Justice Served?

Colby wrote:

I gotta agree 10 years is just ridiculous. He should've lived in Vermont he would of recieved 90 days.

no, he would have had sex with the judge. thats his only punishment. and judging by the video on youtube, I would say that punishment would last only about 45-50 seconds, less if you include the hands.

The Paperboy wrote:

Please avoid sweeping generalizations about the populace among which this occured.

We despise the court's decision just as much as anyone else.

if you were responding to me, i wasn't intending to make a generalization about the population of the american south. i was simply trying to be reasonably accurate in my description of actual laws on the books. the american south probably has more religiously oriented laws still on the books as compared to the rest of the western world. whether they are enforced, embraced, championed, etc. is an entirely different question that i did not intend to address.

and i could easily be wrong anyway. it might be the case that countries like spain and italy with a strong catholic presence still have similar laws on their books.

You would think someone such as our President would step in. If all that happened was oral sex from someone who was willing then this is absurd. The law in that red-neck state is ridiculous. Genarlow was a senior and she was a sophomore. You have got to be kidding me about him going to prison. I'm sure this sort of ordeal happens all the time with high school students across the world. I am really surprised nothing has happened to get an appeal or him out of there. Unbelievable.

They make it seem like this kid was headed to an Ivy League school because he had a couple generic letters sitting around.

Reality: This kid was out drinking (underage) and smoking weed (illegal) while having a gang bang with girl he didn't know, who was under age of concent (illegal).

Where was he headed? Ivy league, or jail in a few years any way?

Uhh...Did you read the article? A different girl called the police claiming to have been raped--a charge of which he was found not guilty--and a video tape of the BJ was a part of the evidence. Try reading the article before you judge the guy.

And why did someone videotape the BJ in the first place?

dean, you're wrong here. No, he should NOT have gotten probation, community service, or any sort of punishment (for the BJ). This should not be illegal. Yes, you're right, 10 years is ridiculous. But probation or community services is also ridiculous. He did nothing wrong that he was charged for.

[quote]dean moriarty wrote:

There's no way that kid should be doing that kind of time. I could see probation, community service... quote]

Bush wrote:

You would think someone such as our President would step in. If all that happened was oral sex from someone who was willing then this is absurd. The law in that red-neck state is ridiculous. Genarlow was a senior and she was a sophomore. You have got to be kidding me about him going to prison. I'm sure this sort of ordeal happens all the time with high school students across the world. I am really surprised nothing has happened to get an appeal or him out of there. Unbelievable.

That law's bad, but what's worse is that the guy did some really stupid stuff that let him get caught. If no one was in the home except for the two of them, and neither of them videotaped it or told anyone else of it, the whole jail controversy situation would never have happened.

That law's bad, but what's worse is that the guy did some really stupid stuff that let him get caught. If no one was in the home except for the two of them, and neither of them videotaped it or told anyone else of it, the whole jail controversy situation would never have happened.

Agreed. If you don't want to follow the law for whatever reason, don't INCREASE your chances of getting caught.

Drug dealers don't videotape their crimes, because (as anyone with an IQ >60 knows) it INCREASES their chances of getting caught. Why should it be any different for underage sex?

Well, I know what you're saying, but I can see him getting in trouble with the law for being at a videotaped underage sex party replete with underage drug and alcohol use. You're sort of asking for it, aren't you?

But yes, the crimes that he was charged for are pretty petty in the grand scheme of things. Going to jail for a consensual BJ is outrageous. We agree, mostly.

I am currently attending an Ivy (and while I run for my team, I got in on my academics) and I smoked weed, drank, and had sex with my girlfriend who was under the age of consent (not concent). The only thing that differs was that it was a not group sex and I knew the girl. Otherwise, I have engaged in all the illegal activities he did. Granted, I never videotaped it, but that was only because my girlfriend was against it, I tried to convince her numerous times. I have never felt like I was headed towards jail for my actions, I am an overachieving student athlete who at this point in life is quite happy with what I have accomplished. I come from a pretty rural place where everyone, including myself is white. So smithersville, am I as likely to head to jail as this kid, or does being white and excelling at cross country make my actions less likely to put me in jail as black football stars would?

I get your point. However, it doesn't matter if he was asking for it. A lot of people "ask for it". The point is, the BJ did not deserve ANY punishment.

dean moriarty wrote:

Well, I know what you're saying, but I can see him getting in trouble with the law for being at a videotaped underage sex party replete with underage drug and alcohol use. You're sort of asking for it, aren't you?

But yes, the crimes that he was charged for are pretty petty in the grand scheme of things. Going to jail for a consensual BJ is outrageous. We agree, mostly.

Im in...

Since you asked for a response, I'll give you one. First, I made no reference to this kid's race; you did. The fact that he's black or a football star means very little to me.

Second, no, I would not assume you're as likely to go to prison as this person. Basically, there are a lot of people who smoke weed, who drink under age, or have ex with their younger girlfriend. But, not that many highschoolers I know are out gangbanging strangers and video-taping it. There's a pretty big difference (obviously in my eyes, but not yours) between a videotaped gangbang with a stranger and having sex with your girlfriend. It says a lot about this person's morals and judgement.

I'm not saying this kid deserves to be imprisoned. I am saying that the article is biased and painting what may be an untrue picture of this person. The spent more time describing generic letters from colleges than his numerous illegal acts.

im in wrote:

does being white and excelling at cross country make my actions less likely to put me in jail as black football stars would?

Statistically speaking in today's America, the answer to your question is simple -- yes it does!

The truth is, considering he received those letters (although I know theyre generic) it seems as if he would have gotten in. He had a 3.2 GPA and was apparently quite good at football (guarded CJ well), and any interest from an Ivy is important interest. The thing is, if I had been at a party where a chick was getting nailed and I had a chance to, I probably would have. The punishment that hurt him wasnt due to a gangbang, it was due to a bj, that I als would not have turned down. It is just weird to think how similar our lives have been, yet nobody would even think to classify me as a criminal or a would-be criminal.

keystone light knight wrote:

wow, this is one of the most f***ed up things i have ever seen. this kid's life is ruined because he got his dick sucked.

QFE... absolutely sickening.

The worst thing is the rest of his life, he'll have to explain the "sexual offender" label constantly. This means no wife, kids, family, decent job, etc..

ttc wrote:

The worst thing is the rest of his life, he'll have to explain the "sexual offender" label constantly. This means no wife, kids, family, decent job, etc..

as i've said earlier in this thread, i think the prosecution of this kid was beyond absurd and i think the prosecutor as an individual is pretty much an evil, spiteful man.

nevertheless, i think you're overdoing it with the sex offender label. our country's sex-related laws have become pretty silly so the sex offender label is overused and not all that meaningful. is it a good thing? absolutely not. will it prevent him from having a wife and kids? no. decent job? i don't think it will be much of a problem - the felony conviction is more important than the sex offender label.

No Named Post wrote:

Since GA obviously has some backwards laws, oral sex is viewed as much worse than sex, and he got the book thrown at him.

I am not sure how the jury found him guilty, that is really weird.

Shut up. If this had happened fifty years ago, the black would have swung from a tree and the white girl chased out of town. Be happy those people have it so good these days. They've come a long way.

haha nice one, michael richards