[QUOTE=ambushed]
Oh, and if any of you are as outraged by the miscarriage of justice in this case as I am, you should consider visiting the following web site and signing their online petition: Why Is Genarlow Wilson In Prison??
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think this kid should be in prison for ten years, but how in the world is a petition supposed to help matters? It has no legal weight.
[QUOTE=Campion]
No, that’s why everyone needs to know about talk to your goddamn Legislature so they don’t pass knee-jerk feel-good laws without considering the consequences.
If this is a travesty (and I can’t be bothered to look at the opinions to see if this actually was reported accurately), it can be laid squarely at the feet of the legislature and the people who elected said legislature.
[/QUOTE]
You prove my point, you pathetic dicktard. Pay more attention.
[QUOTE=Lissa]
I don’t think this kid should be in prison for ten years, but how in the world is a petition supposed to help matters? It has no legal weight.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I guess I was hoping the petition would be sent to the Governor asking for commutation.
Umm…this girl had sex with an underaged guy. Why is she not in prison?
[QUOTE=Darth Nader]
You prove my point, you pathetic dicktard. Pay more attention.
[/QUOTE]
You’re arguing for something that is illegal and ultimately ineffective. If this guy’s case demonstrates that a law has consequences people don’t like, the answer isn’t either a rogue judiciary or a runaway jury; the answer is to change the law so that its effects are appropriate. Your argument, instead, is for an ad hoc system of government that creates more injustice and less predictibility for a greater number of people, because under jury nullification (a) the law remains on the books; (b) it continues to be administered; (c) people continue to be prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned under it; but (d) perhaps one or two people will be “set free” by a rogue jury that violates its oath and fails to follow the law, while the vast majority of people (e) continue to be prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned under it. That isn’t a solution. It’s a pathetic attempt to sidestep the problem and fantasize about how things could be if only you were emperor. Grow up.
[QUOTE=ambushed]
Not quite. While technically, of course, the legislature can be blamed for not foreseeing the consequences of their poorly drafted statute, the author of the bill in question argued that the law was never intended to felonize inter-teen sexuality. And they’ve already fixed the problem.
It seems to me that in this case, the problem’s more with the state supreme court – who refused to address the problem – and with the Governor who has refused to commute or modify the sentence.
There is no justice in a “justice” system that refuses to right a wrong.
[/QUOTE]
While reading about this before this thread started, I came across an article that stated that it wasn’t the Governor’s decision, but the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles. I haven’t independently tried to verify, and I’m pretty sure if the Governor gave the Board a shove, it would move in the direction he wanted it.
[QUOTE=betenoir]
Umm…this girl had sex with an underaged guy. Why is she not in prison?
[/QUOTE]
Age of consent in Georgia is 16. The boy was not underage.
[QUOTE=ambushed]
The “honor roll” argument is perfectly valid according to American jurisprudence (and I suspect other countries as well). The purpose is less to give good kids a break (and this was indeed a good kid) and more to give recidivists and troublemakers less of a break.
[/QUOTE]
If that’s really the case, why does it matter if he’s on the honor roll, or the football team, or is homecoming king? It shouldn’t matter if he’s an unpopular straight C- student who can’t even catch a ball, as long as he’s not a troublemaker or a recidivist criminal. Unless you’re arguing that anyone not on the honor roll automatically falls into the troublemaker or recidivist categories.
No-one is arguing against taking previous crimincal activity (or lack of it) into consideration. But the whole “honor roll” type argument is more often deployed in an undifferentiated way, as if it actually excuses the crime itself.
[QUOTE=betenoir]
Umm…this girl had sex with an underaged guy. Why is she not in prison?
[/QUOTE]
As someone else has already noted, the age of consent in Georgia is 16.
The age of consent is 16 or lower in at least 28 US states, and there are other states that allow sex at age 16 with parental consent, and at 18 without it.
Also, as other have noted, if the guy had actually had penetrative vaginal intercourse with the girl, he would have been charged with a misdemeanor and received a maximum sentence of one year; because it was oral sex, it was charged as aggravated child molesting.
I live in Georgia, I’ll write the bastids, but I doubt it’ll be much good. Georgia is a really red state. We voted for Dubya twice, and would probably do so a third time (if it were possible, and so long as the Republican Party continues to support racism). I’m sure the legislators in charge have many letters thanking them for putting that horrible kid in jail for ten years so he’ll set an example for those other bad black kids out there.
As for how these things happen in Georgia, in the minds of many Georgians, whenever a black person comes before the law on sex-related issue, there’s a little trope that runs like this:
They would never, ever admit to it, and for some it probably isn’t even conscious, but it’s there. Boy, howdy, is it ever there.
And that’s how shit like this keeps happening.
Oh for fuck’s sake, people!
