything is absolutely not OK. A woman's life has been all but destroyed and the rapist is out of jail after serving less than a year

I don't know why a memorial is needed in the first place unless it is to draw attention to sexual assault more broadly. If I were the University I wouldn't build any kind of monument to what has become a pretty unflattering episode in its history, especially as more stories about how other cases of sexual assault and rape have been mishandled. I really wish the school would get out of the business of administering justice and refer these matters to the local police & DA's office.

[Stymie]

If I were in charge, I'd keep the dumpster and the way it was and call it the "Brock Turner Memorial Trash Bin," and add to the "plaque" something to the effect of:
"Brock Turner sexually assaulted 'Jane Doe,' a fellow Stanford Student in the night of (date here).  He was and is trash."

[Stymie]

If I were in charge, I'd keep the dumpster and the way it was and call it the "Brock Turner Memorial Trash Bin," and add to the "plaque" something to the effect of:
"Brock Turner sexually assaulted 'Jane Doe,' a fellow Stanford Student in the night of (date here).  He was and is trash."

[ColoradoTree]

I can understand the value of a physical reminder, so that everyone who walks by has to confront the uncomfortable fact that it happens everywhere, including here.  But if the university is intent on keeping things this way, they are just asking for the plaque to be vandalized. 

For the university to take any step in this process that even hints at minimizing what she experienced is beyond shameful.  If you want to use her words, you don't get to cherry-pick, and you sure as heck don't get to pick the words she spoke to try and keep from upsetting her family.  If you don't want to use her words, then that's OK--make it an apology on behalf of Stanford to women that have been sexually assaulted on campus, and a pledge to try and be better and work harder at preventing it every day.  If you don't want to make that pledge, then why exactly are you creating a physical reminder of this horrible event in the first place? 

Here's hoping the PR backlash is enough to shame Stanford into changing the plaque.

[ColoradoTree]

I can understand the value of a physical reminder, so that everyone who walks by has to confront the uncomfortable fact that it happens everywhere, including here.  But if the university is intent on keeping things this way, they are just asking for the plaque to be vandalized. 

For the university to take any step in this process that even hints at minimizing what she experienced is beyond shameful.  If you want to use her words, you don't get to cherry-pick, and you sure as heck don't get to pick the words she spoke to try and keep from upsetting her family.  If you don't want to use her words, then that's OK--make it an apology on behalf of Stanford to women that have been sexually assaulted on campus, and a pledge to try and be better and work harder at preventing it every day.  If you don't want to make that pledge, then why exactly are you creating a physical reminder of this horrible event in the first place? 

Here's hoping the PR backlash is enough to shame Stanford into changing the plaque.

[oldalum]

just a news update for those not local:

The recall petition for the judge has enough signatures, so the recall will be on the next ballot. There are already signs in my neighborhood on both sides.

Turner reportedly has appealed the verdict, in part on the basis that the assault did not occur "behind a dumpster" and the prosecution's mention of the dumpster biased the jury. I don't understand the strategy of appealing: he got the lightest sentence possible and already served it. If re-convicted, would he be re-sentenced?

[oldalum]

just a news update for those not local:

The recall petition for the judge has enough signatures, so the recall will be on the next ballot. There are already signs in my neighborhood on both sides.

Turner reportedly has appealed the verdict, in part on the basis that the assault did not occur "behind a dumpster" and the prosecution's mention of the dumpster biased the jury. I don't understand the strategy of appealing: he got the lightest sentence possible and already served it. If re-convicted, would he be re-sentenced?

[needle]

I can understand the value of a physical reminder,

Not sure I can. The whole idea seems unnecessary and, now, unwanted.

Bring back the dumpster!

[needle]

I can understand the value of a physical reminder,

Not sure I can. The whole idea seems unnecessary and, now, unwanted.

Bring back the dumpster!

[Mick]

just a news update for those not local:

The recall petition for the judge has enough signatures, so the recall will be on the next ballot. There are already signs in my neighborhood on both sides.

Turner reportedly has appealed the verdict, in part on the basis that the assault did not occur "behind a dumpster" and the prosecution's mention of the dumpster biased the jury. I don't understand the strategy of appealing: he got the lightest sentence possible and already served it. If re-convicted, would he be re-sentenced?

I'm guessing he wants an innocent verdict so he doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

[Mick]

just a news update for those not local:

The recall petition for the judge has enough signatures, so the recall will be on the next ballot. There are already signs in my neighborhood on both sides.

Turner reportedly has appealed the verdict, in part on the basis that the assault did not occur "behind a dumpster" and the prosecution's mention of the dumpster biased the jury. I don't understand the strategy of appealing: he got the lightest sentence possible and already served it. If re-convicted, would he be re-sentenced?

I'm guessing he wants an innocent verdict so he doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

[oldalum]

I'm wondering if it's a risk-free appeal (if wins appeal, loses trial, same sentence applies and already served), or if he risks re-sentencing which definitely would result in a worse sentence. Probably risk-free or it would not make sense to do it.

[oldalum]

I'm wondering if it's a risk-free appeal (if wins appeal, loses trial, same sentence applies and already served), or if he risks re-sentencing which definitely would result in a worse sentence. Probably risk-free or it would not make sense to do it.

[Mick]

I'm wondering if it's a risk-free appeal (if wins appeal, loses trial, same sentence applies and already served), or if he risks re-sentencing which definitely would result in a worse sentence. Probably risk-free or it would not make sense to do it.

