Judge frees teen imprisoned for consensual oral sex

[BronxBoy]

Source: Atlanta Journal Constitution

Judge frees teen imprisoned for consensual oral sex

By JEREMY REDMON
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 06/11/07

A judge today ordered that Genarlow Wilson be freed from prison, where he has spent more than two years for receiving consensual oral sex from a 15-year-old girl when he was 17.

Monroe County Superior Court Judge Thomas Wilson also amended Wilson's felony conviction to a misdemeanor without the requirement that he register as a sex offender.

Wilson's lawyer, B.J. Bernstein, appealed to a judge Wednesday to free him from prison, arguing that his 10-year prison sentence and inclusion on the state's sex offender registry is grossly disproportionate and violates the Constitution.

Bernstein also pointed to how the Legislature changed the law since Wilson's conviction to make similar acts a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of one year in prison. Wilson, now 21, has been locked up for more than two years.

Read more: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/stories/2007/06/11/0611wilson.html

---

So glad it appears this kid's nightmare is over. I wonder if the state will appeal

[CottonBear]

1. He would have received a lighter sentence if they'd had intercourse. Go figure. n/t

[BronxBoy]

5. Really?

I didn't know that. Wonder what the rationale for that is.

[CottonBear]

10. I think it has to do with Georgia's sodomy laws. I live in GA and this case is big news today. n/t

[BronxBoy]

26. So do I

Have you heard anything about the state appealing? I just heard it on a talk show but haven't seen it in the media yet

Edited for spelling

[Iris]

31. here ya go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1088964

[Karenina]

75. Your link has NOTHING to do with the issue.

:shrug:

[Iris]

79. oops! I see what you mean! I'll try to find the right one. n/t

[Iris]

80. try this one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2877307

[Karenina]

74. Forget rationale. That N**GER STAYS IN JAIL

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2877307

That'll teach HIM and the rest of 'em their place.

[xchrom]

2. that this ever went this far shows how nuts things are.

[Dhalgren]

3. I just hope that this young man can put this nightmare behind him

and salvage something of his life. This has been a disgrace to out whole disgraceful legal system. I am glad that a rational adult has looked at the case and acted accordingly.

[maxsolomon]

4. his lawyer's name is BJ

just saying.

i'm very happy "justice" came to its senses.

[SayWhatYo]

47. hehehe you caught that too?

It actually made me laugh out loud when I saw that.. Easily amused I guess.

[wageslave71]

86. That jumped out at me as well.

[shenmue]

6. The age of consent exists for a reason

The law regards the consent of someone underage as invalid. And it must set the line somewhere. If we meddle too much in the line, we are going to wind up with no age of consent at all. I don't feel sorry for this guy, I don't blame it all on his girlfriend because it takes two to tango and he didn't exactly run down the street and scream with horror when she was there, and I wonder why people can't stop asking for pity and accept the consequences of their actions.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

7. Kids have been fiddling around with each other...

Since time immemorial. That is a fact. Frankly, as long as there is somewhere where two kids can be alone with each other, it's gonna continue, too.

Even after reading the facts of the case, the egregious nature of the sentence, the disproportionate aspect of it, you still want to see the kid pilloried for many years?

Should a gross miscarraige of justice befall you, will you just "take it like an adult" or will you stand up for yourself, like this young man did? I suspect the latter. And that ain't asking for pity.

I would expect, given the facts of this case, especially the racial component, to find this sort of comment elsewhere. As in "elsewhere".

[Donnachaidh]

25. umm, the only comment I see making racial inferences is you

Shen didn't bring up the racial component of the case -- YOU did.

Disagreeing with someone and inferring something that wasn't in the original comment? What does that make you?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

32. Donna:

I was referring to the racial component in the initial case, not in anything the person I responding to said.

Phrase for today: Reading. Comprehension.

[catgirl]

62. good response.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

8. Wow....

Just wow. :(

[Growler]

9. ugh...

This is the dumbest response I've read in a very long time.... Congratulations!

Next task for you: joining the human race.

