Three character witnesses testifying Friday on behalf of former Stanford University student Brock Turner, who is on trial for allegedly sexually assaulting an unconscious and intoxicated young woman on campus in January 2015, described him as “respectful,” “courteous” and “know(ing) what right and wrong is.”
Turner’s former girlfriend, swim coach and friend from his hometown in Ohio told jurors that while they had never seen him drunk, they didn’t believe he would carry out the charges he now faces: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious person; sexual penetration of an intoxicated person; and sexual penetration of an unconscious person.
Turner’s high school girlfriend, a college student, described their relationship as “respectful” and very close to this day, though they are no longer dating. In response to a question from defense attorney Michael Armstrong, she said she never felt pressured to engage in any sexual activity with him.
“He has great moral character,” she said.
Turner’s friend, who was a year ahead of him in high school and spent much time with him as a teammate on the same club swim team, said Turner was like a “little brother” to him.
“There’s no way he would ever do something like that,” the friend said.
“I don’t believe that he would do anything that would harm anybody,” his former swim coach testified. “He knows what right and wrong is.”
But had any of the three witnesses ever consumed alcohol with Turner, seen him intoxicated or attended a party with him, Deputy District Attorney Alaleh Kianerci asked during her cross examinations? None of them had, they testified.
The defense called the character witnesses the two days after Turner himself took the stand to provide his account of what allegedly happened between him and the young woman, “Emily Doe,” in the early hours of Jan. 18, 2015. The Palo Alto Weekly has changed the woman’s name to protect her privacy.
Turner admitted to engaging in some sexual activity with Doe but said it was consensual and that she remained conscious and responsive throughout all of their interactions.
This was in contrast to the testimony of witnesses who described her as unresponsive and unconscious from the point she was first discovered around 1 a.m., throughout a 30-minute ambulance ride to Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose and for several hours at the hospital until she regained consciousness at 4:15 a.m.
Doe has testified she has no memory of the alleged assault nor of meeting Turner that night. Expert witnesses for both the defense and prosecution have said that she was likely in an alcohol-induced blackout, meaning she lost some memory of the evening even though she may have been conscious for part of it.
Over the course of the trial, which began last Monday, March 14, both the prosecution and defense have focused on how intoxication affected Turner, Doe and others that night and attacked the credibility of their opponent’s witnesses.
On Friday, the tenth day of the trial, Kianerci also played the full audio recording of the statement Turner gave to police on Jan. 18. He was interviewed by Stanford University police detective Mike Kim, who testified this week on behalf of the prosecution. In the interivew, Turner said Doe was “responsive” to him and their interactions were consensual, though he didn’t mention several verbal responses that she allegedly gave him, as he testified to this week.
“Like, literally, my intentions were not to try to rape a girl without her consent,” Turner told Kim during the Jan. 18 interview. “I can’t believe I’m charged with rape.”
He described his level of intoxication that night as “pretty buzzed” but functional, his memory “fuzzy” in parts but clear on other details.
Turner also told Kim on Jan. 18 he didn’t “think” he ran away from two graduate students who approached Turner after seeing him “thrusting” on top of an unmoving body, behind a Dumpster near the Kappa Alpha fraternity house. He testified this week that, feeling sick, he got up from Doe, when all of a sudden one of the students, Peter Jonsson, approached him, put his hand on his shoulder and tried to put him in an armlock, making him scared — which is why he ran away.
Kianerci called back Jonsson on Friday to testify that the first time he touched Turner was when he tackled him, after Turner started to run away. He said he never put his arm on his shoulder or tried to put him in an armlock.
Defense attorney Michael Armstrong also asked Kim if he had made attempts to interview any members of the KA fraternity, other people who attended the party or go back to the KA house to find more potential witnesses; he said he hadn’t. Police did interview a friend and fellow swim-team member with whom Turner went to the KA party.
Armstrong is expected to call one more defense witness on Monday morning. Judge Aaron Persky instructed Kianerci and and Armstrong to prepare to give closing statements later on Monday.
Read the Palo Alto Weekly’s coverage of the Brock Turner trial and other sexual-assault cases at Stanford here.
I find this very sad that this young man’s life has been ruined. If he was indeed trying to rape an unconscious woman, then he deserves the sentence the judge throws at him but I don’t think that was his intent. In High school he was a swimmer at the highest levels in the nation, probably leading a very busy, structured, and protected life. This young man comes to Stanford and has total freedom for the first time in his life and made some very bad choices with drinking and partying. I don’t think he’s “bad” and he seems truly remorseful. Does the girl have zero fault in this mess? I have 2 high school girls and I teach them personal responsibility, so where was her personal responsibility? She’s already testified that she’s been totally drunk and blacked out before. What a disaster for everyone, but especially for this young man.
