I’m not going to call you names or anything to that effect, but I have to ask you why the General Assembly changed the law after Wilson’s sentence in the first place?

Wilson screwed up, there is no denying that but I’d argue that he has likely learned his lesson. He is not a sexual predator and I don’t believe he should have to make a deal to be released only to have to live with a label the rest of his life.

Also, legally…isn’t Wilson still a minor at the age of 17? I thought 18 was the age of adulthood.

Remember, one of Mr. Wilson’s buddies impregnated a 12 year old while awaiting trial and has been convicted of statutory rape.
And this makes Wilson guilty? He is responsible for the actions of his friends. There is your sexual predator, Senator. Not Genarlow Wilson.

It is sad that this kid will have to sit in a prison cell for the next few years. I disagree with Senator Jones on virtually every issue, but he got it right on this one.

We will always have … rock n roll.

I call bullshit. That woman had been sexually active for years and she knew exactly what she was doing being at that party.

I thought you conservatives always say us liberals claim to be victims when we don’t get our way? Now you’re placing the victim mantle on others just to attempt to justify your ridiculous arguments.

What is the matter with people in your district? Why do they vote for you???????

Remember, one of Mr. Wilson’s buddies impregnated a 12 year old while awaiting trial and has been convicted of statutory rape.

That’s funny… I’m sure I’ve heard that type of argument before…

The most compelling unanswered question, to me, is why, if the law was changed, are you so adamantly against releasing him? If he’s such a dangerous predator, why aren’t you using your productive energy to campaign against the statute that would let so many more like him go free?

This case has caused our state embarassment in the face of the nation and has made our laws look very backwards…but really there is nothing we can do at this point for him, which is sad. But rather than talk about what we think, how bout you gentlemen in the State Senate get together and fix our laws so this sort of thing does not happen again..communitty service, probation, even a year I can see…but 10 years! that is just down right insane!

The point being, it is an extremely WEAK argument for you to hoist yourself up by stating “Hey, this was the law back then! We gotta follow the law” when you brag that you guys (by an overwhelming mnajority) CHANGED THE LAW LAST YEAR!

If you need a brick wall to pound your head on during the day to knock some commonsense into it, let me know. I’ll raise the funds required to build one in your office…graffiti-free.

I only quoted an R rated movie!

Robin Williams and not a single obscene word.

Would you like to have me sugar coat it?

“You’re more in need of a “street slang for oral sex between a male and female” than any white man in history.”

Good Morning, Vietnam!

juror Marie Manigault, quoted on the ABC News story on the subject (Mar. 9, 2006), reported that the jury saw the rape case as very weak: “[I]t wasn’t even an hour. We immediately saw the tape for what it was. We went back in and saw it again. Then everybody immediately said not guilty.”

I take it that the jury therefore concluded that the 17-year-old girl wasn’t “too drunk to know what was going on.” Georgia law adopts the “constructive force” doctrine, under which the “force” requirement of rape can be satisfied by a finding that “the victim [was] physically or mentally unable to give consent to the act, as for example when she is intoxicated, drugged, or mentally incompetent such that she is unable mentally to give consent to the act.” Unless the jury was somehow not properly instructed on this, I would assume that they concluded that the 17-year-old girl wasn’t so intoxicated that she was unable to give consent.

My question to you: how do you square that juror’s account with your description of the interaction with the 17-year-old as “abusive”?

So who do we need to accuse of rape to fix the budget this year, just let us know please!

Genarlow was a jerk. He engaged in irresponsible behavior. He hung out with people who were doing drugs, engaging in risky sexual activities, and who had little self control. However, your argument engages in guilt by association by bringing up the buddy who “impregnated a 12 year old while awaiting trial”. The issue of the “15 year old victim” is an appeal to emotion and irrelevant to the question of whether a judge can change a sentence after one year. So are the issues of video taping (I figured that would garner a child porn charge btw) the fact that there were 6 guys and two girls, or that he was offered the plea bargain.

Finally I will point out that it doesn’t matter how many cases may have to be revisited if SB37 were to become law. The fact that the General Assembly had a foolish law on the books (Oral Sex is a felony while intercourse is a misdemeanor ) for so long means that more people
were railroaded by this law, and the law that prevents judges from revising their sentence
once the law was amended.

I’m just glad these laws were not around when my father got my mother pregnant with me at age 15, and my 24 year old father was not branded a child ‘rapist’ and thrown in jail. They are still married, after 51 years, by the way.

I’m also relieved ‘child saviors’ like you, Senator Johnson, were not around in 1879, when my 13 year old great-great-grandmother had her first child by her 44 year old husband.

Otherwise, I and about 200 of my relatives, including my 2 grandchildren would have never been born.

Thank you for believing that I was the unwanted result of a heinous and evil crime. I’ll remember that when my overall tax bill exceeds $40,000 again this year.

See, Senator, mandatory minimums are like playing God. Unlike you and yours, only your god knows the eventual outcome and ramifications of the act.

This minor was no ‘victim’ sir. Was she kidnapped? Did she know what would happen at a party like this with adult males? Is it not true the minor was sexually active since 11?

Did the ‘victim’ and the ‘victims’ families not forgive the perpetrator? When it comes to this crime, whose opinion means more – crusading, ‘look at how tough on crime I am’ vote pandering, moralistic society molders like you, or them?

And finally, can you substantiate your claim that there are many millions of teens are actually law-abiding? Or do you only count the ones that get caught as ‘law-breaking’. Are you saying that as a teen, you never did anything that ‘broke a law’? Would you swear on a Bible you never had sex with anyone under 18 in your life, even when you were a teen? How about your family? How did the teens in your family spend New yuears Eve? Are you absolutely 100% positive they were not out having questionable fun? Heck, you can’t even get out of bed these days without breaking some law you ’servants of the people’ have dreamed up, to out tough each other.

Who did Christ say gets to throw the first stone, Senator?

That there is even laws attempting to legislate and outlaw a basic human survival instinct (to copulate and reproduce) is repulsive. If someone messes with my minor daughter, I’ll kick the guys ass myself, OK? Like back in the 50’s.

That you oppose a sane and rational review of a mostly horribly misused law says volumes about your character and the contempt you really have for your fellow humans.

I do not condine child molestation. This is not the case. The law you apologize for is misguided, dangerous and the children must be protected from laws that can have an adverse effect on being raised in a father-mother household.

Which is what marriage is all about, right, Sen. J?

I’ll pray for you.