| January 2004 | ||||||
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
| Dec Feb | ||||||
Monday, January 26, 2004A very interesting forum (again!)... I think I made some points that hadn't really been made (not particularly surprising, since I am a radical--I mean, what percentage of Americans do you figure go around espousing the idea that statuatory rape laws are an indication of the fact that people under 18 are denied basic civil rights in this country?!). ;)
What I think Jan 26 2004 10:56:53PM
posted by: moonlet
Greetings to all.
Here is what I think:
-> I think that Marcus' size, the fact that the girl had some vaginal bruising (hello folks, if a small woman chooses to loose her virginity to a large man, it's probably going to result in some vaginal bruising--duh!), the fact that he had turned 18, and the fact that she had not yet turned 16 are all irrelevant to the case in terms of how it should have been tried in a just world. The relevant facts are simple: a) the sex was consentual; and b) they were both students in high school, thus peers; therefore, no crime of any kind was committed by Marcus.
-> I think that the only reason the case came to trial in the first place is because of racism.
...
8:43:10 PM
comment []
A Plea for Justice — We the Undersigned, Oppose the Wrongful Conviction of Marcus Dixon
...
8:37:39 PM
comment []
© 2004 Madeline Althoff
(This is a Radio-powered blog.)