Friday, July 13, 2007

 

Black Teenager Still In Jail in Georgia

Lately, Instapundit has been all over this story of a black teenager in Georgia serving 10 years in jail for receiving oral sex from his white girl friend. I first posted on this November, 2006 after reading posts by Instapundit and Eugene Volokh.

Apparently the prosecutor, McDade, feels a strong desire to keep this kid in prison although there appears to be no compelling reason and, under a new law in Georgia, the boy's "actions" are no longer considered criminal.

CORRECTION: - My charges of racism based on a black/white encounter were based on erroneous understanding.

Volokh does bring up the question of race here and decides race is not a significant factor. I still wonder.

Comments:
Might wanna get your facts straight. She wasn't his girlfriend. She was a 15 year old girl who gave multiple blowjobs on tape to 17 year olds while drinking and smoking pot in a motel room.

As for his actions no longer being considered criminal, that should fall under the tough shitzky rule. When he received a blowjob from a 15 year old girl he was breaking a law that the Georgia Legislature felt, at the time, deserved a 10 year mandatory sentence. Furthermore, the Legislature could have made the law retroactive and decided not to.

There will always be stupid laws on the books that punish too much or too little. Just because Mr. Wilson is a bright young person does not mean he is above the law and be spared a constitutionally sound law. I guess it's just easier to claim racism than to realize that actions have consequences, no matter who you are.
 
"What better way to ignite this racist outrage than the images of a young white girl engaged in oral sex on a black man?"

Might want to read the posts you link to, too (like the Volokh link and references). Nobody involved in this episode was white.
 
Which probably has a lot to do with the conspicuous lack of racism charges.
 
Are you as stupid and thoughtless as you appear to be? The GA Attny General, who appealed the judge letting the guy out, is Black (oh, and a Democrat).

Get a life.
 
what the hell is the stupidity of this? consensual sex with minors? and he goes to jail? this california girl does not understand how this could even happen. in my state it is 18. and we are not looking at rape here.what a waste of money and this guy's life. tragic.
 
Sadly, we have entered an age where archaic laws are allowed to be used having not been elimintate for lack of attention, thanks to an abundance of unscrupulous lawyers, rather than rational justice. And the fact this law wasn't acknowledged as ridiculous until after the fact in this case is a crime. Teens don't seperate attraction by legal statutes, it's just 'there', hello. Maybe McDade and others need re-explore their own adolescence to get a clue. But guessing they were clueless so might be useless advice.
 
Why are people trying to make this kid into a saint? His boys and he ran a train on two drunk girls while his friends videotaped it. He could have taken a plea like his friends and he would be out now. He chose to roll the dice and got what he deserved.
 
One of my pet peeves is when you get people crying "racism" automatically just because of the race of the accused/convicted. It gets rather tiring, depending on where you live. But this time I'm going to have to agree.

The DA is publicly saying that the tape refutes Wilson's supporter's claims that he is a "straight A student" or some such nonsense. What Wilson did isn't in question - he admitted it. People weren't outraged because they think he's an angel, they were outraged because a consensual act between minors was made a felony. Now the DA has been handing out this tape as a counterattack.

The DA's own words have convinced me that he is either a complete idiot or maliciously grandstanding. The question is, indeed, is he doing it out of personal animosity, or opportunism?
 
You see no other reason for the conduct beyond racism? Well, perhaps that is because Cnn is ommitting details it previously put in other articles on the subject (see: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/27/teen.sex.case/). There you will see that the DA maintains that the girl was too drunk to consent. For one reason, he couldn't make out that charge in a straight up rape charge, so he releases the tape to demonstrate why he didn't excercise prosecutorial discretion. And from what I hear (i.e. on O'Reilly) the tape is damning as hell.

The reality is statutory rape laws are most often used to prosecute where the prosecutors can't, or don't want to prove a lack of consent (i.e. to avoid traumatizing the victim further). Tough on him.

