Brock Turner's sexual assault appeal: He intended 'outercourse,' not intercourse
Source: Washington Post
An attorney for Brock Turner, the former Stanford University swimmer convicted of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman in 2016, launched a bid to overturn his client’s convictions before a panel of skeptical appellate judges Tuesday, arguing that Turner never intended to have sexual intercourse with the woman. He just wanted “outercourse,” attorney Eric S. Multhaup told the court in a brief and in oral arguments.
The distinction is central to Multhaup’s argument that Turner should not have been convicted of assault with intent to commit rape because, he claims, Turner’s clothes were on when two bicyclists saw him thrusting on top of the half-naked, unconscious woman. He argued that Turner was engaged only in “outercourse,” a “version of safe sex” with no “penile contact,” Multhaup explained, the Palo Alto Weekly reported.
The long-shot legal argument had three California 6th District Court of Appeal justices scratching their heads, according to multiple accounts of the hearing.
“I absolutely don’t understand what you are talking about,” Justice Franklin D. Elia told Multhaup, the San Jose Mercury News reported.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/07/26/brock-turners-sexual-assault-appeal-he-intended-outercourse-not-intercourse/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ccee12533494
= new reply since forum marked as read
By definition that would make the doctor molesting the wrestlers innocent as well. Hey, safe sex is not rape!
I can just see the looks on their faces. One eyebrow raised..
..
Still an act of sexual assault!
This guy has to be kidding.
