Genarlow Wilson -- Georgia is insane

[AWoodside]

[ QUOTE ]
Prisons would likely not go away, and idiotic convictions surely wouldn't. Whatever punishment scheme that ACism produces, stupid cases like this won't disappear. To blame statism for this is being intellectually dishonest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Arbitration companies that made rulings completely at odds with the moral sense of the majority of the population would be quickly out-competed. You might have an argument in more borderline cases - but not in this case. Here we have a situation where the vast majority of people view the end result as ridiculous, this would not happen in a free market.

You may want to bring up the point that if a society as a whole is prejudiced in some way, these prejudices will be reflected in that region's arbitration systems. True. However, in that society the same prejudices will also be reflected by state policy as well, the difference being that the state entrenches the prejudice systematically and removes the market incentives to profit from the irrational social climate (and thus incentivise a trend away from bigotry).

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the 10-year sentence was the judge's version of a "make right" for the jury's inability to convict on the rape charge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any actual information on this other charge? I don't see anything in the article and haven't heard anything on CNN (though that certainly doesn't mean that it didn't happen).


[/ QUOTE ]

You do know this happened 4 years ago, right?

You saw it on CNN because the courts just ordered Wilson's release.

I remember looking at it in detail some years ago, and they showed the video (censored...LDO) of him and two other guys screwing and skull-jamming these two girls....one of which was motionless on teh bed for like the entire time on the tape (couple hour, if I recall).

I'm going off memory from a while back, but that was pretty much the gist of it.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, no one has mentioned in this thread yet that his release has been ordered and he'll end up having served about 2 years for all of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one's mentioned it because it's the headline and the first sentence of the article that I linked at the beginning of my OP. No one was trying to hide this obvious part of the story.

[/ QUOTE ]

Relax, mary...I wasn't implying you were hiding anything...I didn't know if you just stumbled upon the case, seeing how it's been out there for 4 years, and every 6 or 8 months someone posts it up as if they just learned about it and "OMFG what an atrocity!"...


[ QUOTE ]

The fact that you think two+ years (and the scare that it could have been as much as 10) in prison for something that hardly deserves a sorry is an OK result is pretty amazing. I wonder if you'd feel the same way if you were accused of something petty that rested 2 years of your free life in a state judge's hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

"Something that hardly deserves a sorry"?

"something petty?"

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Hmm...I'm just now realizing you're one of those guys being disingenious again, I'm out.

Have a good day, bud. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

They dropped the rape charge because the video clearly showed her consenting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um...they didn't drop the rape charge. He was found not guilty, but it went to jury.

As far as I recall:
The video showed the 15-year old girl consenting to oral.
The video showed the 17-year old female laying motionless for hours, getting screwed by three different guys.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They dropped the rape charge because the video clearly showed her consenting.

[/ QUOTE ]

So RedBean was way wrong and conveniently screwing up facts to support an indefensible position!? Noooo! That's not the Beaner I know!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is kinda funny considering that they didn't drop the rape charge.

You just can't buy this kind of irony anymore.

[govman6767]

NOthing to do with racism.

Lots to do with a crappy judicial system.

Lady kills two ppl in WA while drunk. Has multiple citations for DUI and crappy driving.

max she can get is 6 years for double murder.

It just depends what state your in and how retarded the judges are.

NOT THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It makes me wonder how dampened racial tension would actually be if it weren't for the state systematically seeing color and forcing its policies on us.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, Georgia would be way less racist, and certainly wouldn't send black kids to jail for oral sex with white kids, were it not for affirmative action?

Really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Durrrr, no. It's not that simple, and I made no such claim.

A harmful act (of racism) begs a certain "blowback" of harmful consequence. As long as some people identify other people as members of some "group" and act accordingly then they are engaging in racism, and racism has harmful repercussions. So, doing racist things is bad.

All instances of racism will tend to disintegrate when we stop all forms of it. When a state engages in racism it is still racism, and so it still carries the same real consequences. Maybe some business owners will resent the policies and see more reason to discriminate against prospective black employees. The state is not magic and it is still subject to natural human consequence.

Would all instances of racial tension suddenly disappear if the state's affirmative action and similar policies disappeared? Obviously not. Not immediately. But the problem is worsened and not improved when people let a state see race and factor it into their decisions.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They dropped the rape charge because the video clearly showed her consenting.

[/ QUOTE ]

So RedBean was way wrong and conveniently screwing up facts to support an indefensible position!? Noooo! That's not the Beaner I know!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is kinda funny considering that they didn't drop the rape charge.

You just can't buy this kind of irony anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I took Thug's information on face value, since up until then neither of you had provided any actual information and your track record is not very good.

As it stands, I am not sure who is right and also don't care, because like I said: It's irrelevant and courts should be making correct decisions as they apply to the case in front of them.

