You're own ridiculous words convict you. I would assume that someone with your superior intellect would understand that.

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Typographical error. Substitute Georgia. My bad.

Your trolling, however, remains unaffected.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

WOW!! So according Reino, I lack reading comprehension skills, despise members of my own family, and I'm part of the brain tumor America doesn't want?!?!? Thanks for letting me know that's the impression I leave around here.

__________________
New to the forum? Check out our Newbie's Guide!
Interested in supporting USPO? Click here!

Betcha the kid won't do it again ..

__________________
"I miss the days when they made toys that could kill a kid."
- Jerry Seinfeld

But, Crystal, he said:

Yeah, right.

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Society changes, the law doesn't.

__________________
Hier ons bloed. Wanneer ons recht
Here our blood. When our right

Here are the explanations:

1.) The police found a video tape when investigating a seperate rape charge filed by a 17 year old who had sex at the same party
2.) That rape charge resulted in acquitals
3.) Georgias Romeo and Juliet Statutes did not cover oral/anal making it child molestation
4.) 'Sodomy' is considered especially immoral, hence the "Aggravated" part of his charge
5.) Georgia has since changed the law, but does not retroactively pardon him
6.) The governor cannot pardon him but the prosecuter can dismiss the charges, but does not feel he appears "sorry enough" for his crime of having consensual sex
7.) The girl has never disputed the fact that it was consensual
8.) The jury never had it explained that this would carry a minimum sentence of 10 years

So there it all is. The judge should have thrown out the sentence immediately as he is allowed to do, as it was in contravention to the bar against "cruel and unusual punishments" to punish a person more harshly for what would be considered a lesser sexual act.

Although often criticised on its logic, the SCOTUS in recent years has held that legislatures can freely set the sentences for any crime as they wish, and the length of the sentence for any crime does not fall under the 'Cruel and Unusual Punishment' clause. They have held that it only applies to types of punishments and not to proportionality questions on the lengths of sentences (an example would be that if a court sentenced John Doe to undergo some wierd torture procedure then this would fall under the C & U clause, whilst getting life without parole for smoking a joint under a statute that allows that sentence would not fall under the C & U clause).

What puzzles me here--besides not writing the laws sensibly--is why the state simply doesn't withdraw the charges. Even the drafters said it wasn't intended to apply this way; it merely does by its wording. Thus, the Governor or other higher-ups ought to instruct the District Attorney to simply withdraw the charges and release him. If anyone is stupid enough not to do this in elected office, the ballot box is a perfect remedy. No person who thinks this is a fair use of that law has proper head sense and ought to be voted out or removed. The District Attorney ought to be voted out for thinking this is acceptable, and if he is appointed, then he ought to be removed and the voting public ought to make that clear.

Voting out stupid/incompetent individuals is good but it doesn't help the poor bugger who's in the slammer. This is patently unjust.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

No shit. This is the stupidest thing I've .... seen in the last hour or so LOL

Next we'll hear of a 6 year old getting 10 years for playing doctor and looking at the "parts" of a 5 year old.

I bet Jimmy Carter would hoof and poof and carry on about THAT too

Someone mentioned that the police found a cell phone video?

Then that is an entirely different thing - that is child pornography and child exploitation...and THAT is completely different than just consensual sex.

If the cell phone thing is real - then I agree with the sentence....however I don't agree that he would not be eligible for parole/good behavior IF this is his first offense of this nature.

Well, the judicial system does statistically tend to be a tad more lenient towards white men than black men, so in that regard...it's theoretically possible that it really is. But, we're talking about the court of public opinion here, and hence, racism gets people blood boiling a hell of a lot more than a simple travesty of justice. So, if you want people involved...there can be no doubt, it must be an issue of racism.

Simple, when you're trying to convince your audience that a person is a victim, if you don't add 'black' no one is going to care.

On top of it all, in the court of public opinion you are fighting against 30 years of anti-male propoganda and bias. People will assume guilt and thus dismiss your argument. If your attempting to spark a public reaction, a travesty of justice against a white man will gain little to no traction unless you can prove absolutely beyond any shadow of a doubt that the 'man' involved is a victim (and even then a not insignificant amount of people will doubt it. See : Duke rape case.) But, add the race card, you get protests, you get letters to the government, you get all forms of civil reaction.

The sentence has been vacated: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/11/tee....ap/index.html

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

From the article...
You mean the state is going to appeal the vacated sentence? WTF? Still it's a good first step.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

Great news! I highly doubt the state will appeal the ruling or that it will be overturned by the supreme court.