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 ...
“The Law is an ass.”
Thank God you appear to be in the minority on this issue. The kid already served 2 years for something which could be called commonplace.
“Frankly, I’m not seeing what is altogether unreasonable about the sentence in the first place”
You don’t see what’s unreasonable about getting 10 years for a consensual sex act with someone only two years younger?
You must have been busy in high school, making all those citizens’ arrests.
Seriously what does that have to do with the ruling. The ruling was based on the act. I'm not saying the act was right, and if I was the girl's father I may want to enact a little friendly reminder from my fist. But I don't think the young man committed a crime as outlined by the law and deserved 10 years in jail.
And apparently neither did the state legislature as they changed the law.
You don’t see why a 17 year old minor shouldn’t be sentenced to TEN YEARS in prison for oral sex with another minor? Wow, that’s more refecting your shortcomings than this cases’
I can’t understand all of the Freepers on this guys side. Nobody seems aware that wilson was also charged with raping an intoxicated 17 yr old, along with the other 5 males.
Except when the statutory rapist is a cute blond teacher. Then our strict by the book legal system doesn't imprison said cute blond statutory rapist because she's too cute for prison. By the way was she forced to register as a sex offender?
Duh, ya got that right.
If he wasn't convicted then your argument is nothing but hot air and speculation. As we know in the Duke case, there is not always a direct correlation between accusing someone of rape and that person actually committing rape.
The Founding Fathers anticipated just this type of overreach when they wrote in the Constitution that punishment for a crime must not be "cruel or unusual." The punishment should fit the crime.
Now we've seen numerous cases recently where teachers have sex with 13 and 14 year old students and get probation or a sixth-month sentence. Those are cases where the teacher is an adult in a position of authority; here, we have a case of two people in high school -- and he gets ten years.
He should have robbed a bank instead -- he'd be out in 5 or 6.
Sheesh, some of the comments on this thread sound more like sharia law than the U.S. Constitution.
Probably, but that’s emotion clouding reason.
The term was "Honor Student", which is a title describing of his academic performance. Separating the word "honor" out changes the meaning.
It's not so different from having to call a judge "Your Honor", regardless of what the judge's character is.
“Nobody seems aware that wilson was also charged with raping an intoxicated 17 yr old...”
I was not aware of that. (It does sound vaguely familiar now that you mention it.) Was he convicted of it? If not, it makes absolutely no difference.
Why is oral sex wrong?
The punishment does not fit the crime in this case.
10 years is extremely excessive.
(provided he was truly innocent of the gang rape)
You were taught to worship the law in schools? Figures.
Before understanding law one must understand ethics and justice. The law is only a crude approximation of this. And this "rule of law" people keep going on about is nothing more than the arbitrary enforcement of the crude approximation of ethics and justice. Doesn't sound so pretty or noble in those terms does it? Perhaps it isn't something you need to get down on your knees to worship. It is a decent system in general, but it is not perfect and in order to function properly it requires the people who operate it to think!!!
One thing that isn't taught in schools is how to use good reasoning and judgment. Perhaps that is why so many people ignore it. It is easier to act like a computer than to think critically.
I just heard on the radio that DA is appealing...what is wrong with this person? The defense attorney is trying for bond so this kid can be released.
This kid had never been in trouble. I’ve always thought it was blatant racism.
So acquittal doesn't mean innocence.
That’s a bogus response.
The law is there on the books and I can go to the library and look it up. The judges are bound to apply the law as it is written. Thus, I can make rational, reasoned decisions based on what are rational expectations of the workings of the judicial system.
In your world, however, all of that goes away and we are replaced with a system of “good reason.” One cannot possibly be expected to make rational, reasoned decision when he has no expectation of the consequences whatsoever. It is plain bad policy, and I note that even you are having trouble defending it.
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.