Oral sex leads to 10-year prison sentence

I hold my nose and look at digg.com from time to time, mainly for technical news. But this story had had a huge number of hits:


Obviously, from a Catholic perspective, there are grave sins being committed here, there is no question about that. But much of the conversation seems to revolve around the ‘injustice’ of a 10 year prison sentence… What do people here think?

P.S. People claim that CAF is crazy… it’s nothing compared to the downright immorality that goes on on Digg :slight_smile:

The law is clear. He broke it. He should serve his time.

The law is not that clear, nor is its justice.

They were all children, and the stupidity of youth is proverbial. If there was no brutality, well…maybe you made no mistakes before you were 18, in which case, good for you, but ten years? Ten years? For a consensual incident? The young man will come out of prison a ruined person.

If there is no evidence against the consent of all parties involved, no matter how stupid (and he has pled as an innocent, given the choice of being a registered sex-offender with a lighter prison sentence, given that the young woman is nearly his age), if adolescent misguidance and poor conduct is the best the law can come up with for condemnation, then at least make the punishment fit the crime.

Only it America. Ten years, give me a break. Someone needs to take a chill pill. Ruining his life might be just a little worse than what he did, no matter how you look at it.

It was not consensual.

Link please? The one given asserts consensuality, as much as can be given between minors anyway. That makes all the difference.

The law is clear – and stupid. Ten years for a consensual act between two minors? I’d like to know how many real rapists serve less than ten years.
I’d agree that the young man was foolish to “roll the dice” but the writer has a point that prosecutors could use their discretion not to bring cases where a “victory” would result in an injustice.

Under Georgia law at the time, this was considered aggravated child molestation, a felony for teens less than three years apart to have oral sex. It carried with it a 10-year sentence, even though it was only a misdemeanor for those same teens to have sexual intercourse.

The “at the time” makes me wonder if the law has been changed since. At any rate, the law is the exact opposite of how teens think, many consider oral intercourse “not really sex” and it is their alternative to “going all the way”.
[yes, I know how warped this is but that’s not what’s under discussion here]
If the law has been changed maybe Wilson could be re-sentenced under the new guidelines.

She could not consent as a minor. It was not consentual.


A 15 year old young lady surely had free will. I’m not condoning anything that happened but the law that defines what a minor is does not imply that they can’t “consent” to this…otherwise, can they consent to sin? The statement falls apart due to the concept of free will and sin.

I understand that.
But one assumes that the Georgia legislature changed the law because they realised the old law was out of date.
I am suggesting that as a matter of justice and/or mercy Wilson’s sentence be readjusted to reflect the new law. I don’t know if this could be done thru appeal or commutation or what but it would be a just solution.

He was offered a deal for a reduced sentence. He turned it down. He took his chances.

It does not have anything to do with free will or sin. It has to do with the legal concept of consent in GA. The age of consent in GA is 16. The girl was 15.

And he was given the plea-bargain-option of being a registered sex-offender plus prison time at the age of 17?

Some bargain.

He is a sex offender. He had oral sex with someone who could not consent to the act.

In that poor state. She fully consented as far as common sense goes.

How about we just remove all age of consent laws? Is that what you want?

So, by your lights, the offender was capable of full consent, an adultt and triable under all formalities and definitions and equally to act freely under such?

Someone get on the red phone and make underage drinking legal!

How about you try applying a little common sense. Of course, that is the conclusion you draw from my statements, anyone would right!

I don’t get it.

At 15, she is too immature to consent to sex…but at 17, he is mature enough to be tried as an adult? Teenagers either are or aren’t adults, I would think…

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.