BLOG VIEW | HEADLINE VIEW

CULTURE

POLITICS

MUSIC

CELEB

Pole Vaulting, Public Exposure, Privacy, and Rape Defenses

WEDNESDAY JUNE 6 2007 4:00 PM

Submitted by Bitch_PhD. Edited By Bitch_PhD.

TAGS: fame, the internet, rape, consent, feminism

Those of you who read and talked about Saturday's and Tuesday's posts might be interested in this absolutely appalling bit of background information: apparently the father of the pole vaulter whose photographs got tossed around (and over) across the internet is, himself, a criminal defense attorney--a noble calling--who, in the course of his duty, has offered up some pretty disgusting defenses of his clients.

defense attorney Al Stokke argued that Park wasn’t responsible for making sticky all over the woman’s sweater (after a traffic stop). He insisted that she made the married patrolman make the mess—after all, she was on her way home from work as a dancer at Captain Cream Cabaret.

“She got what she wanted,” said Stokke. “She’s an overtly sexual person.”
.... A jury . . . found Park not guilty.

And, in another case,

Defense lawyer Al Stokke, who replaced lead trial attorney Joseph G. Cavallo, questioned any link between the rape and the victim's claim of mental anguish. Stokke also mocked the girl's physical injuries, finally conceding she was unconscious but then trying to use that against her. "There's [no pain] that is felt," he said, "because she was unconscious."

Awful stories, but beautifully illustrative of a larger point: the culture that enables people to defend rape by arguing that unconscious women are there for the taking isn't at all cut off from the culture that thinks it's okay to make one's opinions about which women are hot into a public game of male bonding. Both rely on the idea that, in the end, women are things, not people. And if it turns out that a given woman hasn't fully internalized that message, and she has the huevos to complain about being treated like an object, way too many of us will just tell her to toughen up, that it's inescapable, what do you expect?

Same fucking thing. Women don't need to get used to being treated like shit. Guys need to get used to the idea that women are human beings.

Bitch_PhD wants to point out that there are men who get it--but that it was feminist women who did the digging and broke the story.

55 Comments

PAGE:

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Morgan

SUICIDEGIRL

Illinois, USA

JUN 06, 2007 04:03 PM

I remember reading in "Against Our Will" the case of a little girl (I think she was 7 or 9) who was raped by her father, and a judge ruled that she had been "engaging in seductive behavior". It wasn't all that long ago, either. Wish I still had a copy of that book so I could look it up.

RileyStClair

Los Angeles, CA

September 2006

JUN 06, 2007 04:09 PM

i'd like to read that case. jesus.

Skywisdom

Portland, OR

December 2005

JUN 06, 2007 04:33 PM

Bitch_PHD, I don't know what else to say but: You've got me on your side. This is so incredibly disgusting.
I'm not a self-hating man. I'm confident enough in my masculinity that I can view women as people. I'm tough enough that I don't need to live in a male-dominated society.
People like Stokkes are cowards in the worst possible sense. FUCK.

IDGAS

Jackson Heights, NY

March 2004

JUN 06, 2007 04:45 PM

Al Stokke you are a useless fucking asshole!

Roethke

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

JUN 06, 2007 04:49 PM

Skywisdom said:
Bitch_PHD, I don't know what else to say but: You've got me on your side. This is so incredibly disgusting.
I'm not a self-hating man. I'm confident enough in my masculinity that I can view women as people. I'm tough enough that I don't need to live in a male-dominated society.
People like Stokkes are cowards in the worst possible sense. FUCK.

The greater point of the article given the context of the past few articles by the same author, is that he is comfortable to treat women as objects when it suits him, but is very very upset when a small amount of that treatment is directed towards his daughter.

No woman should be treated that way, but it does make Stokke senior seem like a bit of a hypocritical ass.

Jennifer_

Venezuela

November 2006

JUN 06, 2007 04:49 PM

I don't think this guy is a twunt. These are, quite possibily, not his real beliefs on the case.
As a defence lawyer he's legally obligated to give the best possible defence of his client; otherwise they can claim a mistrial.

That being said, I don't think 'she was asking for it!' is the best possible defence for this person, so I think he's a bad lawyer. But that's different to being an asshole.

blackrose_x45

Ottawa, ON

April 2005

JUN 06, 2007 04:50 PM

Stokke may be a vile human being, but he just puts these ideas out there. He likely doesnt agree with most of the defenses he uses, his biggest sin is simply greed. Its the majority of the 12 person jury panel that agree with him that scare me more. i think its time i checked out of this society, grew a beard and moved to the mountains.

