They put a fucking 17 YEAR OLD in JAIL for this?!

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I think they should fix the law but not at any expense of creating a loop hole for others to get out on technical grounds, no way.

The 'loophole' would have consisted of saying that people who were already imprisoned under the old law have as much a right to freedom as the people who would have been convicted if the law hadn't changed.

That's not a loophole, that's 'equal justice under law'.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by richlevy

The 'loophole' would have consisted of saying that people who were already imprisoned under the old law have as much a right to freedom as the people who would have been convicted if the law hadn't changed.

That's not a loophole, that's 'equal justice under law'.

And that is the problem. People who were rightly convicted under the old law were put there for good reason. This kid should never have gone to jail. But the 50 year old man who has sex with your 12 year old daughter more likely should have been there and has no right to release.

[TheMercenary]

Further, the legislators did make the law retroactive in an attempt to free the young man. The higher court is the ones who screwed up, so again it is the Judges who are the pussies.

"Legislators last year voted to close that loophole. But the state's top court said the new law could not be applied retroactively to Wilson, now 21. "

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew..._name=&no_ads=

[Clodfobble]

This appeal wasn't based on the change in law, it was classifying his previous sentence as "cruel and unusual."

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

This appeal wasn't based on the change in law, it was classifying his previous sentence as "cruel and unusual."

Well they had to come up with something to get it into the court.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

This appeal wasn't based on the change in law, it was classifying his previous sentence as "cruel and unusual."

Which was the only excuse left. However, IMO the 'equal protection' argument had as much plausibility.

I can't believe they couldn't apply the age provision retroactively. In the Skakel murder trial in Connecticut, they ended up trying a 40+ year old man in Juvenile Court.

[Radar]

Notice how biased the laws are? He was also under age. How much time did she get? The man is always punished more than the woman under American law. The woman always has an advantage. In child custody battles, rape cases, and even murder.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Radar

Notice how biased the laws are? He was also under age. How much time did she get? The man is always punished more than the woman under American law. The woman always has an advantage. In child custody battles, rape cases, and even murder.

He was not under age. There is this little thing called "Age of Consent", each state is different. Sexual orientation is not a factor, meaning it is not different for males and females. 17 yrs is an age of consent, 15 yrs is not. Like it or not, it is the law.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

He was no under age. There is this little thing called "Age of Consent", each state is different. Sexual orientation is not a factor, meaning it is not different for males and females. 17 yrs is an age of consent, 15 yrs is not. Like it or not, it is the law.

The age of consent is the age at which you can buy a beer. It's the age at which you are responsible enough to make ALL decisions for yourself and have the ability to support yourself. All states should be forced to allow alcohol and gun sales to those who are the same age as their consensual sex age. I think we'd see those ages rise a bit if we did.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Radar

The age of consent is the age at which you can buy a beer. It's the age at which you are responsible enough to make ALL decisions for yourself and have the ability to support yourself. All states should be forced to allow alcohol and gun sales to those who are the same age as their consensual sex age. I think we'd see those ages rise a bit if we did.

Wrong. That is not how the law is written and that is not the way society views it.


http://www.actwin.com/eatonohio/gay/consent.htm

[Radar]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Wrong. That is not how the law is written and that is not the way society views it.


http://www.actwin.com/eatonohio/gay/consent.htm

I don't argue about how the law is written, but it is how society and the law SHOULD view it because it makes sense. You are old enough to make your own decisions (including military, marriage, alcohol, sex, gambling, drugs, contracts, guns, etc) or you aren't.

[TheMercenary]

More:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboliti...f_consent_laws

http://blog.laborlawtalk.com/categor...t-laws/page/2/

[classicman]

Another hit from the SD random thread picker led me to this thread. Did a little looking and found a lot of updates.
gotta do the search yourself though

12/23/2007 12:01:00 AM
Two more young men freed in case that changed sex laws

ATLANTA - Two more young men have been freed after serving time in jail for a case involving a 17-year-old who had consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl.

Ryan D. Barnwell and Cortez Robinson, both 22, were released from prison Friday morning after spending 31⁄2 years behind bars. The two pleaded guilty to child molestation after attending a 2003 New Year's Eve party with Genarlow Wilson, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with the girl.

Wilson, now 21, was freed Oct. 26, 2007 after the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that that his sentence was 'cruel and unusual punishment.' Georgia law at the time of his trial required a minimum of a decade in prison.

The case prompted lawmakers to change state law to make such cases a misdemeanor when they involve teenagers close in age.

[glatt]

Good.

It looks like it was a small local newspaper that broke this story initially. I wonder what will happen when most of the local newspapers die in the next few years? The internet is great for some news sources, but will anyone be covering local news like this anymore? The story was initially a small one. "Georgia Supreme court refuses to hear appeal." That happens all the time. But this time a small paper picked up on it. These kids are free now and the law was changed because of newspapers.

Who will track this stuff in the future? Maybe some Georgia state law school student journal, but I doubt such a journal would have the circulation and influence that newspapers have enjoyed.

Call me a luddite, but I'm sorry to see newspapers dieing. Even my print edition of the Washington Post has become very skinny. It's maybe 60% of its former content.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I think there will be a slew of startup papers, really local, probably free, local ads, wanted/for sale ads, and a smattering of local news. Hopefully some journalistic talent will follow, but they won't want to insult advertisers.