This sentence is BS. A 17 year old with a 15 year old and he gets a 10-year sentence plus listing as a sex offender?
I’ve been complaining for years about the sex offender list. It’s so broad.
That’s probably missing the point of the article though. They need a Romeo/Juliet law like I heard some states have. Besides, when you have a president saying it’s not sex, this is what we get.
There's a lot more to this story than you read in these short articles.
Seven young men, including Genarlo, had a hotel room. I believe all of them were black. One black girl, around sixteen years old, and one white girl, fifteen (she may have been fourteen at the time) were involved.
The black girl brought a grip bag with clothing in it, apparently planning spend the night. She had apparently already been drinking.
There was a lot more drinking after she arrived.
The guys videotaped much of what happened from that point. I haven't seen the tape but, as an attorney, I know three attorneys (one conservative and two very liberal) who have seen the tape.
The young black girl appears to be unconcious some (many? most?) of the times the guys had sex with her. Her pants and underwear were removed when she appeared to be unconcious. Generalo and five of the six other young men had sex at least once with the seventeen year-old when she appeared either unconcious or too drunk to consent legally. The seventh young man watched.
That seventh young man and some of the others are allegedly shown physically keeping the drunk seventeen year-old from leaving the room.
The fifteen/fourteen year-old was white, apparently sober, and performed oral sex on Genarlo Wilson.
The seventeen year-old claims to have awakened on the floor between the two beds, nude. She found her clothes while the others were passed out or asleep. Went home and told her mother she thought the guys had sex with her when she was unconcious and drunk.
From viewing the tape, the DA agreed that some of the sex acts committed on her were committed when she was not conscious, and that she was prevented from leaving the room. He prosecuted six, including Genarlo, for rape of the seventeen year old and for consensual oral sex with the fifteen year old (which was against the law in Georgia).
Genarlo was an honor student and homecoming king, apparently with good grades, and had no prevous criminal records. The other six guys all had juvenile records and one of them is currently charged with impregnating a thirteen year-old after this case.
Given their past criminal history and after viewing the tape, six of the young men were convinced by counsel to plead guilty to a lesser charge of something like sexual battery (and the one who didn't participate in the alleged rape, to false imprisonment).
Virtually all attorneys I know believe the oral sex charge was just thrown in with the main case -- gang rape of an unconcious girl.
Those who pled to a lesser charge got two years. Many people believe there would have been no prosecution if the only act had been consensual oral sex. Genarlo refused the offer to plead guily to a lesser offense.
Different people will give you different reasons why he didn't take the plea bargain -- he didn't think he did anything wrong, he considered the sex consensual, etc.
After watching the tape, the jury decided that the seventeen year old had not been raped. It was a stunning decision according to anyone in the know. It signaled that the jury didn't want to destroy the life of a young man with a good record -- but they did convict him on the consensual oral sex charge.
Was it because the fifteen/fourteen year old was white? Possibly. It may also have been that they decided to convict him of what they thought was the lesser offense, or they could talk themselves into believing the other girl consented (she DID bring an overnight bag) but saw this sex act on tape.
The jury was stunned at the sentence, but it was Georgia law at the time. At the time, people were offended that he was convicted of his sexual act with a white girl but not rape of the black girl.
What's on the tapes was damning enough that all of the other defendants copped a plea, including the one who admittedly didn't have sex with either girl. He copped to false imprisonment.
All three attorneys who viewed the tape said there was no doubt that the young black girl was raped. One went so far as to say that anyone who watched the tape and thought the girl consented to all of the sex acts could watch the Rodney King tape and claim he was never struck by police. Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- believes the young black girl was not raped except for people who think that arriving drunk with an overnight bag is consent to let anyone have sex with you when you've passed out.
After the conviction and before the sentencing, the prosecutor AGAIN offered Generalo a chance to take the plea bargain -- two years and the lesser offense. He refused it.
I'm not justifying keeping Genarlo Wilson in jail. The Georgia legislature COULD have written the law so that it applied retroactively to those already serving time for this offense. They didn't. I also think there may be guys serving life sentences in Huntsville, Texas for possession of a single joint of pot in the 1960s.
There's a touch of a karma thing going on here -- the actual events of that night were far worse in most people's minds than consensual sex with a minor.
I no doubt have a few facts wrong. Genarlo may not deserve ten years in prison; however, he appears to be more of a sexual predator than simply someone who accepted consensual oral sex from an underage girl.
If there had not been alcohol and a video of the event I would have a kinder stance on this. In fact, I supported him until I saw all the facts of the case.