Grave Injustice, Ten years for consentual sex.

[madanthonywayne]

I came across this story today, an unbelievable miscarrage of justice. A seventeen year old boy got a blow job from a fifteen year old girl at a party. The age of consent is sixteen, but it doesn't apply if the people involved are within two years of each other. Unfortunately, this proviso doesn't apply to oral sex. If he'd had vaginal sex with her, he'd be cool. But since it was a blow job, he's currently in his second year of a ten year sentence.

Once, he was the homecoming king at Douglas County High. Now he's Georgia inmate No. 1187055, convicted of aggravated child molestation.

When he was a senior in high school, he received oral sex from a 10th grader. He was 17. She was 15. Everyone, including the girl and the prosecution, agreed she initiated the act. 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.

Afterward, the state legislature changed the law to include an oral sex clause, but that doesn't help Wilson. In yet another baffling twist, the law was written to not apply to cases retroactively, though another legislative solution might be in the works. The case has drawn national condemnation, from the "Free Genarlow Wilson Now" editorial in The New York Times to a feature on Mark Cuban's HDNet.

"It's disgusting," Cuban wrote to ESPN in an e-mail. "I can not see any way, shape or form that the interests of the state of Georgia are served by throwing away Genarlow's youth and opportunity to become a vibrant contributor to the state. All his situation does is reinforce some unfortunate stereotypes that the state is backward and misgoverned. No one with a conscience can look at this case and conclude that justice has been served." http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=wilson

Why the governor hasn't pardoned this guy, I can't understand.

 

[Oniw17]

That's horrible...I'd be mad...

 

[spidergoat]

It beats the sentence some men suffer, marriage.

 

[Bells]

Why the governor hasn't pardoned this guy, I can't understand.

Why the laws that were changed to include oral sex were not retroactive, I can't understand.

Why this case was even prosecuted, I cannot understand.

Why his appeal wasn't upheld, I cannot understand.

Even the girl's mother admits that her daughter instigated the acts.

As galling as this case is and what this poor boy has been put through, what I find most appalling is this from the prosecutor:

In Barker's eyes, Wilson should have taken the same plea agreement as the others. Maintaining innocence in the face of the crushing wheels of justice is the ultimate act of vanity, he believes.

"I understand what he's saying," Barker says. "I think he's making a bad decision in the long run. Being branded a sex offender is not good; but at the same time, if it made the difference between spending 10 years as opposed to two? Is it worth sitting in prison for eight more years, and you're still gonna be a sex offender when you get out?"

Barker is quick to point out that he offered Wilson a plea after he'd been found guilty -- the first time he has ever done that. Of course, the plea was the same five years he'd offered before the trial -- not taking into account the rape acquittal. Barker thinks five years is fair for receiving oral sex from a schoolmate. None of the other defendants insisted on a jury trial. Wilson did. He rolled the dice, and he lost. The others, he says, "took their medicine."

What arrogance!

Having worked as a prosecutor I found that offering such deals to be disgusting and only did so after being ordered to, and even then it wasn't without a fight. But this... I find myself speechless at how unfairly this case was tried.

This is the plea system at its worst. The one and only thing a prosecutor cares about is to get a guilty plea. Now this would be fine if all those accused were in fact guilty. But even in cases where prosecutors know for a fact that the accused is in fact innocent, they will still attempt to bully them into accepting a plea.

For Barker to say that Wilson should have just accepted the same plea, even after all other charges were dropped, is in my opinion, vile. To then say:

"Being branded a sex offender is not good; but at the same time, if it made the difference between spending 10 years as opposed to two? Is it worth sitting in prison for eight more years, and you're still gonna be a sex offender when you get out?"​

It is a shame that so many lawyers cannot understand any notion of principle and most importantly, of ethics, nowdays.

Only the prosecutors' opinion does, and according to at least one legal expert, prosecutorial ego is more of a factor in this case than race. The folks in Douglas County are playing god with Genarlow Wilson's life.

"We can set aside his sentence," Barker says. "Legally, it's still possible for us to set aside his sentence and give him a new sentence to a lesser charge. But it's up to us. He has no control over it."

The position of Barker and the district attorney, McDade, who refused to comment, is that Wilson is guilty under the law and there is no room for mercy, though the facts seem to say they simply chose not to give it to Wilson. At the same time this trial was under way, a local high school teacher, a white female, was found guilty of having a sexual relationship with a student -- a true case of child molestation. The teacher received 90 days. Wilson received 3,650 days.

That man should be fired!

This whole case is tantamount to blackmail and all to appease the prosecutors desire for another 'guilty' notch on his belt. Disgusting in my opinion.

 

[draqon]

well the conclusion is: don't deal with women

 

[madanthonywayne]

Why the laws that were changed to include oral sex were not retroactive, I can't understand.

Why this case was even prosecuted, I cannot understand.

Why his appeal wasn't upheld, I cannot understand.

Even the girl's mother admits that her daughter instigated the acts.

As galling as this case is and what this poor boy has been put through, what I find most appalling is this from the prosecutor:


What arrogance!

Having worked as a prosecutor I found that offering such deals to be disgusting and only did so after being ordered to, and even then it wasn't without a fight. But this... I find myself speechless at how unfairly this case was tried.