[fishwax]

83. welcome to DU, Growler

:hi:

[BootinUp]

12. This is just ignorance, sorry

It is perfectly natural for teens to experiment with sex. Your position is another attempt to legislate something that could never be controlled in any fair manner. Who gets prosecuted and who doesn't?

[High Plains]

13. Are you insane? 10 years for a teenage blow job?

[Iris]

33. Yeah. I guess the prisons aren't adequately overcrowded yet. n/t

[entanglement]

14. Breathtakingly stupid / ignorant post of the month?

n/t

[joeunderdog]

28. Uh, year. nt

[BronxBoy]

16. Umm...

You do realize he was 17 at the time. And 17 year olds sometimes do stupid things.

I haven't seen anyone, anywhere blame the young lady for this incident. Most of the comments have been about how stupid this law was.

Anyway, you seem to think just like the fine prosecutors in theis case as I just heard they are planning to appeal the decision.

[knight_of_the_star]

17. Talk about ignorance

Last time I checked to commit statutory rape one of those involve has to be at least 18. A 17 year old and a 15 year old is two minors having sex, not statutory rape. If that were the case then I know half of my high school's population would have been locked up according to you.

[enki23]

18. are you f***ing kidding?

i hope you have very little authority over anyone's life, work, or wellbeing, because you are clearly insane. or you're just a troll playing at being insane. there don't seem to be any other likely alternatives.

[DrDan]

19. "two to tango" - read the story - there were more than 2 involved

I do not think a 15 year old should be participating in activities as described - it is a serious matter. So if an "adult" was present, then perhaps some "punishment" is justified.

Did they go overboard with the sentence? perhaps.

If it was just the two, then it would be a completely different matter in my opinion.

(I am prepared for the flaming - but I am not comfortable with a 15 year old engaged in activiites as described)

[BronxBoy]

23. I think most people would agree with you

about not being comfortable with 15 year olds having sex.

But the issue is that the prosecutor in this case somehow, someway saw Aggravated Child Molestation in their actions.

I know what comes to my mind when I think of child molestation and 2 consenting teenagers having sex isn't it

[DrDan]

24. but it wasn't two teenagers

there were 4 guys involved and two girls . . . it has gone beyond "2 consenting teenagers having sex"

and how can you have a "consenting" teenager who is below the age of consent as defined in the law?

Putting aside any practical, pragmatic thoughts about comparable ages mentally, if she is below the age of consent, and he is above the age of consent and considered an adult, then there was a law broken.

If she was 8 and he was 40 it would be a moot point, right? So at what point do we start to bend the law?

oh yeah - and there was one other issue - it was being filmed. In my mind, that is a significant. An under-age girl with 4 "adults" being filmed.

[BronxBoy]

29. I don't know

I'm not a lawyer and my response is grounded in my understanding of consent.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the behavior here is unaceeptable, "inquisitive" teenagers not withstanding.

I just fail to see how it rises to the level of Aggravted Child molestation and an act that millions of teenagers have done could result in a young kid being locked away for 10 years. And I really can't get my mind around it after reading that a pastors wife was only sentenced to 3 years for killing her husband and may end up only doing 2-3 months

[BootinUp]

30. Sex laws used against minors

are pretty stupid in my book. In this case with the video tape and multiple teens there may have been more appropriate charges. I would argue that minors involved in situations like this should have to get counseling or something, but locked behind bars seems extreme. If there was physical violence or other evidence of like rape that is different of course. 15 year olds get married in some cultures, I am not sure that a girl of 15 is always blameless in this kind of case, seems like its in a gray area to me.

[DrDan]

36. but for purposes of defining a law, this is where the state of Georgia

decided to determine the "age of consent"

And in doing so, they must live by it.

In our own worlds, we can forgive, bend, ignore. But this is their "law" and should be upheld. Otherwise, why even have the law?

[BootinUp]

46. I guess I don't understand the point of this discussion

I don't accept that all laws must be upheld, even draconian idiotic ones. I believe they should be fought and eventually rescinded.

[DrDan]

48. so - if she was 8 and he was 40 do you think a law was broken?

[BootinUp]

49. lol.

We seem to be unable to communicate. Lets leave it at that.