Let’s examine the facts:
A person committed a crime.
For that crime they were sentanced an appropriate and legislatively-mandated term of incarceration.
That is all.
The man in question (he’s seventeen, people - not twelve) knew having sex with a 15 year old was illegal. He did it anyway.
I see no information that he’s alleging he didn’t know her age.
Granted, I’m only assuming he knew having sex with a 15 year old was against the law, but if I recall correctly from my own high school days, every was precisely aware of the laws regarding statutory rape ages and could quote them accurately and at length. Hence the term “jailbait”. The whole concept of statutory rape is so firmly embedded in our popular culture that I would be absolutely amazed to discover someone who didn’t know about it.
In a most fundamental way, it doesn’t matter if you think the law in question is a good one or not. If you live in Georgia and think that this law isn’t a good one, write your fucking state legislature, don’t run around having assorted sexual acts with jailbait until you get prosecuted. If you don’t think the law is a good one, then feel free to debate the merits of the law. Standing around expressing outrage over an instance where the law was rightfully enforced does not a debate on the merits make.
This man (honor student and star football player or not) knowingly and willfully broke the law. This isn’t a travesty, it’s a legitimate conviction for unlawful behavior. I, personally, don’t want people deciding for themselves which laws they feel like obeying and which they don’t. I like my laws to apply to everyone - even people who think the law is stupid. There are people running around who don’t think cold-blooded killing is unilaterally a bad idea. There are a good many people who regard laws against nonconsensual sexual activity as bad laws. I know one.
This isn’t outrageous or morally wrong or even newsworthy in my opinion. I’m all for the current laws of the land being enforced against willful lawbreakers.
If someone deliberately does something they know is against the law, they should damn well go to prison for the appropriate term of incarceration determined by that law. This guy deserves to serve his term.
For the record, my feelings on the value of statutory rape laws are extremely mixed, but my feelings on the subject of punishment of willful lawbreakers is crystal clear.
[QUOTE=ambushed]
I’m certainly not blaming the victims here or even hinting at the ugly “they deserved what they got” bullshit. Having sex with drunk girls is pretty base behavior.
[/QUOTE]
Well, as you noted yourself, the girl in question wasn’t drunk.
As for the other girl:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/19/us/19georgia.html
And from Atlanta Magazine
There are plenty of real-life situations in which guys get a girl drunk explicitly to get ‘consent’. You’re right, that’s ‘base behavior’ at best, and frequently it’s rape. But this isn’t one of those cases.
Here, one drunk girl decided to go to a party with a bunch of drunk guys & have sex. She woke up the next morning & realized she’s an idiot. She’s not a victim, except possibly of her own stupidity. Sure, the boys were looking to score…but so was Michelle.
The victims in this story are the boys. Not men, boys. A bunch of high school boys that had a New Years Eve party and committed no crime. (Well, beyond some drinking & smoking.) But they’ll still pay for it with the rest of their lives because some horny bimbo decided post-hoc she didn’t much care for her own behavior. If having sex while drunk is a crime, she’s just as guilty as they are. Send her to jail too.
So I’m not blaming the victim here either. But the great state of Georgia sure is…pity that.
[QUOTE=Aangelica]
Oh for fuck’s sake, people!
Let’s examine the facts:
A person committed a crime.
For that crime they were sentanced an appropriate and legislatively-mandated term of incarceration.
That is all.
The man in question (he’s seventeen, people - not twelve) knew having sex with a 15 year old was illegal. He did it anyway.
[/quote]
You’re already starting to spin it. He, at 17, is a man. She, two years his junior, is a child. Maybe in a legal sense, but in the real world where most folks live, a mere two-year gap in age makes them a lot closer to being peers than would be indicated by the terms “man” and “child.”
Ah, but we, the solons of the Dope, are on a message board deciding if the law is good and the prevailing opinion seems to be that it isn’t good, in fact, that it sucks. Big time. Is totally injust in this instance. We understand, as you apparently do not, that bad law can cause awful tragedies like this one, and that the sentence should be changed because it is GROTESQUELY out of keeping with the nature of the crime.
Such laws and the travesties of justice they entail breed disrespect for the law and the people that enforce them as well. People see that the law is an ass and don’t respect it any more. I see that with a certain crystal clarity.
Then I have to believe you’re either ignorant or some sort of heartless monster. Ten years in jail for a consensual blowjob with a woman within two years of his age? That’s just sick, and if you think it’s not sick, you’re sick, too.
Y’know, if there’d been ay sign or allegation that the sex wasn’t consensual, of if the guys had been behaving in a predatory manner, trying to force consent out of the girl by subtly threatening her or whatever, I’d be with you on this. But there just isn’t any such indication. All indications are it was consensual. Maybe the guy should have some sort of legal punishment for it, even if it was consensual, but ten years in jail? For a consensual blowjob? That’s WAAAAAAAY over the line. That’s so far over the line it’s a dot.
