Topic: This case just pisses me off.

[Pugnate]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/06/teen.sex.case.ap/index.html

I think GPW has posted about this before, and it is fucking unfair. I don't approve of what the kid did, but come the fuck on.

Georgia lawmakers changed the law in 2006 to make consensual oral sex between teens a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of one year behind bars. Offenders do not have to register as sex offenders, as Wilson will be required to do.

But the state's top court ruled the 2006 change couldn't be applied retroactively to Wilson's case. An attempt earlier this year to pass a bill that would provide a remedy for Wilson has stalled.

Why not? WTF? Doesn't make sense.

I am ticked.

[idolminds]

Consensual oral sex between teens is a crime now? What the fuck is up with that? Yeah, *that* will make them not do it. Morons.

[Ghandi]

Georgia lawmakers are fucking stupid.

That's all, carry on.

[Jedi]

Consensual oral sex between teens is a crime now? What the fuck is up with that? Yeah, *that* will make them not do it. Morons.

Yeah it didn't make any sense to me either until I took a look at the link, Pugs quote doesn't mention that the teens in this case are under age (15 and 17).

The problem with making a law retroactive is that every little perv will want an appeal, it just means kids like this one (ie not a perv) who did actualy break the law (and still has even after the law change) gets a tough break. But hell man... he shouldn't have either a) broke the law to start with or b) got caught.

[Pugnate]

He was 17... she was 15.. that's just two years of an age difference!

[idolminds]

Seriously, it was only two years. Both were underage. And it was consensual. Big freaking deal. What does a law like this even accomplish other than putting some kids in jail? What horrible crime is being stopped? We already have laws that stop adults over 18 from having sex with minors...fine, whatever. But what is the purpose of trying to stop two hormone soaked teenagers from fooling around?

[Pugnate]

That Duke's Lacrosse case displayed how easy it is for power hungry prosecutors to take advantage of the system.

[Jedi]

Dam Web marshal is blocking this thread!

The law was already in place, they just changed it a little so that these kids don't end up in jail for 10 years! But know I've said that I think I see your point Pug 10 years is a bloody long time for something that should be nothing more than a misdemeanor but my was if they let this kid off then every little bastard who deserves 10 years will want off too.

[Cobra951]

"Only" a misdeameanor?  Bullshit.  This is a prime example of how bad things are getting here.  Simple protections like civil liberties and due process are getting bypassed with increasing success.  Consensual sex between two (or more) partners of similar age should never, ever be a fucking crime!  Assholes!  Anyone who clings to some moral high ground here to justify this better examine the ramifications.  Some white-house staffer just got sentenced to a ridiculously long jail term based on federal guidelines which only require a preponderance of the evidence.  Think about that.  He gets convicted of some simple little thing beyond a reasonable doubt, but if the judge feels that it's more likely than not that the defendant commited a higher crime, though never tried or convicted, the sentence imposed can be based on that higher crime.  How long are we going to allow this kind of authoritarian strong-arming to go on in the country which is supposed to be the guiding light of freedom?

[beo]

governments are meant to be ruled by the people, for the people. how is this for the people? it's just another means of exerting control and telling us whose boss. pushing their highly questionable moral compass on the masses. fuck, i hate politicians so fucking much. at least it's not in my country, but our situation is fucking terrible too, although for slightly different reasons.

[nickclone]

Defense attorney B.J. Bernstein noted that state lawmakers passed a law to close the loophole that led to Wilson's sentence

Haha, classic!

I wonder if all of the kids convicted were black, do you think the girl was white? I wouldn't expect anything less from the cracker state.

[WindAndConfusion]

governments are meant to be ruled by the people, for the people.

Aren't you from England or Wales or one of those drunken islands where everyone misspells "airplane"?

[WindAndConfusion]

I wonder if all of the kids convicted were black, do you think the girl was white? I wouldn't expect anything less from the cracker state.

White girl, black defendant.

(I read about this case a LONG time ago. The prosecutor is a first-rank asshole, and I wish someone would take him out back and have him shot.)

[MysterD]

He was 17... she was 15.. that's just two years of an age difference!

I should state this:
The "age of consent" law is 16 in Georgia.

Remember: she's not 16 here, while he was 17.

We already have laws that stop adults over 18 from having sex with minors...fine, whatever. But what is the purpose of trying to stop two hormone soaked teenagers from fooling around?

Maybe lawmakers are doing this to try and lower the amount of teenage sexual activity and teenage pregnancies from occurring?

Regardless of what you think of the actual laws, they are the laws. It always seemed crazy to me that there isn't just one Federal law period that sets the "age of consent" for the entire country, overriding whatever the state has for their "age of consent" law. That would make more sense to me, than having the states all dictate their own laws for their very own actual "age of consent."

