The California definition of sexual battery is “any person who touches an intimate part of another person while that person is unlawfully restrained by the accused or an accomplice, and if the touching is against the will of the person touched and is for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse, is guilty of sexual battery” ("California "Sexual Battery" Laws Explained | Penal Code 243.4 Pc"). This definition fits the Brock Turner case, as the victim was touched against her will and restrained by the accused, however the punishment for Sexual Battery was not given to Turner. The law states “A conviction for felony sexual battery subjects you to two, (2), three (3) or four (4) years in the California state prison and a maximum $10,000 fine” ("California "Sexual Battery" Laws Explained | Penal Code 243.4 Pc"). Instead of getting two to four years in prison, Brock Turner only got three months. In this sexual abuse case, the punishment of just three months does not fit the crime in which he was found guilty of, therefore there was an injustice in the case, especially to the young girl who was sexually abused. When comparing the three months of punishment for the crime of rape and other sexual abuse felonies, particularly sexual battery, to the victim’s punishment of having to deal with the trauma for the rest of her life, which punishment was worse? Why was the punishment shorter than what the law stated should have been a punishment for the crime of sexual battery? Judge Persky, the judge in charge of this case claimed he was “afraid a harsher punishment would have left a severe impact on Turner” and that he thought the victim “would not be a danger to others". There are two major injustices in the case; the punishment did not fit the crime that was committed, meaning the law was not
The California definition of sexual battery is “any person who touches an intimate part of another person while that person is unlawfully restrained by the accused or an accomplice, and if the touching is against the will of the person touched and is for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse, is guilty of sexual battery” ("California "Sexual Battery" Laws Explained | Penal Code 243.4 Pc"). This definition fits the Brock Turner case, as the victim was touched against her will and restrained by the accused, however the punishment for Sexual Battery was not given to Turner. The law states “A conviction for felony sexual battery subjects you to two, (2), three (3) or four (4) years in the California state prison and a maximum $10,000 fine” ("California "Sexual Battery" Laws Explained | Penal Code 243.4 Pc"). Instead of getting two to four years in prison, Brock Turner only got three months. In this sexual abuse case, the punishment of just three months does not fit the crime in which he was found guilty of, therefore there was an injustice in the case, especially to the young girl who was sexually abused. When comparing the three months of punishment for the crime of rape and other sexual abuse felonies, particularly sexual battery, to the victim’s punishment of having to deal with the trauma for the rest of her life, which punishment was worse? Why was the punishment shorter than what the law stated should have been a punishment for the crime of sexual battery? Judge Persky, the judge in charge of this case claimed he was “afraid a harsher punishment would have left a severe impact on Turner” and that he thought the victim “would not be a danger to others". There are two major injustices in the case; the punishment did not fit the crime that was committed, meaning the law was not