Thursday, September 2, 2010

The Unjust Prosecution of Katheryn Thornton

Officials in King County, Seattle should be ashamed of themselves for prosecuting Katheryn M. Thornton for having consensual sex for eighteen months with a man who was about 27 years of age when it started. Reading through the various news reports, it appears that the man, whose name is not given due to his “victim” status, could be using unjust laws against adult, consensual, consanguineous sex for nefarious reasons.

From the Seattle Times

A 54-year-old Eastside woman has been charged with first-degree incest for allegedly conducting a two-year sexual relationship with an adult son she had given up for adoption when he was an infant.

Sounds like a possible case of GSA.

Katheryn M. Thornton invited her son, now 33, to live with her near Kirkland in March 2004 after he tracked her down through an adoption agency, according to charging papers filed in King County Superior Court earlier this month.

He tracked her down. Then she invited him into her home. He could have said “no” right then and there, for starters. I wonder if he is planning to sue her and the adoption agency?

In May, the man reported the alleged incest to a King County sheriff's detective.

Why would he do this? Blackmail? Revenge? I have my suspicions.

He told the detective that the day after he moved in, Thornton "came into his room and lay next to him. He said [on] day three, she invited him into her room. He said on day four, they had sex," charging papers say.

He would have been about 27 at the time. There is no indication in the news coverage that he was of congenital or drug-induced mental deficiency. No force indicated. This was consensual. Why is this a crime?

The man said the sexual relationship lasted until March 2006, according to the charges.

Why did it last so long? Surely he is stronger than her, and able to be independent. He was probably enjoying himself.

The son, who is not being named because he is considered a victim of sexual assault, was granted a sexual-assault protection order against Thornton on Tuesday, barring her from coming within 500 feet of him, court records show.

This is convenient for him. We’ll see why later.

First-degree incest is a Class B felony. If convicted, Thornton would face a 12- to 14-month prison sentence and be required to register as a sex offender.

This is outrageous. He is just as “guilty” as she is. Can you imagine going to prison for this? Registering as a sex offender? I want to know if a child molester or rapist moves in to my neighborhood. I have no reason to fear a woman who has consensual sex with another adult.

The Associated Press picked up the story, but at least they don’t give her name in the report I saw, as they shouldn’t unless they want to come to her defense. His name should be published alongside hers, or neither name should be published. I include her name because I do want her to know there are people who are against this persecution of her.

From Seattle Weekly

And on the fourth night, mother and son had sex for the first time, beginning what would eventually become an incredibly creepy 18-month relationship.

Why is that creepy? This blogger’s bigotry is showing.

Thornton told prosecutors that she was excited to have her son living with her and that the two had an "awareness." Like many love birds, the relationship started off hot and heavy, with Thornton reporting that initially they had sex all the time, including in a locked bathroom so her other children wouldn't catch them, but eventually the amorous affections tapered off to about once every two weeks.

Sounds like many other relationships with a passionate start and ups and downs. I believe her account because he didn’t leave. It is understandable when dependents don’t leave. He was no dependent or hostage.

Given that he was an adult at the time, it wouldn't seem that the man should be considered a victim. But the King County prosecutor's office has charged Thornton with first-degree incest, a felony. And Deputy Chief of Staff Ian Goodhew says the office has its reasons.

"We're pretty conservative when we make a charging decision regarding incest," says Goodhew. "But there were a number of concerning factors weighed before filing this charge."

Those factors: the two underage kids living with Thornton.

Then charge them both with child endangerment, though I fail to see what the legal problem is given that married people, unmarried cohabitating people, and virtual strangers have sex all of the time even though there are children in the same home.

And the way she confessed to sleeping with her son with no apparent sense that it might be against the law or, ya know, morally repugnant.

It shouldn’t be against the law. And how is it morally repugnant? Merely saying it is doesn’t make it so.

Now here is where we start to get a better idea of what is really going on here…

The wheels were put in motion in May, when Thornton's son plead guilty to a (surprise, surprise) charge of child molestation.

So a child molester complains that a woman has been having sex with him for eighteen months? Hey, I agree that people should shun child molesters (which would include not having sex with them) but there’s nothing illegal about adults having sex with child molesters. It happens all of the time, unfortunately.

But it is awfully convenient that a child molester’s name is being kept out of the media now because he is a “victim.” Is he getting some sort of deal in his case for this, too?

From this report, we get…

The son said his mother's younger children knew he slept in Thornton's bedroom, but they did not know about the sex, according to the documents.

Maybe they didn’t, maybe they did. I don't think his word is worth much. Children sometimes think of their parents only have sex enough times to make them. Other children figure things out for themselves. And still others just don’t think about it at all, if they are prepubescent.

If this man is a child molester, she shouldn’t have exposed her children to him. But she isn’t being charged for that. She is being charged with having consensual sex with another adult, behind closed doors. We need these laws wiped off the books. Prosecute people for child endangerment, neglect, abuse, molestation, assault, rape, you name it. But let’s not allow consensual sex between adults to be prosecuted or illegal.

I call on any judge or jury that gets a say in this case to refuse to convict someone of a crime for having consensual sex in private.
— — —

1 comment:

  1. I agree that the whole mess is ridiculous. It sounds to me like this molester got busted and like a lot of criminals started blabbing about how he knew about other criminals doing things. But unlike most situations, the "crime" he revealed was consensual sex between two adults and the person he ratted out was his own mother.

    They should lock him up for being a child molester AND for being a backstabber.


To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE. If your comment includes graphic descriptions of activity involving minors, it's not going to get published.