And as you can see, there is an easy explanation besides racism: the DA believes he committed rape.
 
What the problem is in this case, especially coming from Georgia, is that most of the time such cases are never, ever prosecuted consistently. Least they wasn't down in my neck of the Georgia woods.

One commentor on this thread makes note that this kid "might be bright, but that does not make him above the law." Which is absolutely correct.

Unfortunately, many such cases involving minor on minor sexual activity in Georgia are prosecuted in a myriad of ways. Selective enforcement = someone getting away with it. And when you pick a bright kid with a future college career and a possible football scholarship as your example to throw the book at on national TV you're going to have to deal with controversey.

So, to the commentors bantering about the 'get the facts straight' blah blah: get your butts into a real Georgia high school in some of those rural counties and affluent Atlanta suburbs and find out what is really going on with the kids. Find out who is videotaping parties in your neck of the woods. Find out which ones of your baby darlin's have laptop wallpapers of their latest statuatory law violation. And then, no matter who their daddy is, go out and demand the book gets thrown at them as hard as it got thrown at Wilson.

Then you'll have a argument.
 
Oh, and as long as we're throwing the book at every single person, regardless of position or standing, based solely on the letter of the law, let us not forget that we have laws forbidding child pornography as well.

Dispatch for Chirs Hanssen....
 
the DA believes he committed rape.

The jury disagreed. They are who supposed to decide these cases. 10 years is extraordinarily harsh for two teenagers engaged in sexual activity. At worst, time served should be enough.

And, why did the state legislature change the law? Seems they think such acts shouldn't be dealt with so harshly either.

Similarly to CPFG's comments, teenagers, unfortunately, are doing this sort of thing all over the country for a long time. When caught, legal action is rare. Heck, when I was in high school in the 1960's, several guys were caught having a gang bang in a pickup camper with one girl. I think all were suspended but no one went to jail for even a minute.

10 years for a 17 year old is way beyond reason. This reminds me of some of the false child molestation cases of the past based on false memories, etc. in which D.A.'s got convictions.

In Ohio, a 46 year old man got probations and staying at a treatment house for repeatedly sexually molesting two boys for three years.

I don't believe the youth is a saint. But, I certainly do believe he is being treated with unreasonable harshness.

There is no man so good that if he placed all his actions and thoughts under the scrutiny of the laws, he would not deserve hanging ten times in his life.
-Michel de Montaigne

Another little story I like to keep in mind.

A story has been told of a mother who sought from Napoleon the pardon for her son. Apparently, to the mother’s request, Napoleon simply responded by saying that it was the man’s second offence and according to the law and justice, it demanded death, and that is what he is going to get. The story goes on to say that the mother persisted and said, “Sir, I don’t ask for justice from you, I plead for mercy.”

"But,” said the emperor, “he does not deserve any mercy.”

To which the mother replies, “Sir, it would not be mercy if he deserved it, and mercy is all I ask.

"Well, then,” said the emperor, “I will show mercy and pardon your son.” And her son was spared from certain death.

 
"And from what I hear (i.e. on O'Reilly) the tape is damning as hell."

Wait, this "O'Reilly" character is a law enforcement officer? Or the DA is self-acknowledged as willfully spreading child pornography?

I suppose the fact that it's for "educational purposes" will be used as a defense again?

Hmm, I suspect if I started sending out video of a 15y/o girl giving BJ's that I'd have a bit of a jail sentence coming up.

But that's ok, he's a DA so he's allowed to break the law and commit crimes when he's defending his viewpoints... or something.

Is there a manditory sentence for knowingly distributing child pornigraphy? Just asking...
 
If she was giving "multiple blowjobs" why is only one man in prison?
 
ive read some of these comments about the case. one thing that should be known, in Georgia at 17 u are an adult. i know most other states minor/adult age is 18 but not Ga. 15 old girl and multiples ADULTS - rape
on video - child porn

=== prison time

this is georgia not california
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]