To the woman who just posted, are you for REAL? This “nice young man” is a PREDATOR. Witnesses testify he was on the prowl from the beginning, kissing women without their consent, and then finally, spotting the drunkest girl in the room and penetrating her while she was UNCONSCIOUS. Do you think having sex with a sleeping person is normal, LAHMom? Is that what you are going to teach your daughters?
Brock’s testimony was a JOKE and revealed him to be a huge liar. Do you have any idea what rape does to someone? How it absolutely destroys their life? It doesn’t matter that she was irresponsible – the punishment for drinking too much should be a bad hangover, not RAPE. The fact that you are raising two daughters and you have more sympathy for the RAPIST than the victims is appalling. People like you should not reproduce.
As for this trial, why the hell did the judge allow for character witnesses?? Isn’t that reserved for sentencing?
I am wondering LAH Mom how you would feel if one of your daughters was the victim in this case?
His statements on the witness stand do not ring true.
I would love to hear how you think he is showing remorse, the only thing I have heard him do is make excuses for his behavior and blame the victim.
I hope Brock Turner gets acquitted. He is an innocent young plan victim of a smear campaign. Hang tough buddy, you will make it out and the truth will set you free.
So in other words, the *alleged* lack of responsibility on the part of the young woman in this case excuses the actions of Mr. Turner?
Funny, I thought we as a society had moved on from “she had it coming to her.”
You are one sick puppy.
A woman has a right to get intoxicated, dress in the most suggestive manner, and not get raped. No, she has absolutely no responsibility in this matter. Regardless of how she behaves, no man has the right to assume he can force himself on her. NAH Mom is beyond awful. She is basically an enabler for men who will rape women and then blame their “slutty” behavior in order to escape responsibility. I just feel sorry for her daughters.
LAH mom is a troll for the defense. Every time one of these stories is posted one of the first posts is by someone who poses as a community member but who is defending Brock, attacking the prosecution, and defending the witnesses who testified for the defense. There was one that defended their horrible expert who testified in the Steubenville case as well. Ignore and do not feed the defense trolls.
He clearly did it. He’s clearly not sorry. He clearly takes no responsibility. I feel sorry for his parents, who sent their son off to Stanford, probably so proud of him, and then he went and did this ridiculous thing.
Fraternities should be banned. Period. Hennessey, your ridiculous alcohol proposal will only worsen the rape problem and drive it underground — girls won’t report because they weren’t supposed to be drinking. It’s worse than nothing. End. Fraternities. Now. The Greek system is the problem and everyone everyone everyone knows it.
Men should have more self-control. But women know that when they are around drunk men, they are targets, even when they are sober. Any woman who gets drunk, especially to the point of blacking-out has to be at least partially to blame.
You can’t hold raw meat in front of a lion and expect him to walk away.
Not only is he a fast swimmer but he is also a sexual predator a necrophilia hopeful both rear among men the latter even more. He developed a fantasy around his unconscious pray and reported it as truth. Whatever the verdict will be that zebra’s stripes wont change. Good that he was discovered early less there be another Cosby in the news.
Being a mother of a daughter and a son , I followed this case very closely. I believe that Mr. Kim the detective , utterly failed to gather more witnesses and testimonies regarding what exactly was the nature of interaction between Ms. Doe and Mr. Turner . I believe that the witnesses at the party would testify that the interaction was consensual . One thing that all involved fail to realize is : Ms. Doe was NOT dragged or was carried towards the grassy area but actually was LEADING Mr. Turner towards his dorm in what one can just assume to have sex or further sexual interaction with Mr. Turner. I do not blame her but I truly can not see how it is plausible to convict him in rape when she was walking with him and both were drunk and both were interested in having sexual activity. Students at Stanford and in any other university unfortunately do not exercise restrain in dealing with alcohol and they do not know the limit of what they can handle ….both drunk on grassy area…absolutely logical that it looked odd to any bystander …after all, it is after midnight and you would expect that whatever sexual activity that happens on Stanford property most likely happens in the dorm room !
My question to all of you is “ can you convict an 18 year old drunk boy who was led by a drunk 23 year old Ms. Doe towards his dorm to have further sexual interaction? “ what if the case had been reversed ? He was too drunk to give consent and she was on top of him assuming that since they walked out of the party towards her dorm , he agreed to have further sexual interaction and they both ended up on grassy area…would you convict her of raping Mr. Turner?. Something to think about!
I see in this case overly pushy prosecutor ,who has NOT gathered enough witnesses to the interaction between Ms. Doe and Mr. Turner….. I am glad that the witnesses noticed the event because otherwise we might have two utterly drunk individuals spending entire night on dirt unconscious …and by the way it appears the Mr. Turner is not accused of rape. Unfortunately many actual cases of rape go unreported at Stanford according to Mr. Kim….I truly do not believe that this case amounts to rape and I hope that Mr. Turner will be exonerated very soon.
