Marcus Dixon CONVICTED Ten Years for Child Molestation

[cyborg]

I just heard that Marcus Dixon has been convicted of child molestation. Ten years in prison...a complete outrage esp. since the girl said she lied anout the rape.

[cyborg]

http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=32764

[OldSmaj]

And we care because...?

The guy was already convicted and has been in prison for several months.

Where have you been?

[Eala]

In a recent case before the state Supreme Court, lawyers for 18-year-old Marcus Dixon argued that a decade-long mandatory sentence for aggravated child molestation was cruel and unusual. The trial judge said during sentencing that his hands are tied by the Legislature insofar as the mandatory minimum.

This sounds like the conviction isn't too recent...

[cyborg]

He was in prison for a false rape charge and today he was sentenced to ten years in prison for child molestation. Just because YOU don't care doesn't mean I don't have to.

[cyborg]

That's what I just heard today on ABC radio that the decision went down for him to spend ten years in prison.

[Prime Choice]

He was in prison for a false rape charge and today he was sentenced to ten years in prison for child molestation.

If these are facts not in dispute, what is the problem here?

Yes, it's a bad thing that a false charge of rape was made. That doesn't erase his having sex with an underage girl.

[green iguana]

He was 18, she was 15, the sex was consensual. Ten years in prison for that? But this hardly belongs in breaking news...

[cyborg]

She was three months away from turning sixteen then it woul have been legal. I think ten years for teen sex is a bit harsh.

[cyborg]

If I am in error in putting this in breaking news, then take it out by all means.

[Prime Choice]

He was 18, she was 15, the sex was consensual. Ten years in prison for that?

The law is the law. 18 is defined as the age of majority (legally an adult), and 15 is defined as a minor. It is illegal for an adult to have sex with a minor, consensual or no. The legislature set minimum mandatory sentencing and the judge had to follow it.

Bottom line: the law is functioning as it was designed to function. And I don't know about anyone else in this thread, but if that 15-year-old girl had been my daughter, I sure as hell wouldn't want the 18-year-old boy to walk.

But this hardly belongs in breaking news...

I agree, but I didn't start this thread.

[Prime Choice]

She was three months away from turning sixteen then it woul have been legal. I think ten years for teen sex is a bit harsh.

I'm sure the father of this girl sees it that way, too. (/sarcasm)

[Sender]

That doesn't erase his having sex with an underage girl.

Dixon was convicted of the charge for having consensual sex with a 15-year-old classmate at his Rome high school.

Should we just throw all male high school students in prison then? They're all felons under this ridiculous ruling. Jeez Louise!

[Prime Choice]

Dixon was convicted of the charge for having consensual sex with a 15-year-old classmate at his Rome high school.

You're leaving out the fact that Dixon was 18 years of age: thus, and adult in the eyes of the law. Sex between a minor and an adult is illegal. Do you wish to change the law to make it okay? Your objection appears to indicate as much.

Should we just throw all male high school students in prison then? They're all felons under this ridiculous ruling.

If they are legal adults having sex with minors (statutory rape), then yes. Unless, of course, you want to encourage that sort of conduct.

But in the final analysis, you are not the father of the 15-year-old girl, so I don't think you have much room to pitch a fit in this case.

[cyborg]

Not expecting her father to be peachy keen about his daughter having sex. It was consentual though and ten years is a long time in prison.

[ping jockey]

I believe that the State 0f Ga. Has clearly legislated that 18 yrs is the definition of an adult and that 15 years is in fact a minor and below the age of consent. I further think, that the Ga legislatures are duly elected and charged with the duties to lawmaking in that state. If the constituancies of these lawmakers do not like the law they have a recourse. If the law was a bad one (one nobody wanted) it would have been killed instead of billed.Who am I to tell THE PEOPLE of The State of Ga. that they should make laws that I like. The young man got a stiff sentence, I will agree , but that is all it was. If he cannot win an appeal , guess what? He is in the cooler for 10 years. If I get indicted , found guilty, and cannot win and appeal , guess what? I go to jail. That is the way laws work. One does not get to second guess when and upon whom it gets applied. Don't guess most criminals are thinking to heavily on the penalties involved while they are commitiing crime, but all who are caught and convicted get time.The old, "but he is young, and talented and a really good guy" routine is the tried and true sympathy ploy of the ages to try to weasal out of something unpleasant. If he keeps himself in really good condition maybe he can play ball proffesionally when he gets out.

[q_an_a]

a fifteen year old can not consent to sex. that is the law. everyone that got PO'ed at Klinton for having sex in the White House or lieing about Paula Jones, needs to look at sex laws and the fact that too many older (read adult men) are having sex with girls who are under age. 50% of out of wedlock births, repeat BIRTHS, are to underage girls with men who are 3 to 10 (repeat 10) years older than the girl. Want to end teenage welfare? stop guys like Dixon who have sex with underage girls. They can not consent.