[ProudDad]

58. BAD LAW

should always be opposed.

This is bad law.

All current research has shown that the centers of judgment in a person's brain are not fully formed until the age of 25. To treat people under 21 years of age as "adults" with adult capacity for reasoning and realizing the consequences of their actions while acting is insane.

But then, it IS my contention that what passes for a culture in the U.S. IS insane -- so I'm not suprised...

[shimmergal]

87. Obviously, they SHOULDN'T have that law.

The fact that it's now been repealed argues pretty strongly for its unreasonableness.

And hey, if the law should always be upheld, what about those who broke the law to test it during the civil rights movement? Would you argue for ten-year sentences for them, too?

[Iris]

34. Just up the road from this guy, in one of the most prestigious private schools in Atlanta,

"blow job parties" are the norm. But those kids are rich, so no one is going to throw anyone in jail for it.

[DrDan]

35. well - are they above the age of consent?

If so, it might be another matter.

But I agree - in Georgia, this is certainly viewed differently.

[Iris]

37. It is likely that some of them would be 17.

That's how old this kid was when the act occurred.

And, I'd say it's not so much a Georgia thing as it is a class/economic thing.

[LisaL]

71. Just wait until somebody at that "blow job" party makes rape

allegations. The reason Wilson went on trial is because 17 year old girl at the party alleged she was raped.
The jury did not find him guilty on that, but convicted him for oral sex with a different girl, who was 15.
It's not exactly a "Romeo and Juliet" case.

[ProudDad]

57. Question

do YOU think prison is an appropriate response to teen age sex?

[DrDan]

38. but she cannot consent if she is below the age of consent

[BronxBoy]

40. So why wasn't this considered rape?

Statutory or otherwise. From what I understand, the rpae charges were thrown out.

[DrDan]

45. The rape charges involved another girl at the party

[BronxBoy]

52. No

What I'm trying to understand is that if she can't legally consent, doesn't that make this rape of some form or another?

Like I said I'm not a lawyer.

[DrDan]

54. this is from Georgia defining Aggravated Child Molestation

"GCA § 26-2019: Child molestation; aggravated child molestation
"A person commits the offense of child molestation when he or she does any immoral indecent act to or in the presence of or with any child under the age of 16 years with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the person…. "A person commits the offense of aggravated child molestation when such person commits an offense of child molestation which act physically injures the child or involves an act of sodomy" Effective July 1, 1997"

Sounds like the correct charge. Rape must involve a "female sex organ" according to the statute.

[catgirl]

63. He couldn't legally consent either then.

Maybe she should have been put in jail for molesting him! The
whole thing was ridiculous. Teen-agers have sex. Sex education
should be mandatory in every high school, so kids understand
certain consequences.

The only crimes I see committed here were by the adults who
put him in jail, and the ones who didn't fight for his release and
voted for this AG.

[DrDan]

68. The statute clearly states 16 as the age for consent

She was below that age and he was above it.

There were 4 guys involved and it was being filmed. And you find this ok?

[catgirl]

81. Are you putting words in my mouth?

I don't think it's okay for a-holes to denounce sex education in schools.
I also think the parents should take a larger role in these matters. There are
convicted rapists (real rapists) who get much lenient sentences. As a woman,
I am outraged to see violent sex offenders released just to find more victims-
and in many cases, they kill them.

These prosecuters need to set their priorities straight.

[DrDan]

82. I am with you 100% in terms of rapists

But I do not think parents get to take the lead in how this particular case is to be handled. The old "boys will be boys" does not cut it and the danger is that is how this could end up.

If the law is 16, then the prosecutors handle this as breaking a law.

Why does it have to be one or the other. Shouldn't both be dealt with within the context of the current laws.

[catgirl]

90. I said parents ahould take a larger role

not the lead. I'll repeat myself when I say sex education is
important. I'd like to see how of this is offered in Georgia.
Also, a loophole was closed after the incident that gave him
a mandatory sentence of 10 years. Justice has failed here.

