Posted on 06/11/2007 11:05:28 AM PDT by John Cena
ATLANTA — A Georgia judge on Monday voided a 10-year sentence given to a man who was convicted while a teenager of having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl.
Monroe County Superior Court Judge Thomas Wilson voided Genarlow Wilson's sentence and dropped it to misdemeanor aggravated child molestation with a 12-month sentence, plus credit for time served. Under the new ruling, he will not be required to register as a sex offender
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Good. This case was nothing more that people worshiping the law, regardless of what it says. Putting a 17 year old honor student in prison for 10 years for oral sex is stupid.
A judge who understands human nature, error and makes a distinction between crime and stupidity.
The kid's parent(s) should get 10 years for naming him that....
Happy ending....sorry
Not only that, but our esteemed (not) former president says oral sex doesn’t count.
And if he’d been 18 then he should’ve been prosecuted? What if she was 14 and he was 17?
The law does not distinuish between the minor who is 18 and drunk and the minor who is 20years and 11months and drunk. Both are in violation of the law.
Honor student or not the guy proved he's an idiot.
“makes a distinction between crime and stupidity.”
You’re not going to find too many guys who agree that getting oral at 17 is an error.
Well we wouldn’t want to stop consensual teenage sex would we President Carter. What would happen if “Dad” banged Genarlow’s head off the door jamb on the way out after catching him on his little girl?
The error was he should have been with a girl 16 years old, 1 day. The age of consent in Georgia is 16.....en error in his judgement.
Since when can a 15 year-old consent to sex?
It’s like a 15 year-old consenting to buy a house.
Quite a stretch of an analogy.
I like the fact he has been released, but can’t help buy think of the irony that many here who think the judge made the proper decision also cry foul about judges “legislating from the bench”. There was a law in place which was violated. On what grounds did the judge overrule this? Or is he creating his own law?
The law does not distinuish between the minor who is 18 and drunk and the minor who is 20years and 11months and drunk. Both are in violation of the law.
I can tell you are another of the law worshipers. I know it is a hard thing to ask in this age, but is it too hard for our legal system to use good reason and critical judgment? 10 years for a minor having oral sex with another minor only 2 years younger! 10 years! The villain in this case isn't the 17 year (he was just stupid). It is the legal system that threw his life away. And it is the people who worship that legal system and excuse any outcome as long as it follows "the rule of law."
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Neither 18 or 20 are minors.
You are yet another law worshiper. See #16.
I can’t answer your questions. Here is a description of the original trial etc, composed by a liberal, nonetheless revealing.....
snip:
During the trial, in response to Wilson’s pointed questions about the propriety of prosecuting people for such conduct, Douglas County District Attorney David McDade said that he did not write the law, implying that he had no choice but to prosecute Wilson for aggravated child molestation. McDade said separately that Wilson should have taken a plea deal but that he failed to do so because he “has decided to become a martyr.”
These statements are remarkable in three respects. First, we should be quite disturbed to learn that a prosecutor, who has more discretion in carrying out his job than almost anyone else in the criminal justice system, is prepared to rely on the Nuremberg defense. Yes, a criminal statute literally applied to Wilson’s conduct, but the District Attorney has no obligation to enforce the law slavishly, when even he himself concedes that “[w]e don’t believe that a 10-year sentence is an appropriate punishment [in this case].”
Second, the notion that the decision to exercise one’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial - rather than waive that right by pleading guilty - is a deliberate choice of “martyrdom,” is positively offensive.
Third, McDade’s suggestion that it was Wilson’s responsibility to have taken a pleading option - literally, a confession in exchange for a more lenient punishment - is precisely the sort of “confess and convert” thinking that characterizes a theocratic justice system. It is perhaps no coincidence that the District Attorney chose the word “martyrdom” to describe Wilson’s ultimate punishment for refusing to say what he does not believe: that he did something terrible and deserves to be branded a “child molester” for life and punished for his sins.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20070110.html
Ideally, the judge would have let the ruling stand, the 17 year old would have been pardoned by the governor, and the law would have been fixed by the state legislature to include a Romeo and Juliet clause.
B.J. Bernstein, Wilson's lawyerInteresting choice of mouthpieces.
You think that 10 years of jail is justified here?
(I hardly think we have excess space in our prisons for “criminals” like this.)
Good, a judge with common sense.
This prosecutor’s statements clearly describe exactly what I am worried about by those who worship the law. They always think they are doing the right thing no matter how many people they hurt.
Good, this was a sad oversight in the legislative process in Georgia. That it spilled over into the judicial system and put this young man, and his family and girlfriend, through hell is unacceptable.
Hmmm.
Thank God-this case was an embarressment to me as a Georgian. It probably was racist; I fail to see how such a verdict could have been rendered otherwise.
Is he still going to have to register as a sex offender? That’s really sad if he does.
They only prosecuted this guy because he is black and the girl is white. He was 17 at the time and she was 15. As we all know, kids of this age having oral sex with each other NEVER happens anywhere else. If they had prosecuted guys for having oral sex with younger girls at my high school, half of the guys would have been arrested and sent to jail. He got a longer sentence than many 40 year old ADULT men who have had sex with 15 year old girls have received, and that is just not right. I am glad he is being released from jail.
