A reader writes:
Wow, you’re really fitting in. So the continued imprisonment of Genarlow Wilson is now a racial injustice? As an Atlanta resident, I am immensely glad that Thurbert Baker has taken a stand for following the law. Yes, the original law that resulted in his long sentence should be changed. Unfortunately, the legislature didn’t make the changes retroactive when they reduced the severity of the law. And the court that "freed" Wilson doesn’t have the authority to do what it attempted to do. Thurbert Baker offered Wilson a free and legal way out of jail, with no spot on his record and no sex offender status, pending resolution of the flawed law. Wilson refused. Meanwhile, at least someone in authority is insisting that we adhere to the law and, if it is so obviously bad, change the law in a way that the courts can administer. All legally.
Relax and watch this play out based on the rule of law. Your shrill reaction will have had nothing to do with it, thank goodness.
Another reader writes:
I agree that the Genarlow Wilson matter is a legal tragedy, but I do not believe it is fueled by racism. The prosecutor is black.
I believe it is largely fueled by the over-the-top, sexist laws that were passed in what started as a laudable attempt to get a handle on the sexual abuse of very young women.
However, the laws were passed with the assumption that any young woman who engages in sex is being preyed upon by an evil, older man, and that assumption is simply disconnected from reality. It is not always the man’s, or boy’s, fault, and young, and older, women are also capable of what could be judged age inappropriate sexual behavior – whether it is sex at an age that disturbs adults or is predatory sexual behavior with a teenage boy.
I have been pointing this out to many of my very liberal women friends without their agreement or acquiescense for quite some time. Recently, one spontaneously declared that "those laws" were passed to protect women of ten years ago and that women have changed. However, no one is suggesting that the laws be generally overhauled. Most women want to retain the fantasy upon which the laws are based or, among the more intellectually honest, want the personal, subjective right to put a man in jail if she so decides, after the fact. (Who surrenders social or legal power willingly?)
The Genarlow Wilson was gross and public enough to force the state legislature to change the law, too late for Mr. Wilson. Why doesn’t the legislature simply amend the new law to make it retroactive? Because the political will to change the law is not strong enough to overcome the desire to keep the law, and the threat, in place. The abuse of the sexual assault laws for the purpose of inappropriate retribution is a much, much bigger problem that is socially admitted. The Duke Lacrosse case highlighted the issue, but is being dismissed by most as a single, rogue prosecutor, and the lying, purjerer is being let off because she apparently has a number of personal and social problems. Until the laws get changed – a more realistic definition of sexual assault, the admission or relevant information about the participation of the alleged victim and an elemination of excessive sentences (in many jurisdictions, all sexual assault is subject to the same potential sentence, life) and would-be victims who are actually lying are prosecuted, the problem will get worse.
The Dish 