"boys will be boys"...but there were girls joining in as well.
And voluntarily. I think the prosecutors involved here are simply
out of line. How would you feel if your kid experimented with sex
and was then thrown in jail-for 10 years, no less? Come on, I'm
not what motivates you in your reasoning.

[LisaL]

93. One of the girls, (the 17 year old) alleged it was not voluntary,

she alleged she was raped.

[DrDan]

95. I looked up felony sentencing guidelines for Georgia

10 years was the low end of the guidelines for first offender convictions.

I know the law has been changed to make this a misdemeanor - but he was convicted under the previous statute. Also, the new law was not made retroactive - apparently purposefully.

So the prosecutor followed the statute and the judge followed the sentencing guidelines.

Also - It seems to me this went beyond teen curiousity. There were 4 guys with the under-age girl and the whole thing was being filmed.

Apparently the second girl was unconscious - so they hardly qualifies as voluntary. Also, the girl in question was under age, so that also does not qualify as voluntary as, under the law, she cannot consent.

[catgirl]

96. Here are some bare facts

It was a New Years Eve party. The oral sex was consensual. Wilson was ACQUITTED
of rape, while the other five males took plea deals. Whether or not the prosecutor
followed the outdated law, doesn't make it justified throw this guy in jail for 10
years. There's a reason this law was changed.

The party was videotaped. Wilson was probably acquitted of rape because of that.
He obviously didn't have sex with the second girl.

[DrDan]

100. well - I disagree it was consensual

she was under the age of consent . . . it cannot be consensual legally.

Why would you assume he did not have sex with the second girl? I do not know otherwise, just curious as to why you find that obvious. Just because he was not shown on the videotape in the act of a sexual battery? I do not see anything obvious.

btw, 4 others pleaded guilty to child molestation of the 15 year old and sexual battery of the 17 year old.

Why do you mention the New Years Eve party? Is there some significance there?

The 10 years was a minimum sentence.

This goes beyond simple teen sex in my mind.

[catgirl]

103. It was consensual- whether legally or not

He was acquited of rape, while the others took plea bargains. You "do not know otherwise".
So you assume someone is guilty until proven innocent? You put words in people's mouths,
and I don't care to converse this way. In "your mind" because it was not "simple sex", whatever
that means, a crime has occured, and a sentence deserving of a violent rapist is fair???? And
what exactly is simple sex? Should there be guidelines to follow? Okay, I'm now laughing.

[DrDan]

105. but this is a legal matter - so it cannot

be consensual - the girl was under the age of consent - I am sorry that seems to be concept you cannot grasp.

At least I admit I do not know otherwise. Things seem "obvious" to you, yet I doubt if you know anything beyond the article. Do you have other knowledge? I asked this in my last post, but you have not mentioned anything new.

I have never put words in your mouth. I am baffled by this charge of yours. You have made it twice. I guess it is like you accusing me thinking 10 years was fair. I never made that claim. I have only stated that it the minimum sentence per the guidelines. It is quite amazing that you would fault the prosecutor and the judge for following the statutes. Do you believe the legal system would be run more fairly without guidelines? Should we do without these complicated issues - like an age of consent. I do not live in Georgia. Seems to me that it is an issue for them to question - not me, and not you (unless you live in Georgia, of course).

And I do not consider 5 males on 2 females - one unconscious and one under age - being taped - to be "simple" or appropriate. I do not think a 15 year old needs to engage in such activities. Perhaps your feel differently, and that is certainly your right. I disagree. Any "adult" persuading her otherwise should face appropriate charges imo - according to the laws of Georgia.

[DrDan]

107. well - you do have a good point now that I have reread your post

I do consider him guilty. He was found to be so in a court of law, I believe.

But exactly what did I ever say to make you think I considered him guilty until he was proven innocent? I have never said he was either guilty or innocent with respect to the rape charges. I was only questioning your statements - somehow claiming some divine knowledge with respect to their activities.

[LisaL]

106. Not true. Wilson was on tape having sex with the 17 year old.

[ProudDad]

67. So was HE!

That's the point...

[LisaL]

73. It's very simple. If age of consent is 16, a 15 year old is below the

age of consent, while a 17 year old is above the age of consent.

