SANTA ANA, Calif. (TheBlaze/AP) — A Southern California judge is being publicly admonished for saying a rape victim didn’t put up a fight during her assault and that if someone doesn’t want sexual intercourse, the body “will not permit that to happen.”
The California Commission on Judicial Performance issued a report Thursday saying Superior Court Judge Derek Johnson’s comments were inappropriate and a breach of judicial ethics. The group voted 10-0 to impose a public admonishment on Johnson, the USA Today reports.
“In the commission’s view, the judge’s remarks reflected outdated, biased and insensitive views about sexual assault victims who do not ‘put up a fight,’” Lawrence J. Simi, the commission’s chairman, wrote in response to the case. “Such comments cannot help but diminish public confidence and trust in the impartiality of the judiciary.”
Photo Credit: AP
Johnson is a former prosecutor in the Orange County district attorney’s sex crimes unit. He issued an apology saying he was frustrated with a prosecutor during an argument in 2008 over the sentencing in the case before him compared to other more aggravated cases.
The case involved a man who threatened to mutilate the face and genitals of his ex-girlfriend with a heated screwdriver before committing rape, forced oral copulation, and other crimes.
“I’m not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something: If someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case,” Johnson said at the time.
The commission essentially found that Johnson’s statement — that a victim should resist assault is not a legal opinion, but rather a personal one; since 1980, California law has not required rape victims to prove resistance.
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (48)
biblegeek119
Dec. 14, 2012 at 12:52pmVery easy to test if he is right. Get one of those super strong guys like Mike Tyson and alike and put them in a room with the “judge” and see if he puts up a fight and if his body will shut down and make the rape impossible. After a couple days we take them out of the room and describe how it went.
Report this comment
MONICNE
Dec. 14, 2012 at 12:14pmIt is not unusual for uneducated misomaters to say dumb things about the women they fear. Example: ((Maligner-in-Chafe Avengerk says a female human’s “maidenhead” will be intact until birthing of multiple individual babies )) LOL!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sneak-peek-see-the-epic-nativity-scene-from-mark-burnetts-upcoming-the-bible-history-channel-series/
Check It Out!
Report this comment
Gadz0425
Dec. 14, 2012 at 11:29amRead the entire article IN CONTEXT. He didn’t say that the body shuts down and doesn’t ALLOW the rape to happen. He was saying that if a woman does not want to engage in sexual intercourse, certain bodily “preparations” do not take place which causes forced entry and tissue damage. If neither of those were proven to be present, it is difficult to prove whether sex was consensual or not. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. He was simply arguing that the prosecutor had no proof that there was forced intercourse. Doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Report this comment
RagstoRiches
Dec. 14, 2012 at 12:30pmDoes not permit is exactly the same as does not allow. I’m quite taken with the way that people speak of rape. The truth is that mean sometimes force themselves on women, and in other instances, women sometimes take advantage of a system that is there to protect them. To say that the female body is capable of reacting in a way that prevents the assault to take place is ludicrous. I think there are many males who are raped in prison that may attest to this fact.
Report this comment
Izzy383
Dec. 14, 2012 at 2:26pmOn the one hand I think the judge was trying to say that when intercourse isn’t wanted the woman’s body won’t lubricate it’s self so there should have been more damage.
On the other hand he should have consulted a GYNO before making a judgement of law based on his own opinion.
Report this comment
G-WHIZ
Dec. 15, 2012 at 10:41amDEAD is DEAD!! No-one inside to approve or dissaprove sex or anything else!! Their DEAD!!
When was the last time the heffer/STEAK COMPLAINED about YOU eating it?! When was the last time a DEAD heffer COMPLAINED about being cutup into a multitude of tasety-morseals?! The cemmetaries are FULL of NON-COMPLAINERS!
Report this comment
geomann
Dec. 14, 2012 at 11:20amWhile a woman could certainly resist, not everyone is willing to undergo the torture that might result when the attacker gets mad. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t rape or she didn’t resist. Bottom line; if she says no, and it goes further, it is rape.
This guy is an idiot…
Report this comment
MrSunshine
Dec. 14, 2012 at 11:18amI’m not a gynocologist, but I’ll take a look.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Dec. 14, 2012 at 1:29pmlol. classic.
Did you sleep at a Holiday Inn express?
