I was driving around Dallas listening to The Michael Irvin Show on 103.3 ESPN Radio.  For those who do not listen to sports talk radio or follow the NFL, Michael Irvin is a former wide receiver for the Dallas Cowboys and a member of the NFL Hall of Fame.  They were discussing the Michael Vick case.

The subject of the  show segment focused on Vick’s transfer to  Atlanta from Leavenworth Federal Penitentiary in preparation for his release to home confinement and eventual freedom.(In reality  it was a temporary stop and he is back at Leavenworth).  They covered the usual hot buttons such as his pending bankruptcy case and of course whether he will be reinstated to play in the NFL.  Vick’s civil attorney Peter Ginsburg was a guest, discussing Vick’s testimony in the bankruptcy case.

The discussion  turned to whether they thought Michael Vick’s sentence was fair.  Michael Irvin and his co-host thought Vick was treated unfairly as compared to sentences other defendants had received in similar circumstances.   Ginsburg  chose his words carefully,  simply agreeing that Vick received a harsher sentence then anyone else sentenced on similar charges. (I don’t know that to be true but will take his word for it)  Was it fair and appropriate that Vick be treated differently than others similarly situated?  I believe it was.  My rational is as follows.

When looking at crime and sentencing , our justice systems sets two distinctly different types of deterrent values. One  is the range of sentencing and discretion given juries and judges for classes of crimes that set social policy in the long term.  There is no need to set specific sentencing examples for these crimes as a means of social deterrence.  Such examples in themselves, taken alone,  would have little or no effect on crime deterrence moving forward.  Such crimes are so woven into society and occur with such frequency that unless we change our entire sentencing structure and philosophy to make everyone an example , singling one person out for a harsher sentence would have no social detterrent effect .  The sentence for these types of crimes  send a societal message but not a message directed at any one individual. The example is made is in the consistency of prosecution and sentencing.

As an example, Jim Leyritz is on trial for vehicular manslaughter. He was allegedly driving drunk, ran red light and killed a women.  If Jim were to be convicted there will be a range of sentencing.  Whether he gets the minimum or the maximum it will have no deterrent effect on the the next person to drink and get behind the wheel.  It is a sentence of social policy against drunk driving and and not individual deterrence.  No one is going to think about the Jim Leyritz case before they drink and drive.(except maybe Jim Leyritz)

There  is also the class of crimes in which  the range of sentencing allows for a direct message to be sent to a narrow class of people.  Crimes that may not occur on a repetitive level to a degree that it is a societal issue versus a regional or even local issue. Crimes we do not hear about and are not de-sensitized to on a societal level.  Crimes such as dogfighting.  For these crimes, when the opportunity presents itself, sentencing ranges speak to a specific opportunity to send a targeted message to the narrow class that may be engaging in such conduct.  The message that such conduct will not be tolerated with the opportunity for the message to actually be heard and heeded.  Without the opportunity to make an example and send such a message in high profile cases such as Michael Vick there would be no deterrent value at all  beyond the person sentenced in prosecution of individual cases.  No one would take notice.

We are not talking about Vick or others like him receiving a sentence so harsh/disproportionate as to the crime committed to be considered unconstitutional and “cruel and unusual” as in the case of Genarlow Wilson or Marcus Dixon.  For our justice system to work properly these constitutional types of  “example” sentences such as Vick received must be made when the opportunity presents itself.

For these reasons Michael Vick’s sentence was appropriate and “fair”.

We are all used to seeing high profile professional athletes work their way down from making touchdowns to making license plates. Michael Vick being the obvious example. It a much rarer occurrence to see it work the other way Especially when the person was a convicted child molester. Appearances however can be deceiving……

Shift scene to small town Georgia. Horny high school teenagers trying to get in each other pants oblivious to any legal ramifications that may exist due to a an age difference of a year or two. It really doesn’t have to be Georgia does it? Half the kids I knew in high school were in the same pants and that was small town Pittsburgh. Bottom line, its going on small town and large city everywhere USA……

Here is the kicker….. In small town Georgia three plus years ago, a minor age differential between a few older teenage boys and slightly younger girls propelled several teenagers into “pedophile hell” finally ending up as convicted felons with sex offender tags following them for life.

So was the story of both Marcus Dixon and Genarlow Wilson.

Marcus Dixon was convicted in May 2003 for the statatory rape and aggravated child molestation of Kristie Brown. Marcus was 17 years old and Kristie was just under 16 at the time they had sex. At the time the Georgia Aggravated Child Molestation statute, a crime designed to punish true pedophiles had no exception for consenting teens so close in age as many other states such as Texas had. It also carried a mandatory 10 year prison term and mandatory registration as a sex offender upon release for prison. What amounts to a life ending set of circumstances.

There was no doubt that there was sex and there was no doubt of the age difference. Open and shut case. Amid public outrage the jury had absolutely no choice but to sentence both Marcus Dixon and Genarlow Wilson to ten years in prison. (the jury did not know of the mandatory sentence when guilt was assessed which is normal in criminal cases)

Public Outrage continued during both Dixons’s and Wilson’s imprisonment. Appeals ensued. The Georgia Supreme Court finally reversed the Dixon conviction ruling 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. The ruling let the statutory rape conviction, which carries a maximum sentence of one year and a $1,000 fine, stand. Dixon had long served that portion of his sentence and was released.

Dixon later enrolled in Hampton College on a football scholarship. He had an outstanding collegiate career and while not drafted was signed just the other day to a 3 year multi million dollar free agent contract with the Dallas Cowboys.

Marcus Dixon is not the only Georgia teen to be caught up in the Georgia “Pedophile Express”

Genarlow Wilson was also a young Georgia teen and promising athlete who made the mistake of letting his teen hormones jettison him to a promising prison football career with a sex offender tag to boot.

Genarlow videotaped himself having sex with a drunk teen girl slightly younger than himself. The tape proved to be judge jury and executioner. That was all the state needed to once again prosecute and prove aggravated chid molestation. Bing! Bang! Bam! Guilty and Ten Years in the Booty Hilton for the 17 year old with only the wonderful world that waits for Registered Sex Offenders to greet him upon return….

After over three years behind bars, Genarlo’s conviction was also overturned by the Georgia Supreme Court on the grounds that the punishment for teen sex was cruel and unusual as compared to the crime.

It should also be noted that in the interim the Georgia Legislature had reformed the law to bring it into the mainstream and make the conduct both Genarlo and Marcus engaged in a misdemeanors punishable by one year in jail with no sex offender tag.

Genarlo has since gone onto college and we shall see what his future holds for him…..

Let there be no mistake here. Neither of these kids were choirboys. Both were accused of the much more serious charge of felony rape but acquitted on those charges. There were many facts brought out in both cases that could lead reasonable people to disagree on whether these teens were in fact bad kids….. it was not cut and dry.

There were also serious racial overtones to both these cases. Not race cards…. In my opinion legitimate concerns about racial targeting in small town Georgia.

Mr Tibbs would not have approved……

You can read my coverage of the original Genarlo Wilson case here.