For Barker to say that Wilson should have just accepted the same plea, even after all other charges were dropped, is in my opinion, vile. To then say:

It is a shame that so many lawyers cannot understand any notion of principle and most importantly, of ethics, nowdays.


That man should be fired!

This whole case is tantamount to blackmail and all to appease the prosecutors desire for another 'guilty' notch on his belt. Disgusting in my opinion.

For once, Bells, we are in complete agreement. This is worse than the Duke lacross case.

 

[draqon]

yeah...with extreme feministic views of Bells...and her agreeing that the guy's 10 years was not judicially sound...WOW!

 

[Bells]

yeah...with extreme feministic views of Bells...and her agreeing that the guy's 10 years was not judicially sound...WOW!

Of course it is not judicially sound. I may be a bit of a feminist, but I also recognise a pile of manure in law when I see it. And this is a huge pile.

I wonder if the girl who first alleged rape was charged at all?

This case should never have been prosecuted. At worst, it should have been classified as a misdemeanor. To try it as a felony is a travesty. And to compound to the injustice, the law is changed but not made retroactive.

And then to have the prosecutor only concerned with a guilty plea, regardless of the circumstances of the case.... makes my blood boil. There is no fairness in law and this is a prime example of how the truth no longer matters. What does matter in criminal prosecution is a guilty plea. Lose a case and you are seen as a bad prosecutor. I hope that this case continues to be closely followed by law schools around the US, to serve as a lesson of what good jurisprudence is not. The law should not be about getting a guilty verdict, while ignoring of the issues at hand in the case.

The arrogance of the prosecution in this case is beyond comprehension. It is cases like these that give prosecutors who do their jobs as it is intended, and not to fulfil their own egotistical pride, a bad name.

 

[Prince_James]

I saw this on 20/20 or some show recently.

I have to agree with everyone here: This is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Baron Max]

This case should never have been prosecuted. At worst, it should have been classified as a misdemeanor. To try it as a felony is a travesty.

Are you suggesting that state prosecutors should ignore the laws of the state whenever they want to? Or change the laws if the feel like it?

I wonder if the girl who first alleged rape was charged at all?

And what was her crime? What would she be charged with?

I think perhaps Dragon got it right .....it's just best that males don't interact with females at all, period, ever! Females are nothing but problems for males, in almost every endeavor of life in todays modern world.

Baron Max

 

[madanthonywayne]

Are you suggesting that state prosecutors should ignore the laws of the state whenever they want to? Or change the laws if the feel like it?

One should use judgement and discretion when administering the law. This prosecutor used neither. There was no crime here, except perhaps the false allegation of rape.

 

[leopold]

since both were underage the situation should have been regarded as "growing pains".
i agree that 10 years is waaaaaaaaay over the top.

 

[madanthonywayne]

since both were underage the situation should have been regarded as "growing pains".
i agree that 10 years is waaaaaaaaay over the top.

Any time at all is way over the top. Did you ever get a blowjob from a girl under eighteen while you were under eighteen? I did. Hell, I even did when I was over eighteen (my girlfriend at the time was sixteen or seventeen.)

 

[visceral_instinct]

Oh Fucking Christ that poor guy. I feel so sorry for him. Those bastards.

He shouldn't be punished at all, it was a consensual act.

 

[leopold]

Did you ever get a blowjob from a girl under eighteen while you were under eighteen?

no.
i lost my virginity on my 18th birthday . . . to a 16 year old.

 

[Baron Max]

One should use judgement and discretion when administering the law.

If so, why even have written laws? Let's just let judges and prosecutors administer whatever they each think should be done?

There was no crime here, except perhaps the false allegation of rape.

Perhaps you should read the third sentence in the original post. That might give you a clue about what law was violated.

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

Did you ever get a blowjob from a girl under eighteen while you were under eighteen? I did. Hell, I even did when I was over eighteen (my girlfriend at the time was sixteen or seventeen.)

So you admit to being a phedophile? How interesting! And so you feel qualified to make judgements about laws against phedophilia? Hmmm? Perhaps we should let all phedophiles write the laws about sex with minors? Hey, we could even have them lay out the punishments if there are any crimes at all? Hmmm?

Baron Max

 

[tablariddim]

The mind boggles at the injustices of the legal justice system. I think a top lawyer could and should appeal this sentence and probably win.

 

[Oniw17]

So you admit to being a phedophile? How interesting! And so you feel qualified to make judgements about laws against phedophilia? Hmmm? Perhaps we should let all phedophiles write the laws about sex with minors? Hey, we could even have them lay out the punishments if there are any crimes at all? Hmmm?

Baron Max

The kid was 17, she was 15, if he would've took it to the hole, it would've been legal. It's a fucking technicality, and it's bullshit.

 

[tablariddim]

So you admit to being a phedophile? How interesting! And so you feel qualified to make judgements about laws against phedophilia? Hmmm? Perhaps we should let all phedophiles write the laws about sex with minors? Hey, we could even have them lay out the punishments if there are any crimes at all? Hmmm?

Baron Max

You do realise that teenage females are, on average, 4 years more mature than males of the same age? Calling having consentual sex with a 16 - 17 year old girl when you're just 18, paedophilia, is a bit extreme in my opinion.