Misuse of the Law
// February 28th, 2004 // 6 Comments » // tagged: Politics
Did anyone see the Oprah show from last week about the Marcus Dixon rape case in Georgia? A black 18 year old and a white 15 year old had sex ... and the girl claims rape a few days later. The show wasn't actually about the rape ... because the jury found Dixon NOT GUILTY of the rape after only 20 minutes of deliberation (and I agreed with their findings after listening to his story and the girls story. I think she was embarassed to have had sex with him, her father was a blatant racist, and so she comes up with the rape accusation. And for me, as a woman, to think this - that says a lot. And it says a lot that the entire jury unanimously agreed on the not guilty verdit. And it says a lot that the Oprah audience was supportive of Dixon, and not the girl accusing him of rape. When women are supporting the guy -- I think thats a good clue about who is lying and who is being truthful.) So - Dixon is found not guilty of the rape, but the DA had put a "safety measure" charge onto the case. The show was about a charge that the DA attached to the case, as a "backstop" so that if Dixon was aquitted of the rape, he would still automatically get a mandatory 10 year prison sentence for "aggravated child molestation". (The law could be applied in this situation because Dixon was 18 and his accuser was 3 months shy of being 16 -- and the law states that if there is injury in sex between a minor and an adult, the "aggravated child molestation" charge could be applied and it carries a mandatory 10 year prison sentence.) The girl was a virgin when she and Dixon had what the jury termed consensual sex - and the DA used her torn hymen as the injury necessary to use this charge. This law was created to protect CHILDREN from ADULT sexual predators. It wasn't designed to punish teenagers having consensual sex. Do I agree that a 15 year old should be having sex? No ... but I also don't think Dixon should be spending 10 years of his life in prison. Remember, the jury found him NOT GUILTY of the rape. So he's spending 10 years in prison for a crime he wasn't convicted of. The aggravated child molestation law is what is keeping him in prison. Bryant Gumbel interviewed the DA who prosecuted the case ... and he insists he wasn't being overzealous (even though this is the ONLY time this law has been applied to teenage consensual sex in the entire history of Georgia law). Oprah had several of the jurors on the show - and none of them were aware that even though they found him not guilty of rape that he would still have to go to prison simply based on the fact of their ages. Dixon's family now has a great team of lawyers, working pro-bono, who presented his case before the Georgia supreme court for appeal. They are hoping the child molestation charges can be overturned and Dixon can be released from prison. He's already been in prison for over a year and if the molestation charges were dropped, he would be free to go home. The lawyers on the other side just can't seem to get over the fact that the jury found him not guilty of the rape. That is a moot point now - but they argued about that the entire show and Oprah had to keep shutting them down because they were basically wanting to retry the case on Oprah. I was just appalled at learning about this case - and I'm sure things like this happen all over the country and we don't know about them because they aren't on Oprah or splashed on the news everywhere. Laws are put in place for a purpose ... and when overzealous prosecutors misuse those laws it does more than punish just that one person. It undermines the legal system and all it stands for. These laws should be used for their intended purpose -- to protect children from child molesters. It shouldn't be there to make sure a DA gets a prision sentence when he can't make his case for a jury. Which is exactly what happened here. He attached that charge so that Dixon would still go to prison, no matter what, even if the jury did find him not guilty of the rape.