[shimmergal]

88. That's legalistic, reasoning

As opposed to a humanistic understanding of the law. The "age of consent" is arbitrary; it varies by state and--like it or not--by custom.

[DrDan]

53. here is how Georgia views Aggravated Child Molestation

"GCA § 26-2019: Child molestation; aggravated child molestation
"A person commits the offense of child molestation when he or she does any immoral indecent act to or in the presence of or with any child under the age of 16 years with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the person…. "A person commits the offense of aggravated child molestation when such person commits an offense of child molestation which act physically injures the child or involves an act of sodomy" Effective July 1, 1997"

Sounds like it was the appropriate charge under Georgia law.

[BronxBoy]

55. Appropriate but stupid....

in as far as 2 teens are concerned.

Thanks for posting. I'm glad they codified the true intentions of the bill into law.

Too bad the DA and AG are showing themselves to be major league A**holes

[lolly]

84. If it was appropriate, why did they change it?

Under current law, his actions would be a misdemeanor--which I would find appropriate.

In other words, the legislature realized that this law was wrong.

Now, under a law that was valid in the same state a few years earlier, if she had been 13 and he had gotten her pregnant, he could have married her and escaped any charges. In fact, if he had been any age--a 40 year old man and he had gotten a 13 year old pregnant, he could still have married her and escaped charges.

When laws are unjust and unfair, they are changed. And the victims of the earlier injustice should get justice.

[SayWhatYo]

51. But that's an issue for families to handle, not the courts.

[Barrett808]

22. So you're defending the ten-year sentence?

You really, really, think this "crime" is heinous enough to put it in the same sentencing category as rape and manslaughter?

[DrDan]

39. nope - not at all - read my post

I agree they may have gone overboard.

Two issues
- was he guilty of a crime?
- if so, what is the appropriate punishment within the sentencing guidelines

[Barrett808]

44. A bit of thread confusion -- I was replying to shenmue's post

This reminds me of the old crack/powder cocaine sentencing paradoxes.

Did we ever figure that out? Or can you still do more time for possessing a rock of crack than for rape?

(on edit)

Looky here, what a coincidence:

(Supreme) Court to Review Cocaine Sentencing Case
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2876906

[ProudDad]

59. QUESTION

DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT PRISON is an appropriate response to teen age sex!!!!?????

[DrDan]

69. btw - I looked up the sentencing guidelines for Georgia

They prescribe 120months (10 years) up for a person with no prior felonies.

So - looks to me like the guidelines were followed.

Now - you could make a case that the guidelines did not apply to this particular case due to the closeness of their ages. But - they did follow the guidelines.

[catgirl]

91. Maybe you should look up the dates of the "crime" and the "loophole closing"

and if you really stick to the books, then you'll see that a misjustice has occurred here.
You can't retroactively change someone's sentence after the fact.

[SayWhatYo]

50. How about some common sense and apply age of consent laws for situatio in which they are intended...

To keep older men/women from going after kids and teens. The only consequences he should have to face are those from his parents if they that he should be punished(not saying he should or shouldn't)

[DrDan]

77. well - what if she was 5?

Would you feel the same way - let the parents handle it?

You credit the parents a whole lot more than I do.

This is the law as written - she is under 16 - and that is the lawful age of consent in Georgia. If those living in Georgia want the law changed, then they should go through the process to change it.

However, since it is the current law, the DA/Prosecutor must enforce the it.

Do we really want to pick and choose which laws are obeyed? If some idiot feels he can drink and drive at excessive speeds, do we allow him to do so in protest of a law he finds objectionable? In a civilized society do we not have the obligation to follow the laws? If we don't like them, we take the effort necessary to change them - not ignore them.

[lolly]

85. Law HAS changed

If those living in Georgia want the law changed, then they should go through the process to change it.

As I note above, they DID change it. He would no longer be subject to this penalty under current law.

Clearly, people realized that this was wrong. So, now that they know it was wrong, why do they persist in perpetuating the wrong?

[catgirl]

92. the law WAS changed after the fact!

