posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 10:55 AM
I am disgusted by this injustice committed by Judge Wiley. I (for once) actually have a day free from obligations, but I became so pissed-off at what
I read here that I felt compelled to write something just to take off some steam and elaborate just exactly why I am so pissed off, and highlight the
moral and ethical considerations that came to mind when thinking it all over. (and I wanted to find out where you've been, Joe – where is NLBS?).
Wiley is unfit for the position he holds. He is a petty, angry, and sadistic little man. Judge Wiley's track-record alone serves to demonstrate his
tendency to indulge in sadism, cruelty, severity and injustice. Regarding the concept of Judicial power, a Judge holds a considerable measure of
power over the fate of an individual found guilty of transgressing some (dare I say 'imaginary') boundaries of Law (which are erected to uphold
standards of justice, order, decency, etc). When coupled with the really, really harsh sentencing issued by Wiley, the article given in the OP so
sickeningly demonstrates that Judge Wiley's intent was entirely antithetical to his role within the legal system to serve as a conduit and instrument
of Justice and Mercy. In reality, it is very easy to see this sentencing was an unfair, and intentionally destructive maneuver of injustice built by
his corrupt and sadistic mind - the aim thereof to permanently disfigure, deform and even destroy this young man's life and future.
I remember back in the 90's there was a serious outrage with regard to the fate of a young gay couple - if I recall correctly, the love-birds were
ages about 17 and 18 - yet the age of consent in the State was strictly 18. The angry parents of the younger man were pissed because their son had
come out as not only gay, but also had a boyfriend with whom he was sexually involved. So the hate-filled parents of the young man pressed charges of
statutory-rape against their son's older boyfriend, leading to the same injustice concluding in the story you posted, Joe.
Right off the bat, Here are a few reasons why I think this is an injustice:
W. Both were teenagers - we all know that teenagers are going to get it on, irrespective of the best and worst efforts at intervention from the prude
X. Although one party was a 'legal' adult, and the other, a minor, the age-difference between the two parties alone cannot serve as a measure of the
ethical, or moral quality of the affair.
Y. The affair was consensual (maybe I'm different, but yep . . . I knew fully well what (or who) I was doing at that age . . . I'm probably more or
less right on target when guessing that as a teenager, Judge Wiley never managed to get out and chase some tail because he couldn't decide if he
should ask his parents permission to go to the Friday Night roller-skating social on account of not being able to decide for himself if he possessed
the liberty to even consider making the decision to decide to ask his parents' permission).
Z. 19 year old Homeboy had no forethought that his actions may be illegal, given that he believed, due to being falsely informed, that the booty was
legal; thus there was no premeditation to act with 'criminal' intent. This is significant because the degree of severity in sentencing is that the
Judge deems appropriate largely (like, 'very, very much') dependent upon the premeditation to commit an action that one fully knows is criminal.
No doubt, the severity of Judge Wiley's sentencing in this case was due, for the most part, to his own private sexual frustration and his seriously
out-dated & unsound moral and ethical beliefs about sexual behavior. His sadistic and unwholesome character is obviously reflective of some nasty
skeletons in the closet, coupled with inability to even get, much less maintain an erection, (oh yeah, and the fact that he is a cold, heartless
bastard that has no soul).
I'm sure the very thoughts evoked by the nature of this case probably sent this old bastard into a sexually-charged and neurotic fury; the severity of
his sentencing certainly reflect a deep, inner rage composed of a perverse and evil amalgamation of the arousal that he privately entertained while
pondering the intimate and sensual details that would characterize this teenage affair - and then mixed with the nasty and jealous anger which
surfaced thereafter by his knowing (and knowing very well) that he has never once enjoyed - nor will ever - enjoy and relish in those simple and
innocent, instinctual and sensual delights which color, characterize, and even steer the course of the formative years of a human being. In other
words, not having gone to the Prom because he couldn't get a date is just the tip of Wiley's evil-iceberg.
With sole concern toward the case addressed in the OP, it appears very clear to me that the extreme and severe nature of the punishment issued to the
young man concerned is so heavily disproportionate to the nature of the 'offense' - with consideration to the fact that the young man was misled to
believe his partner in the consensual sexual affair was 17 when she was actually 14 (and does it really surprise anyone that teenagers of different
age-groups are getting down, just as they always have, regardless of whatever prude authority dictates?) - that even a quick and cursory examination
of the facts of this case serves to illustrate that Judge Wiley has obviously has never considered the philosophical concept of 'Justice,' yet is paid
by the State to work as a representative of this ideal. This guy needs a different day job . . . I'm thinking a job in the laundry department
alongside the Queens at Shawshank.