Georgia high court overturns teen's sentence for having sex with minor

The1calledTKE · #1 05-03-2004, 11:33 AM

ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- A teenager's 10-year prison sentence for having sex with a younger schoolmate was thrown out Monday by the Georgia Supreme Court.

The state's highest court ruled 18-year-old Marcus Dixon should have been prosecuted just on the lesser charge of misdemeanor statutory rape rather than aggravated child molestation for having sex with a 15-year-old in February 2003.

Dixon, who is black, has claimed he was targeted because he is black and had sex with a white girl. His case drew protests from the NAACP.

Dixon was acquitted on felony rape charges but found guilty of aggravated child molestation, which comes with a mandatory decade-long sentence, as well as statutory rape. Monday's ruling lets the statutory rape conviction, which carries a maximum sentence of one year and a $1,000 fine, stand.

In its 4-3 decision, the Georgia Supreme Court didn't rule on whether the 10-year sentence was cruel and unusual. It said only that Dixon shouldn't have been tried for aggravated child molestation because the statutory rape law would be more relevant.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/03/te....ap/index.html

swissmiss04 · #2 05-03-2004, 12:51 PM

While I usually roll my eyes when I hear "racism", in this case it may be valid. When I was 15 many girls my age were involved w/ older guys (18-21). Some were sexually active, others not. I wasn't, but if I had been, no doubt it would have been consensual (if a bit uninformed and hormonally driven!).
I read the link you posted. I am rather disturbed on two counts:
1) What on earth was this 15 year old girl doing working as an assistant janitor at a school??
2) Not to be graphic, but of course there is bruising and tearing during intercourse, especially if it's your first time. That doesn't necessarily prove that it was forced.

I think also sociological/cultural aspects come into play. As a Southerner I've witnessed the prejudice experienced by interracial couples. When I was a child I heard ugly comments from my older relatives when they'd see a black man w/ a white woman. I thank God I didn't grow up believing what they said. I think that perhaps the girl got nervous that her reputation would be damaged if word got out she'd had sex w/ a black man (who apparently had a lot going for him). I suppose we'll never know what exactly happened. It's sad all the way around.

TheEpitome1920 · #3 05-03-2004, 12:52 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by swissmiss04
[B]While I usually roll my eyes when I hear "racism", in this case it may be valid. QUOTE]

Why do you usually roll your eyes?

James · #4 05-03-2004, 01:06 PM

You know . . it may be just a bad thing to put kids in jail for having sex.

18 and 15? Give me a break. If they could have proved it was non-consensual thats one thing, but to have that as a "statutory" or automatic crime is insane. You would have had to put half my senior class in jail and registered them as sex offenders .. . the cooler guys anyway.

This may be less racism and more prosecutorial stupidity. There have been several cases around the country where prosecutors have sent boys to jail in obviously consensual relationships becaue of a 3 or 4 year age gap.

In one case the kid ws facing years in prison even though he was engaged to marry the girl.

Its the feminization of america at its best . . . after all, all men are potential rapists.

Peaches-n-Cream · #5 05-03-2004, 01:16 PM

I saw this story on Oprah. The girl claims that the sex was not consensual.

I really don't think that this has anything to do with feminism, James.

James · #6 05-03-2004, 01:30 PM

The girl couldn't prove it.

Quote:

Originally posted by Peaches-n-Cream
I saw this story on Oprah. The girl claims that the sex was not consensual.

I really don't think that this has anything to do with feminism, James.

swissmiss04 · #7 05-03-2004, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by James
The girl couldn't prove it.

It's hard to prove consent after the fact. That's what makes trying rape cases so tricky. Some rapists don't get convicted and some innocent people people go to jail. Unfortunately, it sometimes boils down to who has the best legal team.

BTW, if you read rape laws (especially in backwards states like AL) you will find them to be anything but female friendly. Maybe things are different in NJ.

madmax · #8 05-03-2004, 02:28 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TheEpitome1920
[B]

Quote:

Originally posted by swissmiss04
While I usually roll my eyes when I hear "racism", in this case it may be valid. QUOTE]

Why do you usually roll your eyes?

because most of the time it is bullchit.

This guy is as guilty as Jason Williams. This wasn't even the first time he was accused of sexaul assault.

James · #9 05-03-2004, 08:46 PM

You could theoretically go to jail in NJ if the girl claims she had even one drink and was intoxicated. You could also, in theory, go to jail in any consensual situation if the girl than says she said no, even in the absence of any physical evidence of struggle.

Quote:

Originally posted by swissmiss04
It's hard to prove consent after the fact. That's what makes trying rape cases so tricky. Some rapists don't get convicted and some innocent people people go to jail. Unfortunately, it sometimes boils down to who has the best legal team.

BTW, if you read rape laws (especially in backwards states like AL) you will find them to be anything but female friendly. Maybe things are different in NJ.

Peaches-n-Cream · #10 05-03-2004, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by James
The girl couldn't prove it.

It wasn't the job of a teenage girl to prove she was raped. That is the job of the District Attorney's Office and the prosecution team.

I mentioned it because every time I hear this story on the news they report that he said it was consensual. They never mention that she still says she was forcibly raped.

swissmiss04 · #11 05-03-2004, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by madmax
This wasn't even the first time he was accused of sexaul assault.

I haven't heard of any prior accusations. And besides, innocent until proven guilty, right?

sugar and spice · #12 05-04-2004, 12:58 AM

The racism in this case was legit by pretty much any standards -- the girl told people it was consensual sex at first, but changed her story later because her daddy was a well-known racist and she was worried that he would get mad at her for having sex with a black man -- so she cried rape. She as much as admitted this to people who later testified in court. The actual rape charge was thrown out because it was so ludicrous.

What Dixon was ultimately convicted for ("aggravated child molestation") was an entirely different matter -- basically it boils down to a lesser degree of statuatory rape. The law experts in Georgia were livid about him being convicted of this because the aggravated child molestation was NOT put in place to convict 18-year-olds of having consensual sex with 15-year-olds -- it was put in place to convict 45-year-olds forcing sex onto 13-year-olds. Add to this fact that the jury didn't know what kind of jail time Dixon would be facing and most of them said that they would not have voted him guilty if they had realized how harsh the sentence would be . . .

Needless to say, I'm glad the charge got thrown out. I'm all for rapists getting what they deserve, but everything I've read makes it sound like that was not the case here.

James · #13 05-04-2004, 10:54 AM

He really shouldn't get any charge at all . . even if anything still stands . . he will be a registered "sex offender" for the rest of his life.

madmax · #14 05-04-2004, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by swissmiss04
I haven't heard of any prior accusations. And besides, innocent until proven guilty, right?

Right. He is innocent until proven guilty. He was already proven guilty. That is why he was in jail.

The prior accusations were on a 60 Minutes piece that aired months ago.

sugar and spice · #15 05-04-2004, 06:05 PM

Side note: the "prior accusations" in question were because he jokingly exposed himself to a classmate in class, BTW.

Because it's not like there's a difference between that and rape or anything.

ETA: What it comes down to is that this kid would have been getting ten years in jail on a "statuatory rape" charge for having consensual sex with someone three years his junior.

For those of you who are unaware, statuatory rape charges between consenting teenagers are unevenly enforced when it comes to race -- most of the convictions coming when the younger teenager is a white girl and the older one is a non-white male. You want to debate why that is, go ahead.