I’m sure his attorney looked for those witnesses but could not find any.
I think she was leaving the party either to go to the bathroom to find her friend or to get away from him. He followed her and when she fell down from passing out he took advantage of her.
I am not here to make a judgement. I will leave that up to the legal system.
I do find the situation extremely sad for everyone involved. Universities and colleges carry a great responsibility for the young human beings who join their institutions. Eighteen years old, frontal lobes not yet completely developed, until then, always (or mostly) under direct parental care with certain home rules, and all of a sudden on your own with racing hormones, an enormous freedom to party and to drink until deep into the night with the results thereof.
Again, a tragedy for everyone involved, including Stanford University!
The things men are capable of are frightening; those capabilities are more likely to become realities when they are highly intoxicated. The threat of male violence is very real when excessive testosterone is mixed with alcohol or drugs, and inhibitions/ self-control fall away.
Steer clear of young males drinking to excess, period!
Ted Bundy was a great guy.
To Palo Alto Mom. I know people that go to Stanford and a couple that lived in the KA fraternity last year. This incident was talked about quite a bit among the students last year. I have also been following the case fairly closely.
If I remember correctly, there were several other “witnesses” that were interviewed that night by police that never testified in court. If they had anything important to add for either the prosecutor or the defense, I’m sure they would have also testified. I never heard of there being any other witnesses with more information, but then again, I don’t go to Stanford. I was very likely not privy to all of the student chatter.
Didn’t both of the graduate students that intervened say that there was no one else around when they came across the defendant and victim? Then slowly a small group of people trickled into the scene? Sounds like there weren’t any other witnesses.
To Lisa. I agree. I can’t see the defense attorney not making the attempt to look for witnesses to aid the defendant. The fact that the defense did not call any witnesses to the incident, likely means that they were not able to find any either.
Either way. This is a horrible incident for all involved. The sad thing is that it could have been prevented.
To all who comments about the lack of witnesses to interaction between Turner and the Ms. Doe: according to Mr. Kim the detective in this case., he didn’t seek to find more witnesses and from what I understand , the potential witnesses once they and their parents understood the severity of the charges , hired their own attorneys to shield themselves from any testifying for two reasons : they were all underage and all were drinking heavily and engaging in all sorts of other activities that they did not want anybody to know about! Two, they all pretty much washed their hands off claiming that they didn’t see anything or hear anything…after all if the Turner and Ms. Doe did end up in his dorm ….non of this charges would have been filed by the district attorney !
Ms. Doe herself even if she would have remembered that she agreed to go to Turner’s dorm to engage in sexual activity, she would most likely not say so in court for two reasons : she was heavily drinking and kissing and agreeing to sex with another guy all the while her own boyfriend was out of town!!! Would any of you being in her situation confess to agreeing to sex with random 18 year old or would you just say that you have absolutely no recollection of the event and just throw Mr. Turner under the bus so to speak!
Sad very sad for Turner, that all those that could have helped him with their testimony are all hiding behind attorneys and the only woman that could let him go free will never admit that she consented to having sex with random 18 year old guy while her boyfriend is out of town .
The only testimony that one needs to hear is the exact transcript of Turner’s first interrogation in police department at around 6 am when he sobered up and before he know that he is accused of rape! Before he had an attorney and before all the party witnesses disappeared after the case was brought against him.
His bad luck was that it he incident if their consented sexual activity was on a ground in the middle of the night….that the only reason why the bystanders found it odd and assumed it was a real rape case!
Hooking-up and engaging in sexual activity with random people while drunk is far far more common than we the parents aware off ! That is why many of the students go to this type of parties…It happens every weekend in all universities and Stanford is no exception!!! I hope Mr. Turner will go free!
To Lisa and to others: the defense attorney tried to find witnesses to interaction between Turner and Ms. Dow …I do have a first hand knowledge of few students that were at that party . Their parents hired attorneys to shield their children from court system.
So, Palo Alto Mom, if I understand you correctly – these parents didn’t want their kids to say anything for the defense or the prosecution? That doesn’t seem right for either side of the courtroom. I have been following this case, and (just my opinion) both Mr. Turner and Ms. Doe have fault in what transpired, but I do not believe that there was an intent to commit “rape”. Who knows how it will come about, and by the end of the week it will all be over an done with. In the meantime, Stanford will continue to have both girls and boys drinking too much and not knowing exactly what they are doing or saying at any given time during their party escapades.
Maybe it has something to do with the under age drinking in the house. I don’t know Stanford’s position on alcohol consumption on their campus but it cannot include the acceptance of under age drinking.
