Posted on 01/25/2007 1:52:44 PM PST by Dr. Marten
We have a lot of out of control prosecutors in this country. Between this case, the Amero case, the Douglasvill case, and the Duke Lax team case, the injustices are really piling up.
Video camera? Some people belong in jail for gross stupidity.
That said, I agree that this looks like an atrocious injustice has been done.
1) Was the act illegal?
2) Did the person actually commit the act?
Seems to me like the answer to both is "yes." No tears here.
Negatives against him:
Partying with underage drinking.
Use of marijuana.
Promiscuous sexual activity with a 17-year-old who may have been willing, or may have been too drunk or stoned to give permission.
Allowing an underage female to perform a sex act on him.
Mitigating factors: Some female teacher got away with a lot worse.
"Nobody" thinks he deserves to be in jail for 10 years
They changed the law afterwards so now what he did is a misdeamenor (I wish that worked to wipe out my traffic ticket on a street that they raised the limits on right after I got the ticket).
I think these mandatory sentences stink. It's behind the problems with the BP agents case, and here as well. I don't think the guy is guiltless, and I don't have a lot of sympathy for him or his mother, but I don't think he should be in jail for 10 years.
I think we've got real problems with the "registered sex offender" nonsense. I'm all for making sex with underage people criminal, but there is something fundamentally different about two kids in school having sex, and a 40-year-old man preying on 15-year-old girls. The sex offender acts often can't distinguish.
There is no indication this guy is a molestor, or a predator, and he shouldn't have had to be put on a "registered sex offenders" list. There should have been a way for him to plead guilty to sex with a minor, and any charges related to the drinking and pot.
I also would be happy if there was a "lesser offense" in the law for ANY person having sex with someone who is incapcitated, with the rule that they have to report the crime within 24 hours.
BTW, I would hope the person who videotapes this was hit with a child pornography charge, to be consistent.
This deserves a pardon either from the governor or from President Bush.
Hell, the politicians that write such stupid laws get away with more than this.
I remember this case, and I wonder what happened to this 15 yr. old girl who cried rape? Even though she now admits her lie, even though the laws have been changed, this young man is still in prison.
It just couldn't be more wrong.
Of course if he were a real child molester, he'd get off with probation and be back out on the prowl.
It was the 17-year-old who claimed rape. The 15-year-old never claimed anything, but the film was enough to prove the act and she wasn't old enough to consent.
Plain old racism.
I don’t get it. Age 17 is considered an adult? That’s just wrong. A 15 year old servicing a 17 year old is immoral, the idea of it being illegal is absurd.
Nerf out of control prosecutors!
"But because of an archaic Georgia law, it was a misdemeanor for teenagers less than three years apart to have sexual intercourse, but a felony for the same kids to have oral sex."
Don't raise the bar, lower the standards - is this where we are heading?
RE: "Promiscuous sexual activity with a 17-year-old who may have been willing, or may have been too drunk or stoned to give permission."
He was 17. She was 15. Other than that, your summary is great.
His attorney's name is B.J.! And B.J.'s working Pro Bono! Work it, girl!!
There were two girls. One was a 17-year-old girl who he had sex with "from behind" while she stood with her hands on the floor. She later claimed she had been raped, and the story suggested she might have been stoned or under the influence.
Then there was the 15-year-old who came to him and performed oral sex on him. She didn't file a complaint, but because she was 15 and they had it on tape, he could be charged for the statutory offense.
I wonder how this case is different from what President Cinton and Monica Lewinsky were doing. He served no time and isn't labeled a sexual predator.
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.