Report this comment
ResistSocialism
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:55amso many comedian judges
Report this comment
integrican
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:35amThat judge was already on “Double Secret Probation” already!!!
Report this comment
integrican
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:42amalready x 2 = Dumbash!!!!! LOL
Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:44amJust see how easy it is to have sex with your own wife next time she has a headache….
Report this comment
right field
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:19amIf we outlaw stupidity in politics as a condition for holding public office or being a judge then 99% of all Democrats and 90% of all Republicans will be eliminated. Stupidity has become the #1 national past time for all of America. Oh, and if “lying” is outlawed in the MSM, then 100% of all newspapers, magazines, radio, television and movies will be eliminated as well. Let’s go for it!
Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:31am99.99 Democrats. Just the fact that they are Democrats is confirmation enough.
Report this comment
JRook
Dec. 14, 2012 at 11:15amWell stated but I would reverse your percentages. Witness, Palin, O’Donnell, Bachmann and Akin who was equally as stupid in saying the same thing.
Report this comment
nomsain
Dec. 15, 2012 at 6:51pmJROOK, I know for a fact that Akin DID NOT say the same thing. It is you who is STUPID!
Report this comment
jessieH
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:08amOoh, a reprimand! He should have been removed from the bench.
Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:59amIt is not unheard of for a woman to ‘set up’ her ex. You see it all the time. Not saying that’s what happened here, but you hear about it all the time. You see sharpton in the middle of cases worse than this only to find out it’s a setup. I go read the article and it only talks about ‘threats’ that were made “before” his despicable crime, if he actually did it. That’s what happens when you have Sharpton and so many other cases running around. You need more evidence. And yes- It does happen all the time. Prisons are full of people who were put there because of spiteful people who will lie. The guy was found guilty, so i presume he did it. Just sayin’. This story we are getting is incomplete. Who broke up with who for instance. That might be relevant tot he story. Did the guy have a history of violence? That might be relevant to the story, whether he was actually guilty or not. Would it be interesting to find out the guy is the one who left the woman, or that she was jilted in some other way? It doesn’t sound all that plausible. BTW – I would pull the trigger myself if the guy did as the article alludes.
Report this comment
Landon410
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:55amI guess I should state something, I know this by helping do rape kits on women when i worked in an ER
Report this comment
Landon410
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:54amhe is partly right, if a woman does not want sex, certain parts of the body do not relax, and thus the act of inserting soemthing does cause trauma……
thats true, but sometimes talking about things you dont fully understand makes you look like an idiot
Report this comment
M13
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:19amWell you made yourself look like an idiot landowner. Good job.
Report this comment
charles116
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:37amIt’s not exactly like a vice, hon.
Report this comment
MDECKER
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:46amBecause we know all judges are impartial and the attorneys are just sincerely seeking justice.
Report this comment
wingedwolf
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:39amI guess my body didn’t get the memo….
Report this comment
HKS
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:31amMaybe the judge could spend a few nights down at the big house to proof his theories.
Report this comment
horsehockey
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:30am2008 court argument, they’re going back 4 years to dig this up? That means the GOP war on women is 4 years old now, I didn’t know that.
Report this comment
MGrilla
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:48amDig What up, the D’ bag’s an idiot, apparently he will say anything to try’n win an argument.
Report this comment
MGrilla
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:51amThat’s not to say that the “war on women” isn’t contrived subterfuge .
Report this comment
BattleGrounds
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:29amI am not sure if everyone read the entire article or not, but the judge did not say rape can’t happen because the body shuts down. He says it can’t happen without a tremendous about of damage to the female body.
The issue was that the DA wanted a more server sentencing of the defendant than the judge had given, and in frustration the judge was trying to explain to the DA that if he wanted a harsher punishment then he would have to provide better proof of a server aggravated assault had occurred.
As I have read the article, it seems to me it was more of a he said she said case, where he was found guilty, but the judge did not see enough proof of server assault that would be needed for the harsher sentencing. So the judge gave him a lesser one.
Just please read the article before you allow your emotions to guide your brains!
Report this comment
bane73
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:02am@Battlegrounds: Right, that’s exactly how I read it too. I get so frustrated with news stories not reporting the whole thing but then when they do I find that a lot of commenters frustrating because they don’t bother to read the whole story and just jump to conclusions.
