wooten in his ajc column this morning...
• These are “Profiles in Courage” days for Georgia’s Attorney General Thurbert Baker, who’s been given the bum’s rush to ignore the law as written in the Genarlow Wilson case. If a fraction of the energy and attention devoted to this case had been spent promoting marriage and responsible fatherhood, untold millions of young men might be spared his plight.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I wonder why the Board of Pardons & Parole has not pardoned Wilson, just to eliminate all the negative nationwide attention this case has, not to mention all the taxpayer dollars saved on incarceration costs and attorneys fees.
"If a fraction of the energy and attention devoted to this case had been spent promoting marriage and responsible fatherhood, untold millions of young men might be spared his plight."
Is this to insinuate that Genarlow Wilson's situation arose from his lack of a responsible father? Or is Jim Wooten implying that Genarlow Wilson should marry his "victim" and be a responsible father to his non-child?
To the first, I question how many of you out there believe that your sophomoric conquest, for lack of a better phrase, in highschool or college resulted from your lack of responsible fathering. I had a great father and it never stopped me from trying to hook up with girls in my highschool; regardless if they were a year or two younger than me. Scoop, did you or Jim Wooten ever fool around in the ever so regulated field of consensual sexual activities in high school? If so, was it due to a lack of the same responsible fatherhood that caused Genarlow Wilson to suffer this "plight", or is it an increasingly normal behavior engaged by an evergrowing percentage of our youth that has been criminalized by an absurd abortion of reason and logic when drafting this law, only to be outdone by the absense of reason in interperating this law. (By "this law" I am referring to the law as it was originally written, not to the updated law after the changes arising from Genarlow Wilson's case were implemented.)
To the latter, I would like to note the point that Genarlow Wilson did not have sex with his "victim", he had oral sex. Had he had sex and gotten her pregnant, his "crime" for consensual sex with a girl less than two years his minor would have been a misdemeanor, and would have provided some degree of merit and credibility to Jim's gem of marriage and responsible fatherhood promotions.
Interesting Answer Carl Spackler. Explain one thing, I am amiss on this, you are saying Oral Sex is not sex? Hmmmm I have a different opinion.
Oral sex is a sex act, yes. However, the penalty for oral sex, in this case was more sever than that of vaginal sex. I didn't mean to draw any hard lines on what was and was not considered "sex". By "sex" in my post, I meant vaginal sex. Had Genarlow engaged in vaginal sex, with the possibility of getting the girl pregnant and a much greater possibility of transmitting std's, he would have been charged with a misdemeanor.
It was also brought to my attention after I posted, that the "victim's" mother stood up in court and stated that her daughter initiated the act and that she wanted it to happen. There are also speculations that David McDade (DA) threatened the girl's mother with contempt if she didn't cooperate with his prosecution. At the same time he was prosecuting this case, a white female teacher from Douglas county was being charged for engaging in sexual acts with her students, one of which, according to some reports, may or may not have been David McDade's son. She got 90 days in jail.....Genarlow Wilson got 10 years.
Does anyone think that this young man is a child molester?
I dont think this is a case of Child Molestation. I think the courts should have deemed this in their first decision, instead, and creating the problem they have. Sometimes you question the competence of some judges, and prosecutors. I feel a judge who makes an incorrect decision, should get to serve the time.
I don't feel like we should excuse him. If we overturn this verdict for him then we should overturn the verdicts for all that have been convicted under the law. Don't make exceptions just for one person. Justice for all. Parents you should not allow your under age (15 or younger) be out on the streets until all hours of the morning. Temptation is to great and these young girls should be at home where any girl that young belongs.
Fine upstanding young men with a great future do not gang rape intoxicated women and videotape themselves having oral sex, which is sex unless you're Bill Clinton. Wilson is no victim, he is a sleazbag.
Anonymous 10:44,
How can you honestly say that this girl was "gang raped". She admittedly gave consent, and you have no evidence that she was intoxicated at all. It was a sleezy thing to do, and he definitely made a bad decision. But being a sleezebag doesn't land you in jail for 10 years....esp when the same prosecuting attorney put a white female teacher in jail for 90 days for commiting the same crime to a much greater extent.
Anonymous 1:42,
This young man had consensual oral sex with someone less than two years younger than him, and is serving 10 years in federal prison. Is that "justice" in your eyes?
He got a raw deal, but he is not a choir boy. He could have pleaded and escaped all this, but his lawyer wanted to make a name for herself and he went along.
You're right....he could have plead guilty. Of course, he didn't see himself as guilty and refused to subject himself to being labeled a child molester for the rest of his life for hooking up with a girl less than two years younger than him. I am glad to see that there are still people that won't fold to any adversity they are faced with and will still stand up for themselves, their morals, and their convictions. But yes, he could have sold himself down the river and plead guilty, and accepted to admit that what he did was child molestation. Let's hope you are never faced with the same situation.
Carl, the plea would have avoided the sex offender label. Regardless of how he views himself, he broke the law and his lawyer did him a great disservice and continues to do so. easier for her she's on TV and he is in the slammer.
Carl:
There was a second girl at the party who was gangbanged by Mr. Wilson and the other upstanding young men present, but it was ruled consensual, which is in itself a sad commentary.
If it was consensual, why is that sad. Maybe she liked to be gangbanged. Maybe she asked them to do it. Regardless, if it was consensual, participating in an orgy, isn't illegal. Someday the rightwing fundamentalist are going to wake up and realize they can't legislate their morality on everyone. Also, not being an upstanding young man isn't illegal either. I don't care if he had a rap sheet as long as your arm and was flunking out of school, he still didn't molest a child. He still is being punished for committing a "crime" that violated noone's rights.
Anonymous 12:51, I was under a different impression. Can you point me in the right direction to verify that fact? And you are correct that he broke the law. The same law that was changed because his case pointed out the absurdity in which it was written. Do you think a 17 yr old hooking up with a 15 yr old should be illegal, and should warrant 10 yrs of prison time? He has already served two years for getting a blow job from a girl less than two years younger than him. Good thing this danger to society is locked up. Lots of people marry girls 2 or 3 years younger than themselves.
Have any of you seen the little clip they keep running on tv??
Some one needs to slap that silly grin off his ugly face. There may be just 2 years diffence in their ages but the law is the law and he should not be given any special treatment because he has got the big mouth black leaders up in arms. The laws that were in effect when he was found guilty and sentenced should not be overturned just because he is young and black.
Post a Comment