Never mind I need to learn how to read.
What better alternative is there? The law is there for all to see and know. Do you seriously advocate for a system that is case-by-case, in which no person will or can know whether or not he will be (or how he will be) punished for an action?
The moral of this story is that if you have group sex with a fifteen year-old, if you have a good PR machine, you can get off with a slap on the wrist.
Do you think ages of consent should be judicially abolished? Apparently, the Georgia legislature thought that it would be a good idea to prevent older, more mature people from coercing younger, more naive people, into to consenting to sexual acts. Why should the judge--acting on his own--overturn the will of the people of the state of Georgia, who spoke through their legislature?
Second, the notion that the decision to exercise one’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial - rather than waive that right by pleading guilty - is a deliberate choice of “martyrdom,” is positively offensive.Your whole post is excellent. I just wanted to highlight this.
It reminds me of those cases where DNA is used to free somebody who has been in prison for one or more decades and it turns out that at various times the prisoner (an innocent man) was asked to "show remorse" by confessing that he committed a crime he didn't commit and when he didn't, the "authorities" all clicked their tongues at his "failure to show remorse".
What the hell is a 20 year old minor? I was in the Marines when I was 17.
...the law was changed last year....so he is NOT an activist judge....and the law was old style flawed...if he had had intercourse with her he would have only gotten one year misdemeanor.....but for oral sex got 10 years....now that does NOT make sense at all....
"The fact that Genarlow Wilson has spent two years in prison for what is now classified as a misdemeanor, and without assistance from this Court, will spend eight more years in prison, is a grave miscarriage of justice," the judge wrote.Human law is written, altered, changed, and amended by humans. All the time. It didn't come from a burning bush. It wasn't delivered by Moses. It was a stupid Georgia Law that even the State of Georgia decided had to go. But you want them to keep this kid locked up for 8 more years? To honor a law that doesn't even exist anymore? All in the name of The Law?
Good reason and judgment. The prosecutor did not have to bring this case--he had the option of using his judgment. The judge could have dismissed this case. The jury could have not convicted--except that juries today are trained to believe that they don't have the right to make decisions based on their own reasoning. The governor could have given a pardon. The legislature could have rewritten the law. Each one of these is a group that is hell bent on worshiping the law, even if the law gives them the option of good reason and judgment. But why would you use your reasoning when you can instead revert and follow the letter of the law like a computer, no matter how many it hurts?
Crazy stuff for GA not to make the new law retroactive.
I am just thankful I wasn’t faced with laws like this when I was 17. Wonder if the attorney general or DA ever did anything like this at that age?
There is no “honor” in raping a 15 year old girl —even though it was consensual, it was statutory rape.
15 will get you 20.
So you’d be okay wrecking his life with the “sex offender” designation? Where’s her punishment for her consent?
Age of consent laws must be enforced or abandoned.
The Sex Positive agenda has already got our schools pushing teen sexual activity. They oppose abstinence not because it doesn’t work, but because they see sexual pleasure as a birthright to be enjoyed by everyone at every age.
If you believe that “arbitrary” legal (as in established law) barriers between two “consenting” partners are worth removing, then fight it in the legislature, not the bench.
Same as the laws against homosexuality should’ve been repealed. In Congress, not court rooms.
Your argument begs the question (circular logic fallacy). I was saying that the statutory rape law was unjust and the sentence was unjust. Your response was that it was a just sentence because it was statutory rape (which you implied was a just law). You are going to have to do more that repeat definitions at me to convince me that oral sex with someone 2 years younger means that one should spend 10 years in prison.
How can it be "statutory rape" if the perp was a minor too?
Minor in possession
What is minor in possession?
When a person age 13–17 signs a diversion agreement or is convicted of possession of alcohol. (Age is determined by the incident date.)
When a person age 13–20 signs a diversion agreement or is convicted of a drug offense. (Age is determined by incident date.)
When a person under age 18 pleads guilty or is found guilty of illegal possession of a firearm while in a vehicle.
When a person under age 18 commits any offense while armed with a firearm in which a motor vehicle served an integral function.
When a person age 13–17 is convicted of any offense involving a firearm, whether or not it is related to using a motor vehicle.
http://www.dol.wa.gov/driverslicense/minor.html
If you have problems with the term minor, you need to take it up with the legislature.
Agreed. This is a judge who understands justice.
Let’s have amnesty for all sex offenders then. Everybody’s doing it, right? < /s >
Why NOT ask the legislature why they did not make it retroactive?
This is good but it’s sort of sad isn’t it? IIRC this kid had a bright future as a college athlete
I was objecting to the use of the word “honor” in describing this punk! I don’t care what his grades were. It doesn’t matter. Honor has no part of this.
He broke the law. He should be punished; she should be locked up somewhere if it was truly consensual. If the law is “unfair” then the law should be changed and his sentance commuted.
I’d say the same thing to this kid and to all of his defenders as I would say to Bill Clinton: Keep it zipped.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.