Seems crazy that in MA, it's 16 -- but say in TX, it's 17. C'mon -- agree on a damn age period, y'all. Make it simple. 18 would make the most sense, since at 18, you can start doing all kinds of stuff -- purchase cigarettes, enlist in the military, etc etc.

[WindAndConfusion]

Regardless of what you think of the actual laws, they are the laws.

Fuck the Law, right up her whoring ass. Law without justice is nothing but tyranny.

[MysterD]

Law without justice is nothing but tyranny.

So, when was law always just???
Especially when laws are being made by imperfect beings???

[Quemaqua]

I think it's horrendous that the guy gets jail time for getting a blowjob, but at the same time, don't make him out to be some nice kid.  It says right in the article that he and a bunch of dudes gangbanged some other 17 year old at a party and filmed it.  Granted, I'm sure many of you feel that behavior is perfectly acceptable.  I do not.  Especially not at that age.  If you ask me this guy had some serious issues, honor student or not.  I certainly wouldn't be proud to have him as a son.  However, that doesn't change the core of the debacle.

[MysterD]

I think it's horrendous that the guy gets jail time for getting a blowjob

Agreed.

but at the same time, don't make him out to be some nice kid.  It says right in the article that he and a bunch of dudes gangbanged some other 17 year old at a party and filmed it.

Now, they're also breaking the laws of pornography...
Both are minors.

Granted, I'm sure many of you feel that behavior is perfectly acceptable.  I do not.  Especially not at that age.  If you ask me this guy had some serious issues, honor student or not.  I certainly wouldn't be proud to have him as a son.  However, that doesn't change the core of the debacle.

I think one big problem is the age of (sexual) consent varies from state to state. What the hell is that?? Nothing is clear there. Why can't it just be the Fed Gov't set ONE age for the Entire USA for the "age of (sexual) consent" whether it's 15, 16, 17, or 21 -- why can't the law just be simple and clear cut? Why the hell do the states have different ages for this "Age of consent" AND why are there different extra stipulations from state to state? Isn't that kind of silly???

I mean, look at this way: nationally, the drinking age is 21, cigarette purchasing is 18, joining the military is 18. So, why can't consensual sex be so clear cut and simple? I dunno, but since most things look to be 18 as an age for a minimum requirement to certain activities, doesn't that make the most sense for a nation-wide "age of consent", too?

[WindAndConfusion]

So, when was law always just???

Never?

[MysterD]

Never?

Exactly my point.

My question was rhetorical.

[WindAndConfusion]

Well then, my moral outrage remains. This is a clear case of the law being evil.

You were looking at the law like some kind of moral authority. But that's never justified (except in a courtroom) - any time you're arguing about the law, it's because the law's morality is in question.

[gpw11]

I agree with WindAndConfusion.
 

As for a nation-wide age of consent, that doesn't really solve the problem here (it should also be noted that the federal government actually has no control over the legal drinking age, that's a state issue.  It's only the same across the board because of Regan and his threat (and later act) to withold funds from states that don't up the age.  I'm not sure about the other 'ages of consent').  If the age of consent is 18, this guy is still wrongly being fucked over.  This isn't a case of "but he broke the law..he deserves to go to jail!!!"  That's just stupid.

In Canada the age of sexual consent is 14.  There are exceptions to that, but generally, you can have consentual sex with a 14 year old and get away with it. Besides that there is a clause stating that someone the age of 16 or younger may have consentual sex with someone the age of 12 or older without fear of reprisal (again, there are other factors that can change that).  Essentially, it's a three tiered system.  If you are in a position of authority over the person, you may not have sex with them unless they are 18.  If you are not, you can have sex with them unless they are over 14.  If you're 16 or younger, you can have consentual sex with someone 12 or older.

Yes, 12 and 14 are both pretty fucking young...but so's 16, and consentual sex is consentual sex.  If you feel you were wrongly taken advantage of, there is still legal action you can pursue, but no one is getting hung out to dry with draconian age laws heres.  Far more just.

[Pugnate]

Haha, classic!

I wonder if all of the kids convicted were black, do you think the girl was white? I wouldn't expect anything less from the cracker state.

hahahaha... thanks for pointing it out haha. And yes the girl was white, though I don't think it had anything to do with the case.

Also you guys are right. Laws are meant to be created for the people.

[gpw11]

Oh, I wouldn't be suprised if it had something to due with the sentencing at least.

[Cobra951]

Fuck the Law, right up her whoring ass. Law without justice is nothing but tyranny.

Once in a while I hear or read something that sticks for the long haul.  Amen.

D, an age difference of up to 4 years gets around those arbitrary boundaries, everywhere that doesn't fit within the above quote.

