When their son celebrated his 16th birthday, Elisa Kelley and her then-husband George Robinson agreed to serve beer and wine but set conditions for the guests:
All car keys were forfeited upon entry to the home and all party goers remained overnight. This was to ensure that no one drank and drove. No one did.
The Albemarle County (covering Charlottesville, VA) Commonwealth's Attorney James Camblos prosecuted the couple for serving alcohol to minors. The couple will spend the next 27 months in jail, having apparently exhausted all appeals.
Holding parents responsible for serving alcohol to minors at parties is not uncommon; the severity of the sentence is a bit draconian, it seems.
This article about Kelley's jail sentence appeared on Monday, June 11, 2007, after a media-saturated week-end about the Paris Hilton 45-day sentence for violation of parole which some also felt was excessive. But it is a comparison with another sentence handed down on Friday, June 8, 2007, that I find a bit troubling.
The Albemarle County (covering Charlottesville, VA) Commonwealth's Attorney James Camblos prosecuted the couple for serving alcohol to minors. The couple will spend the next 27 months in jail, having apparently exhausted all appeals.
Holding parents responsible for serving alcohol to minors at parties is not uncommon; the severity of the sentence is a bit draconian, it seems.
This article about Kelley's jail sentence appeared on Monday, June 11, 2007, after a media-saturated week-end about the Paris Hilton 45-day sentence for violation of parole which some also felt was excessive. But it is a comparison with another sentence handed down on Friday, June 8, 2007, that I find a bit troubling.
Mary Winkler, a preacher's wife, shot and killed her husband while he slept and received a three-year sentence for that crime; she had defended her actions based on the abuse she suffered at his hands.
I do believe that spousal abuse should be recognized, if established by the evidence presented at trial, as a major mitigating factor and that states should also consider allowing it as a defense. The sentence was within the punishment for the convicted offense. She could have received 6 years for the crime. The judge, however, only required that she serve 120 days in confinement and the remainder on parole. In addition he allowed 60 of those days to be served in a mental institution while being treated for mental illness and granted a reduction for time served.
These cases involved different states and different penal codes and different prosecutors, but it appears there is some inequity in the punishment and the severity of these offenses.
The bottom line is that once a person breaks the law, the prosecutor, who has the discretion to decide whether or not to charge and what section of the Penal Code to charge you with violating, and the sentencing judge will actually determine your fate. In Texas the jury decides on your punishment and not the judge, but in most states the judge makes the determination within the guidelines for the punishment of the offense.
For those who doubt this, consider another case reported on today. A Georgia Superior Court judge today ordered the release of Genarlow Wilson, who has served two years of 10-year prison sentence for having consensual oral sex with another teenager at a party when he was 17. Prosecutors said they would appeal the order.
The article that appeared in the New York Times (http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2007/06/11/us/11cnd-consent.html&tntemail0=y) went on to state:
In granting Mr. Wilson’s habeas corpus petition, Judge Wilson wrote that it would be a “grave miscarriage of justice” for Mr. Wilson to be kept in prison for the remaining eight years of his sentence.
“If this Court, or any court, cannot recognize the injustice of what has occurred here, then our court system has lost sight of the goal our judicial system has always strived to accomplish: Justice being served in a fair and equal manner,” he wrote in the order granting release.
Because of the appeal, he is still being held.
To understand the role of the prosecutor in this case (who now plans to appeal the judge's order) consider the law that ensnared this young man
The case began three years ago when Mr. Wilson was arrested for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s Eve party in 2003. Under Georgia law, that offense qualified as aggravated child molestation, a felony charge largely intended for use against adult sexual predators, not teenagers like Mr. Wilson, who was 17 at the time of the incident. He had no prior criminal record and was an honors student and star athlete.
Critics pointed out that if Mr. Wilson had engaged in full sexual intercourse with the girl instead of oral sex, under Georgia law he could have been charged only with a misdemeanor, because of an exemption written into the molestation law specifically to cover contact between minors. But because that exemption did not mention oral sex, when Mr. Wilson was convicted, he received a mandatory sentence of ten years in prison without possibility of parole.
The prosecutor could have decided that there was an exemption that covered what these two teenagers did whether the act was specified or not. This is what prosecutorial discretion is all about. Once elected to the post, the citizens trust prosecutors to use discretion wisely and only when the prosecutor runs for re-election will citizens get to show support. or lack thereof, for the decisions made.
Few members of the public are aware of the power of the prosecutor who some believe is the most important player in the criminal justice system. Judges are also powerful players but they do not have total discretion because of sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimums, mandatory sentences, and other legislative restrictions.
If you break the law, you may pay a premium that is beyond your belief.
These cases involved different states and different penal codes and different prosecutors, but it appears there is some inequity in the punishment and the severity of these offenses.
The bottom line is that once a person breaks the law, the prosecutor, who has the discretion to decide whether or not to charge and what section of the Penal Code to charge you with violating, and the sentencing judge will actually determine your fate. In Texas the jury decides on your punishment and not the judge, but in most states the judge makes the determination within the guidelines for the punishment of the offense.
For those who doubt this, consider another case reported on today. A Georgia Superior Court judge today ordered the release of Genarlow Wilson, who has served two years of 10-year prison sentence for having consensual oral sex with another teenager at a party when he was 17. Prosecutors said they would appeal the order.
The article that appeared in the New York Times (http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2007/06/11/us/11cnd-consent.html&tntemail0=y) went on to state:
In granting Mr. Wilson’s habeas corpus petition, Judge Wilson wrote that it would be a “grave miscarriage of justice” for Mr. Wilson to be kept in prison for the remaining eight years of his sentence.
“If this Court, or any court, cannot recognize the injustice of what has occurred here, then our court system has lost sight of the goal our judicial system has always strived to accomplish: Justice being served in a fair and equal manner,” he wrote in the order granting release.
Because of the appeal, he is still being held.
To understand the role of the prosecutor in this case (who now plans to appeal the judge's order) consider the law that ensnared this young man
The case began three years ago when Mr. Wilson was arrested for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s Eve party in 2003. Under Georgia law, that offense qualified as aggravated child molestation, a felony charge largely intended for use against adult sexual predators, not teenagers like Mr. Wilson, who was 17 at the time of the incident. He had no prior criminal record and was an honors student and star athlete.
Critics pointed out that if Mr. Wilson had engaged in full sexual intercourse with the girl instead of oral sex, under Georgia law he could have been charged only with a misdemeanor, because of an exemption written into the molestation law specifically to cover contact between minors. But because that exemption did not mention oral sex, when Mr. Wilson was convicted, he received a mandatory sentence of ten years in prison without possibility of parole.
The prosecutor could have decided that there was an exemption that covered what these two teenagers did whether the act was specified or not. This is what prosecutorial discretion is all about. Once elected to the post, the citizens trust prosecutors to use discretion wisely and only when the prosecutor runs for re-election will citizens get to show support. or lack thereof, for the decisions made.
Few members of the public are aware of the power of the prosecutor who some believe is the most important player in the criminal justice system. Judges are also powerful players but they do not have total discretion because of sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimums, mandatory sentences, and other legislative restrictions.
If you break the law, you may pay a premium that is beyond your belief.