It's hypocritical to say "follow the law" when it wasn't a law yet.
There was a Romeo and Juliet loop hole for consenual sex with
consideration to age. Obviously a 5 year old would not qualify
here. I'm wondering if you like to be the devil's advocate. The
person- who argues with vegetarians about the poor onions getting
sliced open- type.

[SemperEadem]

98. but she wasn't 5, so let's stick to the argument and not throw in non sequiturs?

[ProudDad]

56. Question

do you think prison is an appropriate response to teen age sex?

[catgirl]

61. He had sex. Big deal.

I'm sure you thought it was immoral when you were seventeen. Not.

[Richard Steele]

64. Yes, let's not let the FACTS of a case get in the way, right? Pfft.

:eyes:

[Socal31]

65. Are you serious?

A 17 yr old should go to prison for relations with a 15 year old? What kind of thinking is that? If he was 18, it would have been slightly different.

[GOPNotForMe]

72. Your opinion is draconian.

There's really nothing else to say except that I hope you were being very sarcastic to make a point.

[BootinUp]

11. The kid deserves some type

of compensation for the injustice.

[High Plains]

15. Now it's time to go after the prosecutor and sentencing judge.

Actions have consequences, right, guys?

[Botany]

20. Time for civil court w/ a very good one of those, "evil trial lawyers."

Put those bastards in front of a jury of the young man's
peers (spelling ????) and have them explain the prosocution
of just the one and not the thousands and thousands of other
b.j. crimes.

BTW w/ out looking I would guess the young man is black.

[LisaL]

78. First of all, prosecutors are exempt from civil liability as it is.

And second of all, Mr. Wilson was convicted by a jury, because he broke GA the way it was written at that time. There was absolutely nothing illegal about his conviction. The sentence was mandatory according to the way that law was written. And the reason Mr. Wilson's case was prosecuted is because the 17 year old at the party made rape allegations, police have gone to the house and discovered the tape on which the oral sex between Mr. Wilson and the 15 year old was depicted.

[BronxBoy]

21. I don't think the judge was that culpable in this

The prosecutor brought several charges one of which had to do with inaapporiate behavior towards a minor. Don't know the exact charge but it was that charge that brought with it the 10 year sentence. I also believe it was mandatory so I'm not sure what the judge could have done.

I hope some legal minds weigh in.

[shimmergal]

89. Not a "legal mind" but this case is

a perfect example of one where the jury should have claimed the right to be judges of the law as well as of the offense. Maybe they didn't know they could do that--most people don't, and legal functionaries usually try to instruct them so as to make it impossible. It isn't.

[lolly]

101. Jury Had no idea

According to the article in NYTimes, the jurors had no idea they were convicting him of a crime that carried a mandatory 10-year sentence. They concluded he had violated the anti-sodomy law, but did not realize what they were sentencing him to.

[LisaL]

108. It's because jurors are usually not told about the sentencing during the.

guilt or innocence phase. The idea is they have to concentrate on whether the law was broken, and not how long someone is going to get.

[JackDragna]

27. So shines a tiny candle of light..

..in a dark and dreary world.

[YellingTuna]

41. GA Court Finally Orders Release of Genarlow Wilson

Source: AP

ATLANTA - A Georgia judge ordered the release Monday of a man sentenced to 10 years in prison for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. The state attorney general, however, said he would appeal.

The judge in his ruling Monday threw out Genarlow Wilson's 10-year sentence and amended it to misdemeanor aggravated child molestation with a 12-month term, plus credit for time served.

Under the ruling, Wilson, who has been behind bars for more than two years, would be released and would not be required to register as a sex offender.

"If this court or any court cannot recognize the injustice of what has occurred here, then our court system has lost sight of the goal our judicial system has always strived to accomplish ... justice being served in a fair and equal manner," wrote Judge Thomas H. Wilson, no relation to Genarlow Wilson.

Wilson's original sentence, for aggravated child molestation, was widely criticized on the grounds it was grossly disproportionate to the crime. State lawmakers later passed a law to close the loophole that led to the 10-year term.