What the fuck is it with people and consensual blowjobs ever since Clinton? Some people apparently think they’re worse than the holocaust.
Wow, Evil, that might be the first time I’ve agreed with you on an entire post.
[QUOTE=Campion]
You’re arguing for something that is illegal and ultimately ineffective. If this guy’s case demonstrates that a law has consequences people don’t like, the answer isn’t either a rogue judiciary or a runaway jury; the answer is to change the law so that its effects are appropriate.
[/QUOTE]
That has no effect on an already pending case, and thus is not a helpful suggestion.
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Such laws and the travesties of justice they entail breed disrespect for the law and the people that enforce them as well. People see that the law is an ass and don’t respect it any more. I see that with a certain crystal clarity.
[/QUOTE]
You’re either not paying attention to what I said, or willfully misinterpreting it. The law isn’t breeding disrespect for itself, people who share your viewpoint are. You (and other people in this same thread - and really many other, similar threads) are essentially espousing the position that since you, personally, do not believe in the validity of the law, it’s somehow morally and ethically reprehensible that the law was enforced as written. That is what breeds disrespect for the laws. It is not in any way a “travesty of justice” for this guy to get sent to the pokey for 10 years for breaking the law. He knew it was the law, had some notion of the statutory penalty of breaking it, and he went ahead and broke it anyway. Hell, nowhere is it indicated that he did so in an effort to change said law. He broke it because he damn well felt like it.
And he’s getting an applauding audience here for doing so.
I repeat, as you seem to be hard of hearing on the subject, the remedy for combating a law you view as invalid is to write your state legislator - or to otherwise lobby to have it revoked or altered to something more to your liking. The remedy is not to receive hummers from jailbait - consensual or not.
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
I have to believe you’re either ignorant or some sort of heartless monster. Ten years in jail for a consensual blowjob with a woman within two years of his age? That’s just sick, and if you think it’s not sick, you’re sick, too.
[/QUOTE]
I’m neither, but thanks for playing.
I submit you’re not phrasing your question correctly. You’re phrasing it the way that best suits your particular view on the validity of that law. Try it this way: ten years in jail for willfully and knowingly violating a law that carries a 8 to 12 year sentance?
If this guy didn’t do it - or was at least arguably ignorant of his sex partner’s age - or he was the victim of entrapment or misconduct on the part of someone other than himself, I’d be right with the crowd calling this a miscarriage of justice.
But those aren’t the facts here. From all indications he went forth willingly and did something he knew was illegal and is only now, after the consequences of his action are manifest, crying about the validity of the law.
Well, fuck that. If you disagree with the validity of a law, I’m all for changing it. Lobby. Write your congressperson. Institute a grass-roots campaign. Hook up with like-minded individuals and protest.
From the facts presented, he didn’t care enough about this law to do any of that before he satisfied his yen for jailbait - it’s only now that he’s forced to pay the piper for his lawbreaking that the law is unjust.
I have nothing for respect for people who try to change laws they feel are unjustified or invalid. I have nothing but contempt for people who don’t do anything other than whine about how we should all feel sorry for the people who willfully broke the law.
If you’re working to change the law you feel is so unjust, then more power to you. If you just want to protest a straightforward conviction of a willful lawbreaker because you don’t like the law, then you can take your views and shove them into the orifice of your choice. If it’s that hideous a law, what are you doing about it? Nothing? I thought so.
In the meantime, I’ll continue to applaud the convictions of people who purposefully break laws they don’t like.
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Y’know, if there’d been ay sign or allegation that the sex wasn’t consensual, of if the guys had been behaving in a predatory manner, trying to force consent out of the girl by subtly threatening her or whatever, I’d be with you on this. But there just isn’t any such indication. All indications are it was consensual. Maybe the guy should have some sort of legal punishment for it, even if it was consensual, but ten years in jail? For a consensual blowjob? That’s WAAAAAAAY over the line. That’s so far over the line it’s a dot.
What the fuck is it with people and consensual blowjobs ever since Clinton? Some people apparently think they’re worse than the holocaust.
[/QUOTE]
Apparently you just aren’t paying attention to what I said other than to note I disagreed with you.
My feelings on the validity of the statutory rape laws is very mixed. That, however, isn’t the point of what I’m saying.
What I’m saying is that sitting around bemoaning the fate of someone who knew the consequences of his action, knew it was illegal and did it anyway isn’t something I’m interested in. Frankly, I find that sort of behavior to be shameful.
If you’re really all that opposed to the law, there are a number of procedures in place to go about having it changed. Copping underage poontang is not one of those procedures.
