Comments on: Genarlow Wilson, Inmate #1187055

By: Microblog 2008-11-25

Microblog 2008-11-25 — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:14:51 +0000

[…] horror stories go, Wendy Whitaker case may outdo Genarlow Wilson’s [Below the Beltway; more on Wilson […]

By: Ted

Ted — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:29:11 +0000

1) My understanding is that governor of Georgia doesn’t have the power to pardon unilaterally. It has to go through a bureaucracy first.

2) Leaving aside the factual issue of consent (which I understand to be more ambiguous than indicated in the post, though the jury acquitted on the charge of forced sexual contact), the ten-year sentence was imposed because the sex was oral; had Mr. Wilson simply impregnated the teen, the sentence would not have been so long.

By: markm

markm — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:59:01 +0000

jb: I may be misinformed, but I’ve heard that the Georgia constitution’s prohibition on ex post facto legislation has been interpreted to prohibit even an ex post facto sentence reduction.

By: jb

jb — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 00:34:50 +0000

Why wasn’t the bill made retroactive? That seems like a strange oversight.

By: Colin P. Varga

Colin P. Varga — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:22:36 +0000

For Wilson checking ID would not have been as important as knowing that the law that convicted him would apply to him. Even if he had checked this girl’s ID he would have still believed that since he was also a minor he could not be convicted of Child Molestation. Obviously the answer is to educate all minors regarding state laws regarding sexual practices. I believe that Virginia’s sodomy law bans oral sex for married adults.

By: asg

asg — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 11:34:47 +0000

If everyone agrees the girl initiated the act, yet Wilson was also a minor, why isn’t the girl in jail too?

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 11:05:06 +0000

Paul is correct about the charges (another point to this that’s just silly).

But the really ridiculous part is that the only legal way to protect yourself is to stop her and ask her for ID (and have some way of verifying it – a fake ID is no defense, even if it’s good enough to fool a polic officer).

While I understand the point of statutory rap laws (and the intention is nothing but good), their execution is… poor.

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 09:27:38 +0000

My understanding of the case is that the major crime had less to do with her age and more to do with sodomy. A news report I watched said if the incident had been intercourse, it would have been a misdemeanor, but since it was oral sex, the felony carried a mandatory 10 years.

By: OBQuiet

OBQuiet — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:51:32 +0000

Pat,

I imagine the reason the Gov has stayed out of it is the the headlines the next day would be “Gov Pardons Child Molester”. It might be the right thing to do but the press could make it look bad.

By: E-Bell

E-Bell — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:38:57 +0000

Nevins, I read somewhere that the girl was also black. I think we’d see a much greater hue and cry if the girl was white.

I think this is a prime example of the law of unintended consequences. The legislature enacted a statute designed to protect one class (teenage girls), and in the process has victimized another (teenage boys).

In response to Wilson’s case, the legislature has now corrected its error, allowing a maximum punishment of 12 months incarceration for kids like Wilson.

Unfortunately, absent executive clemency, I think Wilson is still stuck behind bars.

The prosecutor in this case abandoned his duty to do justice. Sure, Wilson had the opportunity to cop a plea like his co-defendants did. But the consensual nature of the acts complained of (including the supposed rape of the other girl) leads me to believe that this case shouldn’t have been prosecuted at all.