[Jedi]

Yes, 12 and 14 are both pretty fucking young...but so's 16, and consentual sex is consentual sex.  If you feel you were wrongly taken advantage of, there is still legal action you can pursue, but no one is getting hung out to dry with draconian age laws heres.  Far more just.

Yeah but she was 15 that's why he's in jail. Fuck 16 is the age of consent in NZ and I think that's too young just like lowering the drinking age to 18 was wrong.
Anyway if he did what he did in NZ he'd still be up shit creek - though he wouldn't have been given 10 years though. Beyond the fact that he got 10 years I don't see the issue is.

[MysterD]

Yeah but she was 15 that's why he's in jail.

Exactly.

Fuck 16 is the age of consent in NZ and I think that's too young

I just think the age of consent is something that needs to be agreed upon by all 50 states, if you ask me -- regardless of what it is; whether it's too high or too low, it'd at least be a start in the right direction here.
 
The waters are just too muddy and gray, from state to state.

Anyway if he did what he did in NZ he'd still be up shit creek - though he wouldn't have been given 10 years though. Beyond the fact that he got 10 years I don't see the issue is.

Hmmmm...Did whomever filmed the two having sex go to jail for filming minors having sex??
And did the boy and girl having sex actually want to be recorded???
Or did just someone just whip a cam out as they were in the midst of this act???

Hmmmm...if they both allowed to be recorded, I wonder if that crime of having minors having sex filmed was involved w/ this boy getting 10 years....

[WindAndConfusion]

Yeah but she was 15 that's why he's in jail.

Normally there are "Romeo laws" that apply in this situation.

Fun fact: In Georgia, you can marry (and then legally shag) a 15-year-old, assuming you get her parents' permission. If she's 16 and you knock her up first, you don't even need her parents' permission - although that presents the dilemma of getting her pregnant without statutorily raping her.

[gpw11]

Yeah but she was 15 that's why he's in jail.

The point was that here, where I would argue there are much more modern laws dealing with this issue, it wouldn't be an issue.  She's 15, that's over 14....end of story.  If she wants to charge him with rape and can argue succesfully that he took advantage of her immaturity, then it can go to court...if there's a solid argument behind it.  However, the government could not come in on it's own and just throw him in jail because a group of legislators decided that one has to be 16 before they are mature enough to understand the repricautions of putting a dick in their mouth.  It's fucking stupid.  Think back to when you were 15. 

[Jedi]

Think back to when you were 15. 

Good point, I've got nothing left to say 

[Ghandi]

Judge Overturns His Sentence. Apparently he has served two of his ten years.

If this Court, or any court, cannot recognize the injustice of what has occurred here, then our court system has lost sight of the goal our judicial system has always strived to accomplish: Justice being served in a fair and equal manner.

The state attorney general is appealing.

[WindAndConfusion]

Judge Overturns His Sentence. Apparently he has served two of his ten years.

The state attorney general is appealing.

The district attorney, David McDade, has argued that what happened at the New Year’s Eve party was worse than supporters of Mr. Wilson have claimed.

“Six young men basically gang-raped a 17-year-old and had repeated sex acts with a 15-year-old,” Mr. McDade said in a television interview last year. “‘There’s no member of the legislature that I think would condone that behavior.’”

David McCade is a serial rapist. "Basically gang-raped" is just prosecutor-speak for "more than one guy."

[Ghandi]

? I was never defending the guy. Not to mention the fact that he was acquitted of those charges:

Mr. Wilson was also charged with rape for being one of several people at the party to have sex with a 17-year-old girl, but he was acquitted of those charges.

[WindAndConfusion]

? I was never defending the guy.

I never said you did. I was quoting the article you linked.

[Ghandi]

My mistake, I thought that you were juxtaposing the two.

[Cobra951]

He wasn't convicted of the serious crime, but he was sentenced for it.  I think I mentioned something about this line of thinking, above.  Justice and due process be damned, when you can convict someone of a minor crime, and then put him away for suspicion of committing a major one.

[WindAndConfusion]

He wasn't convicted of the serious crime, but he was sentenced for it.

Actually, it turns out that 10 years in prison plus a year of probation, all without the possibility of parole, is the minimum sentence for getting a BJ from a 15 year old.

[Cobra951]

I knew that.  But the law was amended because of how unfairly it could be applied, as evidenced by this case, specifically.  Even then, this guy wasn't released.  They refused to apply the change in the law retroactively to him.  Why?  The law was changed because of his case!  They want him in jail, even though he clearly does not belong there.  They have the power to keep him there, so they're going to do it, regardless of legal intent.  This abuse of power is what I'm talking about.  It's getting way too easy.