I despise people who do nothing more than seize on instances where they don’t like the outcome and sit around defending the miscreant. Vilify the law if you think it’s unjust - fine. Hunky dory. Don’t defend the willful lawbreaker. Breaking a law on purpose is not a behavior that should be lauded, encouraged, or excused.
[QUOTE=Aangelica]
This isn’t outrageous or morally wrong or even newsworthy in my opinion. I’m all for the current laws of the land being enforced against willful lawbreakers.
[/QUOTE]
No, that’s just stupid. The remedy is to get very outraged about the law, and to change the law. People who have no power to change the law can still be outraged by it. The law itself is newsworthy, outrageous and morally wrong. For laws to be just, they must have some reason to exist. There is no reason for a law to have a special penalty for having oral sex, that doesn’t apply to vaginal sex.
I remember when it was illegal for consenting, married adults to have oral sex in Georgia. The answer, of course, is to avoid having oral sex, right Aangelica?
[QUOTE=Aangelica]
Try it this way: ten years in jail for willfully and knowingly violating a law that carries a 8 to 12 year sentance?
[/QUOTE]
(Emphasis mine.) You keep asserting he intentionally violated the law. Got a cite? That’s not what I read in the articles linked in this thread.
[QUOTE=Aangelica]
You’re either not paying attention to what I said, or willfully misinterpreting it. The law isn’t breeding disrespect for itself, people who share your viewpoint are. You (and other people in this same thread - and really many other, similar threads) are essentially espousing the position that since you, personally, do not believe in the validity of the law, it’s somehow morally and ethically reprehensible that the law was enforced as written. That is what breeds disrespect for the laws. It is not in any way a “travesty of justice” for this guy to get sent to the pokey for 10 years for breaking the law. He knew it was the law, had some notion of the statutory penalty of breaking it, and he went ahead and broke it anyway. Hell, nowhere is it indicated that he did so in an effort to change said law. He broke it because he damn well felt like it.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, the law has already been changed, perhaps in part due to this case, but this case was not grandfathered in to the updated legislation.
Laws can breed disrespect, especially when foolishly or absent-mindedly written, or misapplied. At least two of those apply to this case. There are still remedies, and it is incumbent upon the state to take those steps. One is the rewrite the law and is done. Two is to address the misapplication of justice by the poorly written or misapplied law. That is what many posting to this thread hope to see happen.
[QUOTE=Aangelica]
Oh for fuck’s sake, people!
Let’s examine the facts:
A person committed a crime.
For that crime they were sentanced an appropriate and legislatively-mandated term of incarceration.
That is all.
The man in question (he’s seventeen, people - not twelve) knew having sex with a 15 year old was illegal. He did it anyway.
I see no information that he’s alleging he didn’t know her age.
Granted, I’m only assuming he knew having sex with a 15 year old was against the law, but if I recall correctly from my own high school days, every was precisely aware of the laws regarding statutory rape ages and could quote them accurately and at length. Hence the term “jailbait”. The whole concept of statutory rape is so firmly embedded in our popular culture that I would be absolutely amazed to discover someone who didn’t know about it.
In a most fundamental way, it doesn’t matter if you think the law in question is a good one or not. If you live in Georgia and think that this law isn’t a good one, write your fucking state legislature, don’t run around having assorted sexual acts with jailbait until you get prosecuted. If you don’t think the law is a good one, then feel free to debate the merits of the law. Standing around expressing outrage over an instance where the law was rightfully enforced does not a debate on the merits make.
This man (honor student and star football player or not) knowingly and willfully broke the law. This isn’t a travesty, it’s a legitimate conviction for unlawful behavior. I, personally, don’t want people deciding for themselves which laws they feel like obeying and which they don’t. I like my laws to apply to everyone - even people who think the law is stupid. There are people running around who don’t think cold-blooded killing is unilaterally a bad idea. There are a good many people who regard laws against nonconsensual sexual activity as bad laws. I know one.
This isn’t outrageous or morally wrong or even newsworthy in my opinion. I’m all for the current laws of the land being enforced against willful lawbreakers.
If someone deliberately does something they know is against the law, they should damn well go to prison for the appropriate term of incarceration determined by that law. This guy deserves to serve his term.
For the record, my feelings on the value of statutory rape laws are extremely mixed, but my feelings on the subject of punishment of willful lawbreakers is crystal clear.
[/QUOTE]
So you “know” this 17 year old kid (not a man) knew the consequences?
I am not even sure he knew getting oral sex from a 15 year old girlfriend was criminal. I would suspect he did not know this.
I wonder if I was a child molester at 17 with my 15 year old girlfriend. Cripes, I have no clue what the laws were at the time and I did not at the time. How on earth does a kid deserve 10 years for a blowjob?
Jim {Trying hard to remain polite}