Just like priests that rob boys of their innocence older men having sex with young girls are robbing them too. Where are the true social conservaties on these matters?

[Rifleman]

Yep, and in 1859 I suppose that you would have reported those escaped slaves to the slave catchers, because the law is the law.

The girl's dad should have kicked his butt and grounded his daughter for a year. Ten years in the slammer is stupid, evil, and cruel.

[Prime Choice]

Not expecting her father to be peachy keen about his daughter having sex.

No kidding. Were I the father, spending 10 years in jail would be the least of that boy's worries.

It was consentual though and ten years is a long time in prison.

Unless the laws become more "age sensitive," I'd say it'll remain that way. I'm sure no-one would rise to this guy's defense if he'd been 28, 38 or 48 and having sex with a 15-year-old girl.

[ping jockey]

you are arguing from the specific to a generlized concept which is in and of itself illogical. If you cannot defeat the opposing viewpoint on its merits then your argument fails.

[cyborg]

I'm not telling the state of GA what to do. I'm just giving my personal opinion which is ten years for teen sex is harsh. If they had waited three more months then it would have been legal sex. What's the difference between 15.75 and 16 yearss of age?

[green iguana]

I agree with both of you with regards to the fact that he broke the law and should be punished. We may disagree in that I fully believe that the punishment does not fit the crime, and that this case is a good example of why mandatory minimum sentencing is bad law.

[ping jockey]

You asked for this. .25 yrs.

[ping jockey]

In MY OPINION if both parties had any commetment to abstain form sex out of wedlock this would be a non issue.;

[Dante3]

It's about time perverts like Dixon learn a lesson to leave children alone.

[cyborg]

I know :) but does three months make a difference in terms of the girl? I don't think so but that's just muy opinion.

[cyborg]

I agree

[CatoRenasci]

When I was in high school in California some 40 years ago, the saying went 15 will get you 20, which reminded us all that sleeping with a girl under 16 or a guy under 18 (by a girl over 18) was statutory rape, then punishable by up to 20 years in San Quentin.

Penalties like this have always been out there and seldom are enforced. In my day, they were mostly used if the girl's father was prominent and the boy was from the wrong side of town, as it were. Although, I do remember a case where a girl with a bad reputation seduced and (some said on purpose) became pregant by, a younger boy from wealthy and prominent family. She was an 18 year old senior and he was a 15 year old sophomore when it happened. She was arrested and, until an accomodation was reached in which she went to a home for unwed mothers and gave the child up for adoption, there was pretty serious talk about prosecuting her for statutory rape.

[cyborg]

I see what you're saying. I think it's unfortunate, but as the saying goes, actions have consequences. Somehow I don't think teens in high school are aware of this law in these sexualized times.

[BlueNgold]

since the girl said she lied anout the rape

I've not heard that bit of information and I have followed the case fairly closely. What's your source? She testified in court as I recall. To my knowledge she has never changed her story. The defense, upon his acquital on that charge has made allegations of consensual sex, but I've not seen anything on the record where SHE said it was consensual. I'm open to education ... please provide a link.

[TheSpottedOwl]

Since I'm not familiar with the case, I read through everyone's replies before I posted mine.

In light of the fact that he and the girl were only 3 years apart, I find it interesting/appalling that this guy got ten years in prison. Women who kill their children get less time!

[cyborg]

That is what was presented in the news, and if I get anything I'll be glad to put it up. The jury dismissed the rape charges in the first case.

[cyborg]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/13/findlaw.analysis.colb.statutory.rape/

[BlueNgold]

Why does everyone seem to want to forget that this was prosecuted as a FORCIBLE RAPE. Just because he was acquited on that charge it cannot now be said that it was a consensual act. To my knowledge, the victim has yet to say that and until she does I for one will not insult a victim in that manner. This was a lesser included charge to the more serious charges of rape. Had the victim claimed a consensual encounter then this would be a misdemeanor stat rape case. She reported this as a rape, not statutory .. but as an assualt .. it was prosecuted, and he was convicted on this charge as part of that prosecution. This was not a stand alone charge made by a prosecutor looking to ruin a kids life with a spurious court case.

[BlueNgold]

Juries don't dismiss charges for one ... OJ was acquited as well ... how many people here rant about him walking the streets and wish the prosecution had an LIO in his case to put him away?

[Cobra Scott]

I think you are missing his point (maybe?). The law is the law, no doubt about it; the mandatory sentencing part is what is in question. If a judge and jury (as the case may be) cannot be trusted to make the punishment fit the crime, how can they be trusted to administer a just verdict?

