The point about Genarlow Wilson is that he’s carrying a sentence far beyond what today’s convicts would receive. Getting Lewinskied by another teenage isn’t exactly moral behavoir, but it’s not sex-offender material.
As to the “virtue” of his “victim” - everyone involved in the case (including the convicting jury) agrees that the girl initiated the oral sex. The Georgia legislature has seen fit to keep teenage oral sex a crime, but to reduce its sentence. What’s really wrong about Wilson’s case is that the prosecutor refuses to reduce the charges and wants the kid to stay locked up beyond today’s sentencing guidelines, seemingly because he can and it would besmirch his prosecutorial image to exhibit some discretion.
He argues that he wasn’t specifically included in the updated law, but that’s no answer.
When a judge ordered Wilson released, the attorney general decided to make the case a separation-of-powers political football. Wrong case to do it on.
Wilson got a raw deal from a crappy law. If he’s screwed the girl straight he would have gotten a lot less time. That’s just out of balance.
I guess you think “whatever he did was bad enough” and he deserves the 10 years.
To reply more directly to your post - I don’t dispute Wilson’s conviction. I dispute his sentence, and he should be released since the updated law’s sentence has already been served.
And he shouldn’t have sex-offender status. Another batch of lawyers screwin’ the People.