I know if there was under age drinking in my house my head would be on the chopping block.
That’s true. Anyone that is at all familiar with college life knows that drinking is, has been, and always will be a problem of some sort. Especially with young adults that are under 21. (Although the victim in this case is 22, not a Stanford student, with a boyfriend. I’m still trying to figure out why she allowed herself to get in such an alcoholic state at a frat party) Anyway, this case is indeed interesting on many different levels. I am curious to see how the jury will look at it all, and what they will say in the end…. but no matter how it comes out, no onw will be a “winner” at all.
I am a little unclear on the law here. He is charged with:
1) assault with the intent to commit rape
2) sexual penetration of an intoxicated person
3) sexual penetration of an unconscious person
We know that as some point Doe was conscious and at some point she was unconscious. We know for sure she was intoxicated. Brock says he never undid his pants and there seems to be no evidence to the contrary so it is hard to see that a rape was actually committed but then again none is charged. I am not going to speculate on the definition of penetration so what about intent to commit rape? Seems like that, and perhaps the others, comes down to did Doe give consent to the activity as Brock states. I assume that would be a good defense as it seems to be the only defense being offered. There are only two people who could know if consent was given and one has no recollection of the events. So only Brock knows. It is a “He said, she didn’t say” case. To convict Brock, you have to think he is lying and basically make up your own story of what happened as there is no evidence other than speculation. I am not going to condone rape but I think it would be sad to take what some people say was a person perhaps going to the Olympics and put him in jail because we don’t believe his side of the story when there is no other side. The point is, nobody knows what happened except Brock and we can all chose to believe him or not but are we going to put him in jail because we don’t believe him and instead believe our imagination. There is no charge of rape. Don’t say if he gets off he got away with rape. He is not charged with rape. Very troubling case.
Most of my other posts have shown outrage at the accused. However I was once called to Jury duty at 401 Broadway in Redwood City. The victim was a pretty blonde girl. The accused was a young African Adult male. They were both about 20 yrs old. The trial was dreadfully boring because each day, nothing changed.
Except the day the young female took the stand under cross examination. It was so tough to see her struggle with the hard questions and then it happened.
She broke down sobbing and said the party that she was at – she drank for hours and hours and in the end she said she knew she had been with many boys at the party not just the accused and she did not really recognize the young man in the courtroom. She sobbed that her family requested that she continue forth so they could get justice. But in the end I myself could not find any justice because the incident itself had so many “he said – she said”.
I cannot predict the outcome of this case but his punishment may be less than what one side is wishing for.
From the closing arguments presented today it appears that the prosecutor would like to have her cake and eat it to! For example: the statements the sister of Ms. Doe made. On one hand the prosecutor claims that the sister’s stateman about the well being of Ms. Doe at the party “ she looked fine” should be considered while also claiming that only Turner could have the first hand knowledge of Ms. Doe condition and not Ms. Doe’s sister. I truly think that the detectives failed in their job to gather ALL the evidence in this case!
As a mother myself, the scariest part of this case is the incredible amounts of alcohol Ms. Doe and her sisters and friends and the rest of the party goers consumed! To hear that Ms. Doe while attending UCSD often “black out “ due to excessive drinking. The prosecutor tried unsuccessfully to portray Ms. Doe as somebody who never attended a frat house party…. One can hardly believe this assertion .
Regarding the Ms. Doe’s boyfriend , apparently they started dating about two month ago so it was not a very long term relationship at all while the prosecutor tried to portray it as such!
I agree with others that this case is about “ he said … She does not remember saying anything one way or another” … Both Turner and Ms. Doe were drunk to extreme and to blame one side only without knowing what actually happened during the few minutes they were outdoors on a grassy area , will be a very very sad outcome!
I hope the jury is smart enough and they will not convict Turner .
And that I hope will be a lesson to all involved to drink less next time!
Question: why is it that the identity of one person is revealed and the identity of the other is protected? Why not protect both young adults until a verdict is reached? From what I have read the entire episode is horrible and heartbreaking. My question is not in defense of the accused; it is just one of fairness while the legal process is unfolding. Even if the young man is acquitted he will carry this shame and have a difficult time rebuilding his life and reputation. At least the young woman’s name is protected and she can begin to rebuild her life with the benefit of anonymity.
After the guilty verdict was given in the Brock Turner trial late last Wednesday afternoon I looked at your reporting of the trial. As one of the members of the jury in this trial I want to commend you on the accuracy and objectivity of your reporting. This was in contrast to some other reports which did not even get the charges correct i.e. reporting rape vs the actual charge of intent to rape.
Thank you – based on this I will certainly look to you for reliable information and reporting in the future.