Sites need to start implementing a technology to bar people from posting comments until they have read the story; how to implement that would be difficult but maybe a quick 3-question test the author writes regarding basic details of the story. I don’t know.
At any rate, thank you for showing me that not all of the commentators are being idiots.
:)
Report this comment
SovereignSoul
Dec. 14, 2012 at 11:03amBlame the headline writer.
What the headline says and what the judge said are two different things.
(Both are idiotic statements, btw)
Report this comment
jungle J
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:17amthe judge is typical of the government dolts that we elect.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:05amI’d like to see the judge test his theory,let’s lock up the judge with three guys he had put in prison and after a few months the judge can write a detailed report of his ‘experiences’ in prison.
Report this comment
Steelhead
Dec. 14, 2012 at 10:31amyou sound as though you have experienced this yourself. Did it hurt
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Dec. 14, 2012 at 2:40pmNah if it ever happens to me they’ll be raping a corpse,you on the other hand I’m sure have been passed around by convicts,right Britney?
Report this comment
jackact
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:01amHopefully there will be a time in the country where ALL judges federal & state in ALL districts will be ELECTED and no longer appointed.
That combined with enforced Tort Reform and ‘Loser Pays’ will help cure the considerable disease called….. the judiciary.
Report this comment
Locked
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:19amConsidering we elect Congressmen who believe the exact same thing as this guy, I wouldn’t be too sure about electing judges being a cure for stupidity.
Report this comment
scrapadapolis
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:57amThe judge was mostlikely the perps friend.
Report this comment
ORACLE12389
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:35amI’m not a gambler, but I’d be willing to bet the reason they call it rape is because the woman didn’t want to have sex in the first place. So to say that the body shutting down, and her laying there like a fish out of water will prevent it is retarded. It’s flesh, it tears, and bleeds, and you can imagine why that’s not a bad thing to the rapist. The just laying there shut down means you become a life like sex doll, which is what these guys want. You know what prevents rapes? Sticking a gun in his crotch, and removing the problem. In fact you prevent future rapes from occurring as well two birds with one stone get it. Too blunt for you? Get used to it I don’t sugar coat things I tell it the way it is.
Report this comment
Lee_in_PA
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:25amHope he isn’t going to be sitting on the bench much longer.
Report this comment
David-FL
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:25amDoes this numb-nutz really believe he himself could not be raped if he did not want it? Would his body shut down to prevent sodomy? Maybe he’d like to give us a demonstration with some of those he has incarcerated.
Report this comment
AllLost
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:24amIn the case of rape I tell my loved ones to do whatever is needed to survive. If that is fight fight, or if it is be compliant be compliant. But I hear many statements of biological ‘fact’ being thrown around since the MO Republican candidate debacle. I would really like to know what the facts are. I assume a woman can still get pregnant during forced intercourse, but is the probability of fertilization changed at all due to biology? I guess I have to do some research.
As I always have said. I will give you $5 for every abortion performed to to rape and/or incest if you give me a $1 for every other type of rape. In other words…..I think the abortions done because of rape and/ or incest is a very small proportionally in the abortion circle.
Report this comment
Walkabout
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:39amIt is like fight or flight reflex. Well some people fight, some set to flight run & some freeze. Research shows that most women “allow” it because it protects them from harm. I assume a very few people could shut down just because everyone is different. But I bet where women don’t shut down is outweighed by all the other responses by orders of magnitude.
But it really doesn’t matter. The woman was threatened with bodily harm & the perp should be put away.
Report this comment
Locked
Dec. 14, 2012 at 8:40am“I assume a woman can still get pregnant during forced intercourse, but is the probability of fertilization changed at all due to biology?”
If it is, it’s not by a statistically significant amount. Approximately 5% of all rape victims will be impregnated by their rapist.
Report this comment
Walkabout
Dec. 14, 2012 at 12:54pmLocked
How do you know that if the women had not been pregnant their chance of getting pregnant would not be 6% or 50%? If they can show when a woman is ovulating by how she dances, might a rapist subconsciously pick up on subconscious cues. if they are not picking up on any cues is the normal rate of being impregnated 5% if having sex regularly during the month or is it higher at 6% or 7%.
***
But as the other judges noted it doesn’t matter. As it should not.
“The commission essentially found that Johnson’s statement — that a victim should resist assault is not a legal opinion, but rather a personal one; since 1980, California law has not required rape victims to prove resist”
Report this comment