[BlueNgold]

From your link:
In the Dixon case, for example, the 15-year-old victim claimed that the defendant "tracked her down in a classroom trailer that she was cleaning as part of her duties in an after-school job, asked if she was a virgin, grabbed her arms, unbuttoned her pants and raped her on a table." This description renders the statutory rape and aggravated child molestation prosecution something other than the state targeting consensual activity for unduly harsh punishment.

Though Dixon was acquitted on the rape charge, that fact does not rule out the possibility of sexual assault. It means only that the jury was not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Dixon forced the 15-year-old girl to have sex against her will.

This states my position exactly...

The jury convicted him of the charge of assualt as part of the larger prosecution for rape. The mandatory min is 10 years on that charge. This is not a case of consensual sex in the minds of anyone except the defendandt and his legal team. I still have yet to see evidence that the victim reversed her story.

[cyborg]

We have a difference of opinion.

[cyborg]

The mandatory sentencing is what I am questioning. If this law was ever applied then I think we'd see a lot of more high school students in jail or with police records.

[judgeandjury]

If they had waited three more months then it would have been legal sex.

Then they should have waited three more months.

[cyborg]

They should have waited for a looooong time IMHO.

[tsomer]

It doesn't sound like he was railroaded.

From an AP story:
"On Feb. 10, 2003, Dixon claims he met the girl _ a sophomore classmate in a home economics class _ after school and arranged to visit her in a classroom trailer, where she was working as a student custodian.

The two had sex on a table in the back of the classroom. She told school counselors about the incident, and they contacted police. Dixons scholarship was revoked after his arrest.

"The person I thought I knew, she was pretty smart, she was kind of laid back, but she was very talkative, friendly. She loved to joke around," Dixon told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from prison. "She seemed pretty sweet to me until this went down. It was like she's a totally different person."

[cyborg]

Is a girl same or different after having sex for the time? I watched the Oprah special and was not convinced for a number of reasons.

[judgeandjury]

In light of the fact that he and the girl were only 3 years apart, I find it interesting/appalling that this guy got ten years in prison.

The fact that the guy and the girl were only three years apart in age is irrelevant. The fact that he was an adult and she was a minor is what is relevant in this case.

[BlueNgold]

"We have a difference of opinion"
No we don't ... at least not yet.

You made a factual statement: "The girl said she lied about the rape."

If that statement is fact then it would change everything. But you provide no source for this 'fact' ... when actually all evidence, including her statemetns to police, parents, and on the stand at trial indicate otherwise. Your 'opinion' is based on facts not in evidence. If you know she did not recant and restate such an inflammatory charge then you are the worst kind of liar, heaping more shame upon a victim of a sexual crime. If you believe she recanted, then it is up to you to prove she did. Find a quote, name a source. You cant make such bold statements in a vacuum. Not here .. expect to be challenged.

[cyborg]

I SAID I HEARD IT AS IS ON THE RADIO...I wrote down what I heard the radio. I am the last person to disparage a rape victim's testimony so don't go there with me. I thought Tawana Brawley was lying and think this girl is lying TOO. Deal with that.

[BlueNgold]

The mandatory sentencing is what I am questioning. If this law was ever applied then I think we'd see a lot of more high school students in jail or with police records.

Inform yourself better. This is not a stat rape case, but a rape and sexual assualt case. He's now a convicted felon.

GA laws do make provision for such encounters between teens, if they are truly consensual. A 3 year age difference (15-18) would be a misdemeanor by state law in a consensual case. As such most HS stat rape cases are never brought to trial.

[TheSpottedOwl]

The fact that the guy and the girl were only three years apart in age is irrelevant. The fact that he was an adult and she was a minor is what is relevant in this case.

Tell that to Romeo and Juliet. Adult and minor are legal distinctions, not having a thing to do with a couple of teenagers. If the man was 30, and the girl was 15...then there would be a huge problem.

My son in law is 29, my daughter who is his wife, is 24. Should we lynch him?

[hellinahandcart]

This leaped out at me from your link:

Statutory rape is sex between an adult and a minor, while aggravated child molestation also involves an injury.

I remember reading something about this a while ago, IIRC the girl immediately reproted the incident and testified at the trial. He was found not guilty of rape but guilty of the other two charges, so I think it's important to know what the physical injury was before deciding whether or not the sentence is an outrage.

I haven't heard that the girl recanted, so "not guilty" doesn't necessarily translate to "consensual". If she did take it back, that's a different matter, and she should be the one facing charges.

[rdb3]

I heard the exact same thing cyborg heard about this girl and that she said she made it up. I also heard it on the radio while listening to Rush, so it was ABC-News (WBAP-AM Dallas).

That is what was reported.