Comments on: Teen Jailed On Underage Sex Rap Is Free

Georgia Supreme Court Deems 10-Year Sentence "Cruel And Unusual Punishment"

[zeezedzee]

What''s the big deal, President Clinton said, after all, that it wasn''t *** in the first place, so what the heck!

[keithle1]

Boy paid a big price for a little tail.

[toldyouso21]

People should think long and hard about what they name their kids as it can have repercussions later in life and affect their success. (Studies have shown that certain names prevent people from rising in jobs or assuming positions as power and certain other names seem to almost give a boost to a person) Employers and employees respond either negatively or positively to a name and this is psychologically exploited subconcisously.

So before you name your kid: Harriet, Ethel, Beulah May, Sally, Ralph, Horace, Boris or other names with negative connotations--or pronounciations that change with the spelling--and no one knows how to say the name--consider the consequences. From the moment the boy was named Genarlow--he stood a very high chance of having a lot of negativity in his life.

[toldyouso21]

This guy messed up his own life. If he was white he''''d still be in jail. He only received all this special attention because of his color and loudmouth windbags like Sharpton.


Posted by robertkjjj at 10:33 AM : Oct 26, 2007

We all (no matter what race) know THAT is a lie. If the boy was white, no doubt the acquittal for the 17 yr old would have stood and the Prosecution would have declined to charge for the act with the 15 yr old--citing that if the 15 year old wanted to prosecute, she or her parents had to bring charges--and that, since the act was consensual--there would be no more charges.

You should stop--we all know the laws are skewed and NOT in favor of any one of color. The list of preferential treatment is by power (who you know or who knows you and is willing to help you), class (how much money someone has), then gender, then skin color--with blacks being railroaded more than any other group--though lately to be a criminal that is perhaps Muslim is really a bad thing...or maybe
the worst a person could be--a male illegal immigrant that is black, gay, and a Muslim. Yep--that would probably have to be the worst possible combo.

[toldyouso21]

The disturbing thing about the way Jackson operates is he stated that even if she was lying, he wouldn''''t take the scholarship back. Her and her kids deserve to be dirt poor and on the street. That''''s a great message to send to the youngsters of america.Posted by roadking041 at 07:06 AM : Oct 27, 2007


YOu don''t really mean that--not as much as you must HATE the idea of having to support so many people on welfare (currently less than 2.7 million from all races out of 300 million citizens). The boy served 1 year in jail for a consensual act. The real problem is--that Americans are sooo hypocritical about *** that they dare to make a natural act between consenting people a crime. The hideous irony is--that a lot of the complainers and those who claim to want tough *** laws in cases like this often are hypocrites with double standards. Ala Ted Haggert, Vitter, Craig, Swaggert, O''Reilly, Limbaugh, Baker, Foley, etc---Behind the scenes those who complain the loudest are often guilty of truly raping children (even their own) and every other deviant act.

www.armchairsubversive.com No act is too perverse for the so called "Imm"--moral majority.

[susanhelit]

The state Supreme Court did not decide to apply the law retroactively. They did look at the sentence, and deem it cruel and unusual punishment, and not in the interests of justice. That''s why he''s free, not because they applied a law retroactively.

[tmn]

This case serves as a fine example of (original) legislation crafted by pea-brained Puritans! Two teens get together for consentual oral ***, and someone is supposed to serve *10 YEARS* in prison? Thank God for "judicial activism"...and (finally) common sense!

[sandzz-2009]

Whats real funny is the majority of posters who want to opine have little or no knowledge of the subject matter. The revised statute explicitly provided that it ought NOT to be applied retroactively. The majority opinion disregarded that fact and decided to apply the statute retroactively anyway, and not just for Wilson, but for others, and not just those similarly situated but for anyone who was ever convicted of aggravated child molestation prior to the statute''s revision.

In fact, not only are those situated entitled to a hearing but, on this opinion they are entitled to be release from custody. This case serves as a fine example of judicial activism.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by robertkjjj,

And some are born ignorant racists, whose parents don''t have the sense to teach them better.

It is called recidivism, dummy, and it is not restricted to class, gender, or the false concept known as "race".

[susanhelit]

The law is the law - but the person who wrote this law says it was misapplied and inappropriate for this case. Several judges have agreed - this is not the law. The AG was an idiot, and should pay with his job, if not more.