The Walsh Act really does get applied. I was sitting in a Southern District of New York courtroom recently and watched the lawyer for a defendant who has been sitting in jail for seven months point out that he still has not seen the evidence against his client -- i.e., the child porn.

Today's winner is Douglas County(Georgia) DA David McDade....

This may come down to how the state law is written. But if I recall correctly, in most states (Certainly here in the Vampire State) fifteen is below the age of consent. Therefore, any sexual contact between any individual and at least the fifteen year old, ad possibly the 17 year old, is by definition, rape, since consent could not be given for the contact.

That's not exactly right; it would be statutory rape, which in many states goes by other names ("child molestation;" "sexual battery of a minor;" etc). Rape is a different crime with different penalties, and involves intent and lack of consent, neither of which is required for statutory rape. Under most if not all the statutory rape laws, liability is strict on the part of the defendant - if a man has sex with a minor, his intent/knowledge to do so and her consent are irrelevant, rendering the question of whether a minor can properly consent a non-issue (and contrary to popular belief, minors of a certain age can consent in many situations).

Statutory rape is highly dependent on the age of consent in the forum state, which generally ranges from 16-18, though some states have "close in age" exceptions for defendants (e.g., under 21 if "victim" is at least 14; no more than 3 years separating the parties). On the other end of the spectrum, some states make no exception for children of the same age, and both are considered to statutorily rape each other (though courts have nonsensically upheld convictions where the prosecution chooses only to prosecute the male).

Georgia's age of consent appears to be 16, with reduction from felony to misdemeanor for Defendants who are 18 or younger if the "victim" is no more than four years younger than the Defendant. I believe the law was actually changed in this manner as a response to Mr. Wilson's unjustifiably harsh sentence, though it was not done so retroactively so that he would be aided by the recognition of inequity in his case.

And distributing, as the DA has apparently done, is also highly illegal.

Curiously, had Wilson had full intercourse w/ the 15 year old the most he could have received in prison time was 12 months, but the oral sex made it "aggravated" which merited the longer term.

Also a curiousity, federal law defines child porn as a video of sex between individuals under age 18 - - so even though sex between two 17-year olds would not constitute a crime under GA law, filming it results in creating of kiddie porn under federal law.

I say again, I'm amazed that they didn't manage to get a conviction.

Thanks, I keep forgetting that, which makes even the fellation from the 15 year old hard to believe...especially a 10 year conviction.

. . . a video tape to potential supporters that depicts sex and where one of the individuals is only 17 years of age.

Actually, they were both underage. Wilson was 17 at the time of the "offense," the "victim" was 15.

For all that the DA, is out of line, one does wonder, how is that if they have videotape of the crime taking place, they don't have the conviction?

Not sure what you are suggesting. One conclusion might be that there was no crime.

Note to the Georgia politicals who received this tape, the FBI did the Tennessee Waltz, best you be careful you don't end up doing the Georgia Crawl.

Criminal charges also seem appropriate if the "victim" is indeed 17.

Any one of these things are grounds for sanction, including disbarment, by the bar association. Let's hope Georgia has something of a sense of fairness and can follow North Carolina's lead.