Posted October 27, 200717 yr http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3080331 Genarlow Wilson was the 17-year-old high school football player from Georgia that was sent to prison for 10 years for having consentual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a Homecoming party. Even though the Legislature has modified the laws, the prosecutor refused to revisit the case. But the latest appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court led to a 4-3 ruling that the sentence was "cruel and unusual punishment", and threw the case out completely. He served over two years. I read through the actual ruling: http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/071026...arlowruling.pdf It took some time, but I figured out that a lot of the ruling had to do with dismissing extraneous motions. For example, it ruled that he couldn't be retried under the new 2006 statute with lesser punishments and no sex offender reporting. The core of the ruling, however, is that his original punishment was "cruel and unusual". And because said "cruel and unusual punishment" was actually the minimum punishment, there was no other relief except to throw out his conviction entirely. That means he's free and clear, and won't be labeled a sex offender. The original prosecutor does not agree, but will not pursue the matter any further.
October 27, 200717 yr This is a case where ex post facto works against the defendant. The proper thing for the Georgia General Assembly would have been to passed something instructing Governor Purdue to review the case and commute the sentence.
October 27, 200717 yr The legislature can't instruct the governor to commute a sentence. Good to hear this guy finally was let go.
October 27, 200717 yr The legislature can't instruct the governor to commute a sentence. Good to hear this guy finally was let go. I used instruct in the form of a legislative message and not legislation. I guess "communicate" would be a better word, but I always hear "instruct" on the news here in Tally when the General Assembly talks to Purdue and vice versa. I'm not sure if they have some procedural reason for such a word. The Georgia General Assembly is one of the oldest legislative bodies in North America, so I'm not about to go back to see why.
October 27, 200717 yr Author The legislature can't instruct the governor to commute a sentence. Good to hear this guy finally was let go. I used instruct in the form of a legislative message and not legislation. I guess "communicate" would be a better word, but I always hear "instruct" on the news here in Tally when the General Assembly talks to Purdue and vice versa. I'm not sure if they have some procedural reason for such a word. The Georgia General Assembly is one of the oldest legislative bodies in North America, so I'm not about to go back to see why. To "urge" the governor to commute the sentence is even better. But the reasoning used by the court without going into all the legal precedent cited is that, by passing a new law that gave his particular crime a radically lesser punishment, the legislature was voicing an opinion that the crime just isn't as bad as the original court thought. Hence, the punishment was out of line.
October 27, 200717 yr I've always felt really bad for this kid. His life was ruined by this. Wasn't he supposed to be going to Yale before all this or something?
October 27, 200717 yr Yeah, I was glad to hear he was finally released. Still, he served two years in jail for no reason.
October 27, 200717 yr The best part about this whole story is that his lawyer's name is BJ Bernstein. You can't make that stuff up.
October 27, 200717 yr Author Yeah, I was glad to hear he was finally released. Still, he served two years in jail for no reason. I hope the Georgia Legislature considers some sort of compensation for him. Just to get him back on his feet.
October 27, 200717 yr I've always felt really bad for this kid. His life was ruined by this. Wasn't he supposed to be going to Yale before all this or something? Maybe. I think it was Brown.
October 27, 200717 yr Yeah, I was glad to hear he was finally released. Still, he served two years in jail for no reason. I hope the Georgia Legislature considers some sort of compensation for him. Just to get him back on his feet.:| Why is everyone in a hurry to hand out powers that don't exist or create nasty precedent? If he wants to he can sue the state, though I'm not sure he would prove to be successful (since they didn't really do anything wrong, it was just a stupid law). I'll defer to people who have a better knowledge of lawsuits and such on this point. The last thing I would want if I was in Georgia is my legislature handing out cash to a guy. Do you know what kind of precedent that sets?!?
October 27, 200717 yr I don't think he should be paid a dime. Just because the General Assembly changed a law that he broke doesn't mean he didn't break the law. Is it a case of over-zealous prosecution? I'm not sure....it was one of those cases that may end up changing the way American Jurisprudence works on an issue. This could change Romeo+Juliet Laws nationwide like the Scopes Monkey Trial changed Creationism vs. Evolution laws.
October 27, 200717 yr This is an example of why I despise sex-offender laws. It is too easy to get on the lists and nearly impossible to get off of them. Depending upon the state you live in, 2 minors having sex will be both put on life-long sex offender lists and will require action by a supreme court to get off of such a list. There was another case where an 18 year old girl had sex after her prom with her 17 year old boyfriend, she was prosecuted, given probation and put on a sex offender list that will follow her around forever.
October 27, 200717 yr Author This is an example of why I despise sex-offender laws. It is too easy to get on the lists and impossible to get off of them. Fixed. I'm not aware of any sort of out from sex-offender registries beyond the overturning of the conviction that led to it. From my understanding, virtually all sex-offender registry laws are perpetual.
October 27, 200717 yr This is an example of why I despise sex-offender laws. It is too easy to get on the lists and impossible to get off of them. Fixed. I'm not aware of any sort of out from sex-offender registries beyond the overturning of the conviction that led to it. From my understanding, virtually all sex-offender registry laws are perpetual. That is why I said nearly impossible
October 27, 200717 yr Nice to hear that he was released. I also liked the demeanor of his statement upon being released. He sounds like a class act and Im sure he will go on to be a productive individual.
October 27, 200717 yr I don't think he should be paid a dime. Just because the General Assembly changed a law that he broke doesn't mean he didn't break the law. Is it a case of over-zealous prosecution? I'm not sure....it was one of those cases that may end up changing the way American Jurisprudence works on an issue. This could change Romeo+Juliet Laws nationwide like the Scopes Monkey Trial changed Creationism vs. Evolution laws. I remember seeing a story about this on 60 minutes. I dont know the specifics, but there were other people involved (I believe). The other three guys pleaded guilty and this is the one guy that did not. The jury decided to find him guilty for the lessor crime, but because of a loophole in the law, it ended up being a ten year penalty.
October 28, 200717 yr I cannot think of a more serious and harmful crime than receiving a consentual blowjob.
October 28, 200717 yr I cannot think of a more serious and harmful crime than receiving a consentual blowjob.
October 28, 200717 yr He can't get money from the legisture for being convicted of a crime that was valid at the time of his conviction. They are not saying he was wrongfully convicted. They are saying it was cruel and unusual punishment. If I'm not mistaken, his conviction stays on the books. The prosecutor in this case was a douche. Never should have brought charges against the guy.
October 28, 200717 yr Author He can't get money from the legisture for being convicted of a crime that was valid at the time of his conviction. They are not saying he was wrongfully convicted. They are saying it was cruel and unusual punishment. If I'm not mistaken, his conviction stays on the books. Actually, that's exactly what happened according to the ruling. You're right, in order to correct "cruel and unusual punishment", you need to reduce the punishment for the conviction. However, the "cruel and unusual punishment" was already minimal for the crime he was convicted of. Without any lesser punishment to give him, the Supreme Court had no choice except to overturn his conviction. The prosecutor in this case was a douche. Never should have brought charges against the guy. Actually this was originally a tack-on to an accusation that he raped a 17-year-old girl at the same party. Those accusations were proven unfounded, and he was acquitted of it at the same time as he was convicted for the blowjob.
October 28, 200717 yr I cannot think of a more serious and harmful crime than receiving a consentual blowjob. I don't see how that is a crime. That is the greatest thing ever. I'm getting one to put in the yard back home.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.