"The fact that Genarlow Wilson has spent two years in prison for what is now classified as a misdemeanor, and without assistance from this Court, will spend eight more years in prison, is a grave miscarriage of justice," the judge wrote.

Wilson's defense lawyers were ecstatic as the ruling came in. But lawyer B.J. Bernstein later announced that the attorney general's office had filed notice of appeal, which she believes it meant to put a stop to Wilson's immediate release.

She said she plans to look into filing a bond to release him while the appeal is pending.

"It is extremely, extremely disturbing that the attorney general would take this action now," she said. "In essence the attorney general is saying, 'Keep Genarlow Wilson in prison for 10 years and keep him on the sex offender registry.'"

The attorney general's office did not immediately comment.

A Georgia Department of Corrections spokeswoman said the agency cannot take any action regarding Wilson nor comment on his case until it receives a copy of the judge's order. Wilson's lawyers said they expected to talk with prison officials in the afternoon.

When the judge's order arrived Monday morning, Wilson's lawyers had applauded and hugged his mother, who wiped away tears.

"I just feel like a miracle happened," said Wilson's mother, Juannessa Bennett.

A jury had found Wilson, an honor student, guilty in 2005 of aggravated child molestation for having oral sex with a 15-year-old girl during a 2003 New Year's Eve party involving alcohol and marijuana. Although the sex act was consensual, it was illegal under Georgia law.

Wilson was also charged with rape for being one of several male partygoers at the Douglas County hotel to have sex with a 17-year-old girl, but was acquitted. The party was captured on a videotape that was played for the jury.

Several influential people, including former President Jimmy Carter, stepped forward to support Wilson.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/teen_sex_case

[Bonobo]

42. Yeah, except it's not true. His release has been blocked on appeal.

[YellingTuna]

43. sorry about that. Changed it to "orders release"

[SemperEadem]

99. so, after the fact, the AG wants to destroy this young man's life

figures...

[ProudDad]

60. Prosocuters and DA's

eat their young.

They are the SCUM OF THE EARTH!!!

[NoodleyAppendage]

66. Was the 15 year old girl white? Just wondering...might explain appeal in GA.

I'm just trying to figure out if the DA appeal is motivated by deep-seated, Southern racism or just sour apples over losing to a judge.

J

[BronxBoy]

70. No

I believe everyone involved was Black. I know the Wilson and the 15 year old are

[Louie the XIV]

76. The Attorney General appealing the release is also black

[catgirl]

94. a democrat surrounded by republicans

perhaps trying to keep the peace? He's a joke. Everyone
involved in putting this guy in jail is a joke. Gay men
who engage in anal sex should be thrown in jail (in some
states) because anal sex is illegal. The oral sex law dates
back to early victorian times. Times have changed and the
laws should too. I think everyone who has broken any of these
laws should turn themselves in as a protest. It would be interesting
to see what would happen. The media would have a field day with it.

[WindRavenX]

97. thank goodness he's free. Now he should sue the bejesus out of all the assholes who did this to him.

This has to be one of the most mind-boggling, pathetic cases I've EVER read.

I can't believe this case and that it took 2 fucking years to amend.

2 years of this kids life is ruined because of some backwards ass law.

[HockeyMom]

102. Throughout HS my daughter went with a boy 2 years younger

They began dating when he was 14 and she was 16. She turned 18 in her senior year when her boyfriend was still 16. The boy's Dad used to tease her saying that if any "funny business" went on he would have her charged with statutory rape. His Dad thought all this was very funny. My daughter was not amused. The age of consent in NY is 18 for both genders.

This is why most judges have discretion with these laws. They generally allow for 1 or 2 year, sometimes even 3 year, age difference, even if one is above the age of majority at 18.

Of course, I am talking about consensual in this. Just imagine if they tried to prosecute all 18 year old HS kids who were "dating" another HS kid who was 1, 2, or 3 years younger?

COMMON SENSE has to apply.

[november3rd]

104. I don't understand

What kind of a judge/court would send somebody to jail for consensual sex? They were both minors!

[LisaL]

109. The girl was below the age of consent and he was above.

According to the law the way it was written, it was irrelevant that he was also a minor.