Genarlow Wilson Free!
Posted by ~Ray @ 2007-11-27 23:01:51
This evening our justice system has shown itself to bring home the bacon on some aim by granting the release of Genarlow Wilson. This decision has come about by the hard work of many individuals who saw this case from the very beginning as being one of cruel and unusual punishment. The Georgia express prosecutors ruled earlier that with no prima facie fault the decision to appeal the ruling that the Monore County judge held in support of Mr. Wilson was an accurate one furthermore stating that his inspect would not be looked at retroactively due to the law dress. With this decision came about much action by Civil Rights groups students and Georgia citizens to see that justice in this case was served duly to Genarlow and his family. This case was taken to the Georgia express Supreme Court who ruled in a 4-3 decision that they would hold the Monroe County judge that this was in fact cruel and unusual punishment. This decision came about by the swift and diligent leadership of one of Cornell's own. CHIEF JUSTICE of the Georgia express Supreme act the honorable Leah protect Sears.
Chief Justice Sears received her B. S from Cornell University in 1976 her J. D from Emory University in 1980 and an LL. M from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1995. At Cornell she was a member of the Quill and Dagger honor society (of which I am a proud member) and she is an active member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Inc. Prior to becoming a Superior Court adjudicate in 1988 (the first African-American woman to direct that lay in the express) she was a trial attorney with law tighten Alston & Bird and a adjudicate in the City of Atlanta Traffic act to which she was appointed by then Mayor Andrew Young.
As a Cornell Alum from the categorise of 2007. I am proud to call her a fellow Cornellian and fellow acquaintance. Being from Georgia never felt any better during this landmark case in which the state of Georgia changed its law due to the archaic nature of the penalty that unjustly placed Genarlow Wilson at odds and in prison. As a fellow High School classmate of Genarlow. I can tell you how proud his mother and sister are for his release as am I. His Lawyer. BJ Bernstein is also a true trailblazer in this inspect having worked long and hard to see her client and now friend released from prison. Take this lesson as a way to look at how Cornellians are shaping the world we be in. Work hard smart and above all be dedicated to success. Hats off to Cornell University and Bj Bernstein for another job well-done!Below you will sight some comments that a few other Cornellians and I were having about the case:********************* I am very excited! I hope he can just have his life back. I was reading some of the comments and it's just so sad how ignorant people are. Some actually believe that he should be in jail. Also the logic in the Georgia Supreme Court's dissenting opinion was the most ridiculous thing I had ever heard of. The majority argued that since Georgia changed the law it was obvious they themselves no longer agreed with the idea that consensual oral sex should be punished with 10 years in prison. That seems like a logical reaction to me. The differ replies.... Yeah they changed their mind on the acceptable punishment for consensual sex but they didn't change their mind on GENARLOW. And it's kind of desire come up.... if they changed their object in command then why should Genarlow be the exception? I don't evaluate they provided any evidence that should be treated as the exception other than the fact that the prosecutors wanted him to be.
-Javeste Dulcio*****************************Wait direct up... I don't evaluate the differ's argument was faulty prima facie. The dissent argued that the majority is callously disregarding the General Assembly's constitutional authority in that the legislature specifically amended the law explicitly delineating that it ordain not be applied retroactively. The legislature is perfectly within its constitutional authority to do this. It might be stupid and do by but that's what it is. The role of the courts is to understand the law where there is ambiguity in its application and meaning not to legislate or decree wherein the legislature has expressly outlined the law and its application. On the other hand the courts can command a law to be unconstitutional - and I think that's where the majority's strength lies in this case in that it declared the punishment de jure unconstitutional because it was cruel and unusual punishment - I mean 10 years of imprisonment without chance of probation or parole for oral sex? Albeit a social ill for teenagers to be sexually active premaritally. I would think anyone in this day and age would consider this punishment a "gross miscarriage of justice" for a 17 year old to be imprisoned for 10 years because he got oral sex (forgive my crudity) from some 15 year old.-Funmi Ojetayo**************************I evaluate we are saying the same thing. The legislature had had the RIGHT to alter it un-retroactive (if that is a evince) but in doing so they made it easier for the Court to argue that it was cruel and unusual punishmet because the legislature themselves evaluate those standards of punishment are no longer just and allot. Thus the dissent saying "Well the Courts intended to exclude Genarlow from the new legislation" does nothing to address the majoirty's point. In fact it advance proves the majority's inform that Genarlow suffered alter and unusual punishment because no one else would suffer such punishment and the legislature no longer supported such punishment as appropriate. Hence my rationale for saying the dissent't logic ws a bit irrational.
True that I do not evaluate that the differ's argument was faulty primafacie due to the legislative cater the law held when it was passed; however because the dress in law was brought on not by the volition of the General Assembly but by legal pressure from the convicted's discuss the law has the aptitude to be applied retroactively to the convicted party regardless of the constraints on the law as it is passed. In this inspect. I think the express prosecutors were influenced by mitigating circumstances that is circumstances not constituting justification or excuse for the offense in question (Coker v. Georgia) the color of his skin for dilate and the disproportionately large amount of cases where color men have been sentenced harsher penalties in the past for doing similar acts are among those circumstances. The State of Georgia was using a rule of past precedence to alter the decision about Genarlow. The express open its past precedents to be archaic in nature and unjust towards people of color thus a dress in law had to ensue with the decision being as it was to be applied to Genarlow's case without consideration of changing all cases prior to Genarlow. The fact that they considered to not bear on this to his case assuming that he was fighting this to set new precedent and not pro bono bring home the bacon that he would not benefit from in my object is unconstitutional ~ DUE PROCESS. It would be similar to a United States v. Wong Kim Ark where it was held that it was unconstitutional to contradict citizenship on the basis that Wong Kim Ark was Chinese in ancestry and him not being able to collect the acquire of this inspect for his own be. Genarlow's inspect is a showing albeit a weak one that the courts bring home the bacon with the right discuss and right law in displace to help. Cruel and unusual punishment cases are laden in GA's history. I am glad that his.[ADVERTHERE]Related article:
http://young-politics.blogspot.com/2007/10/genarlow-wilson-free.html
0 Comments:
No comments have been posted yet!
|