You should look up the definition of irony if you think this qualifies. But, vocabulary is probably the least of your problems, so actually you should do a lot of other things first.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]

"Something that hardly deserves a sorry"?

"something petty?"

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Hmm...I'm just now realizing you're one of those guys being disingenious again, I'm out.

Have a good day, bud. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh?

Yes, I see it as something petty that hardly deserves a sorry. It's a 17-year-old having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old on New Years Eve. What exactly do you call that??? An atrocity?

If you have some information about him forcibly raping some girl while he videotaped it, then by all means, post it and allow it to factor into my analysis.

I haven't a clue what you're ranting about this time, but yes, please, stay out. This is a pretty serious and interesting topic and could do without your nonsense bogging it down.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/26...ef=mpstoryview

This story is bizarre. Basically, someone was sentenced to TEN YEARS of prison for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old when he was 17.

???

Is that even illegal? Apparently so, and Georgia has recently changed this sort of conduct between consenting minors to a misdemeanor rather than a felony. Whew, what a concession, I'm glad it is only mildly illegal for high schoolers to give each other head. It's good that minors often will not be charged for murder, but could face TEN YEARS for sexual relations with someone two years younger than them.

This just blows my mind. It's only one example, and [censored] happens, but if this isn't good evidence that a state monopoly on justice is really, really bad, then I don't know what is. Show me a private arbitrator who decides that the 17-year-old owes the 15-year-old something equal to 10 years of prison and I will show you a private arbitrator that goes out of business fast. <font color="red"> Totally wrong, in many states (or "geographical areas" if you were under AC) </font> It just couldn't happen. It's the type of injustice that would be totally inconceivable if state bureaucracy was not in charge. <font color="red">total nonsense. if deep-pocket daddy of the girl wanted to find "
justice at any price" it would be easier when all justice is bought and sold by definition </font>

I mean, when I heard the story in the background playing on CNN, I first thought he was an adult who had consensual relations with a 15-year-old, and I was like "hmm, ya, 10 years is ridiculous, it's good that they overturned that." I assumed it was some sort of reasonable debate, and still thought it was newsworthy. But then the fact that HE WAS SEVENTEEN and it was a two year difference just makes this impressively ridiculous. This could easily be a high school junior getting head from a sophomore, if that puts it in the correct perspective. TEN YEARS IN PRISON!

Obviously the fact that he's black is why this happened. <font color="red"> ORLY? support what it is that makes this "obvious" </font> But the point is this happened to a human being in the United States of America in 2005. Isn't that [censored] scary?

Government does not work. I used to think it was at least good for the sake of a clear authority, but I came to my senses on that, and examples like this are just empirical icing on the cake.

[/ QUOTE ] <font color="red"> it works far better than anything proposed on this site would, thats for sure </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't read my own posts with red text added in random spots. Sorry, guy. If you want a reply, or anyone to read your arguments, please respond like everyone else on this forum does.

[Thug Bubbles]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They dropped the rape charge because the video clearly showed her consenting.

[/ QUOTE ]

So RedBean was way wrong and conveniently screwing up facts to support an indefensible position!? Noooo! That's not the Beaner I know!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is kinda funny considering that they didn't drop the rape charge.

You just can't buy this kind of irony anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I took Thug's information on face value, since up until then neither of you had provided any actual information and your track record is not very good.

As it stands, I am not sure who is right and also don't care, because like I said: It's irrelevant and courts should be making correct decisions as they apply to the case in front of them.

You should look up the definition of irony if you think this qualifies. But, vocabulary is probably the least of your problems, so actually you should do a lot of other things first.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad. I coulda swore they dropped it. Lemmie find out what I screwed up.

EDIT:

The video showed that the sex was consensual, but the rape charge stayed. That t'was my confusion. Either way, RedBean was wrong in that aspect.

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't figure out how he got off on the rape count when the video shows him screwing a girl while shes practically knocked out unconscious and unable to consent.

[/ QUOTE ]

EDIT 2:

WTF??? (from Wikipedia)

[ QUOTE ]
Reacting to District Attorney David McDade's releasing the videotape to legislators, media and the general public upon request, Georgia State Sen. Emanuel Jones said he would introduce legislation to block district attorneys from handing over photographic images in sex cases. "'I'm going to call it the David McDade Act,' Jones said. 'Sometimes we have to protect our kids from district attorneys.'" [12] Because the participants shown having sex in the video were under 18, the videotape constitutes child pornography under federal law. The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act prohibits prosecutors from allowing defendants in criminal proceedings to possess a copy of any evidence that constitutes child pornography, even if the purpose is to mount a defense against the charge. Under this law, Wilson and his defense team are prohibited from having a copy of the videotape that prosecutor McDade has distributed to anyone else who has requested it. [13]

[/ QUOTE ]