Agreed.  He has to know he dodged a bullet in his prior sentencing.

[Mick]

I'm wondering if it's a risk-free appeal (if wins appeal, loses trial, same sentence applies and already served), or if he risks re-sentencing which definitely would result in a worse sentence. Probably risk-free or it would not make sense to do it.

Agreed.  He has to know he dodged a bullet in his prior sentencing.

[ColoradoTree]

I can understand the value of a physical reminder,

Not sure I can. The whole idea seems unnecessary and, now, unwanted.

Bring back the dumpster!

I mean, I'm not saying it's the choice I would have made. But I can see the argument for it.  I just can't see the argument for doing what Stanford has done.

[ColoradoTree]

I can understand the value of a physical reminder,

Not sure I can. The whole idea seems unnecessary and, now, unwanted.

Bring back the dumpster!

I mean, I'm not saying it's the choice I would have made. But I can see the argument for it.  I just can't see the argument for doing what Stanford has done.

[Hank 91]

I can understand the desire for a memorial, but like some have said, it's odd to have a memorial for one person, and then not to honor that one person's wishes. In that case it becomes more about the University than about the crime. It doesn't seem like they want to send a message to the community about the horror of rape or even the dangers of drinking. It's more like: "Look at what we're doing here to honor this victim. No one told us to do this, but we're still doing it. We are forward-thinking and compassionate." This is quite a leap, but it reminds me of when people see a soldier and say "Thank you for your service." I tend to be rather cynical when it comes to things like this, but I always feel like the speaker in that case doesn't actually want to express gratitude, but instead wants to be seen expressing gratitude. I think the same thing is going on with this memorial. The University wants to be seen expressing remorse.

[Hank 91]

I can understand the desire for a memorial, but like some have said, it's odd to have a memorial for one person, and then not to honor that one person's wishes. In that case it becomes more about the University than about the crime. It doesn't seem like they want to send a message to the community about the horror of rape or even the dangers of drinking. It's more like: "Look at what we're doing here to honor this victim. No one told us to do this, but we're still doing it. We are forward-thinking and compassionate." This is quite a leap, but it reminds me of when people see a soldier and say "Thank you for your service." I tend to be rather cynical when it comes to things like this, but I always feel like the speaker in that case doesn't actually want to express gratitude, but instead wants to be seen expressing gratitude. I think the same thing is going on with this memorial. The University wants to be seen expressing remorse.

[French Rage]

I can only surmise that the Administration’s intent was to evoke strength and survivorship.  But the most obvious and direct interpretation is dismissiveness, Polyannism, acceptance.  How could any semi-literate gaggle of Stanford people settle on such an utterly moronic quote?!

That's my thought too.  Yes in theory maybe they were going for strength and surviving.  But I don't see how you focus group that particular quote and assume anyone would take it that way.  I mean, it's just tone deaf.  It's like when there's a very bad ad campaign or product; take for example that "coolest monkey in the jungle" sweatshirt from a couple weeks back; maybe you didn't mean it they way people are taking it, but with a room full of adults making that decision no one thought to object because of how it would so obviously sound?

[French Rage]

I can only surmise that the Administration’s intent was to evoke strength and survivorship.  But the most obvious and direct interpretation is dismissiveness, Polyannism, acceptance.  How could any semi-literate gaggle of Stanford people settle on such an utterly moronic quote?!

That's my thought too.  Yes in theory maybe they were going for strength and surviving.  But I don't see how you focus group that particular quote and assume anyone would take it that way.  I mean, it's just tone deaf.  It's like when there's a very bad ad campaign or product; take for example that "coolest monkey in the jungle" sweatshirt from a couple weeks back; maybe you didn't mean it they way people are taking it, but with a room full of adults making that decision no one thought to object because of how it would so obviously sound?

[M T]

Why is it that the 4 articles I looked at don't carry the two quotes suggested by the victim and rejected by Stanford?  If they were reasonable alternatives, it seems the article writers would have brought them up.  Maybe Stanford is barred from revealing them, but the victim's representative wouldn't be.

[M T]

Why is it that the 4 articles I looked at don't carry the two quotes suggested by the victim and rejected by Stanford?  If they were reasonable alternatives, it seems the article writers would have brought them up.  Maybe Stanford is barred from revealing them, but the victim's representative wouldn't be.

[CardinalSagehen]

Why is it that the 4 articles I looked at don't carry the two quotes suggested by the victim and rejected by Stanford?  If they were reasonable alternatives, it seems the article writers would have brought them up.  Maybe Stanford is barred from revealing them, but the victim's representative wouldn't be.

That’s an interesting question.  I just assumed that the victim’s proposals were off-putting to the University in some way.  We can even give them the benefit of the doubt on this point, although in this case, they’ve done nothing to earn it. 

But it’s also beside the point that they could have chosen a completely different, semi-intelligent, non mind-numbingly stupid quote... or no quote at all. 

[CardinalSagehen]

Why is it that the 4 articles I looked at don't carry the two quotes suggested by the victim and rejected by Stanford?  If they were reasonable alternatives, it seems the article writers would have brought them up.  Maybe Stanford is barred from revealing them, but the victim's representative wouldn't be.

That’s an interesting question.  I just assumed that the victim’s proposals were off-putting to the University in some way.  We can even give them the benefit of the doubt on this point, although in this case, they’ve done nothing to earn it. 

But it’s also beside the point that they could have chosen a completely different, semi-intelligent, non mind-numbingly stupid quote... or no quote at all.