Cairo

SUICIDEGIRL

Maryland, USA

JUN 06, 2007 04:51 PM

defense attorney Al Stokke argued that Park wasn't responsible for making sticky all over the woman's sweater (after a traffic stop). He insisted that she made the married patrolman make the mess_after all, she was on her way home from work as a dancer at Captain Cream Cabaret.

"She got what she wanted," said Stokke. "She's an overtly sexual person."

.... A jury . . . found Park not guilty.

I remember that case. Jesus.

emotedcreations

Germany

July 2006

JUN 06, 2007 05:00 PM

blackrose_x45 said:
He likely doesnt agree with most of the defenses he uses, his biggest sin is simply greed. Its the majority of the 12 person jury panel that agree with him that scare me more. i think its time i checked out of this society, grew a beard and moved to the mountains.

Agreed, although, if I were a defense attorney, I wouldn't take a case I couldn't make an argument for that I didn't believe in. Maybe that would make me a poor attorney, but then again, I'm not all that concerned with money.

Roethke said:
The greater point of the article given the context of the past few articles by the same author, is that he is comfortable to treat women as objects when it suits him, but is very very upset when a small amount of that treatment is directed towards his daughter.

Exactly, except I don't think that point was ever made. Obviously it could be inferred, and I was waiting for it as I was reading--the big "FUCK YOU--Al Stokke", but it never came and the article went off on a freaking "tangent".

I'm not suggesting that there isn't a culture that objectifies woman. There certainly is. But it makes me wonder, is it a culture that objectifies women or is it a culture that objectifies everything? Our whole consumer culture seems to have stripped the humanity away from everything (including women). Either way, it pisses me off...

BixbyGrendel

Saskatoon, SK

August 2005

JUN 06, 2007 05:04 PM

I believe that's called Karma.

ckdexterhaven

Redding, CA

December 2005

JUN 06, 2007 05:05 PM

Bitch_PhD said:
Awful stories, but beautifully illustrative of a larger point: the culture that enables people to defend rape by arguing that unconscious women are there for the taking isn't at all cut off from the culture that thinks it's okay to make one's opinions about which women are hot into a public game of male bonding.

I think there's a pretty big difference between letting it be known that you think a girl is hot, and raping the girl. A gigantic difference. And publicly appreciating the beauty of a woman isn't the same as objectifying her. True?

ckdexterhaven

Redding, CA

December 2005

JUN 06, 2007 05:06 PM

double. ignore.

Jennifer_

Venezuela

November 2006

JUN 06, 2007 05:06 PM

blackrose_x45 said:
Stokke may be a vile human being, but he just puts these ideas out there. He likely doesnt agree with most of the defenses he uses, his biggest sin is simply greed.

Its not a sin, he's just doing his job, which is critical to the justice system being able to function. To have a fair trial, you need to have two sides debating each other. Just because the people Stokke was trying to defend were scumbags doesn't mean that they should have no defence attorney and be immediately jailed. He needs to explore all possible avenues of defence for these people/twunts, otherwise they will not have recieved the fair trial that is their human right.

emotedcreations said:
if I were a defense attorney, I wouldn't take a case I couldn't make an argument for that I didn't believe in.

I'm not sure if this is the case in America, but in Britain alot of state-employed lawyers don't have a choice over which cases they take on. They're there to do their job, not to pick and choose. People are missing the point here; justice isn't about only defending the nice guys, its about defending everyone and letting a judge and jury weigh the evidence.

Interestingly, the lawyers in the Nuremberg trials, when asked how they could defend Nazis, said that if they didn't do the best job they could as defence attorneys in the trial then the war criminals would then claim a mistrial and be freed. The same logic applies here. Al Stokke did nothing but serve the justice system in the way he was obligated to do.

JII

Arlington, VA

August 2005

JUN 06, 2007 05:15 PM

Amazing ....

When the Sgt. has to tell another officer to stay away from the strippers prior to the incident and he still gets off on the case.... there something wrong with the jury.

"I'm disappointed by the verdict, but I respect the jury's decision," she said. WTF?

RileyStClair

Los Angeles, CA

September 2006

JUN 06, 2007 05:17 PM

well, unless Stokke is a public defender, he most certainly does have control over what cases he takes (as a private criminal defense attorney).

anyway, the man is doing his job of advancing the best legal arguments for his clients and providing them with the zealous representation to which they are entitled, no matter how vile their crimes.

i'm glad that someone at least bothered to mention the jury here, which is, in my (admittedly probably biased) opinion, the truly disturbing thing. lawyers wouldn't make disgusting arguments like "she was asking for it" if jurors weren't persuaded by them. i long for the day when such arguments from the defense counsel will induce hostility and disgust from the jury to which they are presented.

PAGE:

1 | 2 | 3 | 4