Reply With Quote
Three years wasted already.
I hope when Wilson gets out and gets into a good college, he has enough money left in his defense fund to sue the pants off the DA and the State of Georgia.
That case was in 2003, but I don't get why they didn't get rid of that Georgia law when everyone knew it was outrageous then. Now, Wilson's case is so similar.
The news of Dixon's arrest for rape, statutory rape, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and sexual battery seemed to take those who knew him by surprise. It seemed totally out of character for this near-4.0 student, who scored greater than 1,200 on his SAT and planned to major in education at Vandy. In the end, the jury found no basis for any of the "forcible crimes" charges, and found him not guilty on all of them. They also concluded that, as was Dixon's claim all along, the sex was completely consensual.
However, John McClellan, the Floyd County District Attorney on the case, also brought the charge of Child Molestation against Dixon. This charge was proven through a technicality, as Dixon was two years and seven months older than the girl, and Dixon had just turned 18. Even though the sex was consensual, under Georgia's relatively new Child Protection laws, this conviction carries a mandatory 10-year prison sentence without parole. According to Gumbel via the law firm representing Dixon's appeal, and not disputed by McClellan, this is the first time in Georgia's history that a high school teen was prosecuted for a felony for having consensual sex with a classmate.
Three years wasted already.
I hope when Wilson gets out and gets into a good college, he has enough money left in his defense fund to sue the pants off the DA and the State of Georgia.
2nd degree CSC is rape. He plead down so as not to be in Mr Wilsons case. Heres a truth; if a girl says you raped her after consensual sex, what proof do you have you didnt (hypothetical)?
You dont. Railroad starts. You lose, Mr Male.
Last edited by DarkReign; 01-25-2007 at 06:15 PM.
I dont think you quite understood.
He didnt rape her. Period. It was consensual. Court do ents state as such. But "a-HA!" he was 17, she was 15...age of consent is 16 and at 17 you can be tried as an adult (which he was). Rest is history.
----------------
For the record, I am not trying to equte Mr Wilson's case with my friends. But the similarities are there in the sense of being an injustice with no recourse.
Okay, what exactly did she say? She went to the police and said she had consensual sex with a 17 year old? Or she said it was something other than that? What was the "my word against yours" part? Because this is why people (me, anyway) don't see how it is the same situation.
Here are some of the jurors from the trial...
supposedly Clayton Bixby was added so they wouldn't have to answer any questions about an all white jury.
Uh, the video and numerous pics..
Ewww....sloppy seconds.
I am going to speak in her voice for a moment and paraphrase, makes it easier to tell it accurately....
"My boyfriend pressured me to have sex with him, which I wasnt ready to do until marriage (BS). But I loved him and thought he loved me, so we did. I started to notice all he wanted was sex, so I stopped it. We saw each other at a mutual friend's house soon after and we talked for a long time. He was very sincere and nice so we started to date again.
I got into a big fight with my parents and needed to talk to someone. So I called John. He came over and really listened and helped me through the whole situation. We ended up sleeping together that night.
I realized my mistake (BS) and called him to tell him thank you for your support but that the mistake was not going to be repeated (BS). He got angry and made threats against me (big time BS). On the night in question (which was the next day after he supposedly made threats), he came over my house when my parents werent home under the pretense that he just wanted to apologize and talk (also BS). He forced himself onto me and raped me (thats a sum up)."
Reality is, she was a . He had sex with her a couple of times over the course of a month. At the time, he was 16, she was 15. The reality is she was obsessed with him and used to call him all the time (phone records show as much, thus the reason she kept saying they "talked things through" alot in her deposition). Reality is, she didnt like being discarded for the that she was, so she wanted revenge (probably, thats my opinion). So she cooked the story up.
So whats your defense in that situation? Do you think you could actually convince your attorney, much less a judge or jury, that this 15 year old suburbanite from a rich family is actually a dirty little ? Because the "my word against yours" is the only real evidence in the case (she admits to consensual sex multiple times). So your only recourse is to pursue a character assassination to persuade the judge/jury that she was just a flouzy who was scorned.
Honestly, her lawyers/parents/whatever covered their bases brilliantly. They admitted consensual, so there was no need for tests. They admitted a relationship and phone calls, so the phone records couldnt be used for or against, they just were.
The truth is the night in question he was there, they did have sex. They immediately got into a fight some time in the next few days because he told her that the relationship she thought she was in was nothing more than sex, by the end of the week he was turning himself in.
He was 17 when the trial started, he was being tried as an adult for 2nd degree CSC of a minor. He was going to lose. He knew it, his lawyer knew it, everyone knew it. He was a lower middle class Joe Nobody, she was highly upper middle class whose parents were professionals (mom doctor, dad business owner). Her team of lawyers outclassed his in every facet.
The judge was a woman. He stood no chance. He could have fought it under a character assassination calling witnesses to attest to her permiscuous history, but who is going to go into a court and say "Yes, I am 17, and I had sex with her too".
For clarity, she was a sophmore in high school, he was a junior. So this isnt like some guy sleeping with some young chick. They were one grade apart and dont tell me you cared when you were high school.
He did what any smart person would do...plea down to a level where you arent considered a sexual offender and have to register everywhere you live. You take the deal that is only punishable up to 6 years (i think) and hope the judge is lenient based on your testimony. She wasnt lenient. Not even close. He was railroaded.
If you work the math out, youll see that he was 17 in 2004. He will be 21 this year (soon so I am told). He will be released on parole very soon and will free and clear of this sentence after its has run its course (4 years of parole). Then probation. In 11 years, he can have it expunged from his record and it will never be mentioned again.
Thats bull .
Last edited by DarkReign; 01-26-2007 at 10:45 AM.
Yes, that's bad situation. The facts you presented show that she took a standard relationship issue and turned it into a criminal case out of vengeance.
However, the court in that case knows only that she accused someone of rape, and that the facts of the matter were in dispute. And rape can occur even if two people have been having consensual sex for a while. The outcome of the process was unfair, but the system was obligated to go through the process.
In the other case, there was no dispute of the facts, and no one was claiming they had been harmed. The court gave criminal punishment to the UNDISPUTED CONSENSUAL act. And the jurors and the prosecutors seemed to be unaware of the consequences of their actions.
Good point. Very much a different case, then.
But it just sparked the memory, so I shared.
I love how people turn this into something about race. No wonder we have all the problems we do in society. Its always someone else's fault and its because I'm black, mexican, chinese, jewish.
I think the punishment is too harsh but society makes it much worse by bringing the race card into it. I hope he gets out.
Thank God someone finally made some sense here. that AG for appealing it. I don't believe his legal grounds bull . I get that laws are written for a reason and that things have to work in certain ways, but when there has been a clear miscarriage of justice - just fix it. FIX it. Stop using the courts and written laws as excuses. Stop hiding behind legal jargon. Own up to the mistake and acknowledge that it didn't work the way it was supposed to here.
! If this guy is guilty, then I'm guilty aswell! How the do you give a kid 10 years of jail time for consensual oral sex!?? When he gets out he should sue the system! This kid deserves a free ride the rest of his life for what he's been put through.
EDIT: By the way, I've had sex with a 16 year old when I was 17. Anybody want to call the authorities? Whoever prosecuted this kid should burn
Last edited by MaNuMaNiAc; 06-12-2007 at 05:58 PM.
What the ?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
