A man convicted of incest for a consensual sexual relationship with his biological aunt couldn’t persuade the Indiana Court of Appeals that he was entitled to post-conviction relief.Emphasis ours. This shouldn't even be a criminal matter. And yet, it was. So it makes sense that someone who has been convicted of such a victimless "crime" would look for any way to overturn that conviction.
The man claimed ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to argue in his defense that the man’s aunt was older than 31.
A sentence of six years in prison for consensual sex. What a travesty! Don't let this happen to you.
Kyle Pavan of Elwood was 23 when he was charged in 2007 with the Class C felony, to which he later pleaded guilty and was sentenced to six years in prison, with two years executed on work release and the balance suspended to probation. His probation was revoked in 2014, at which time he filed a PCR petition. His aunt, who was 34 at the time, also was charged and convicted.
In his PCR petition, Pavan relied on I.C. 35-41-4-2(e) that bars prosecution for incest, child molesting, vicarious sexual gratification, child solicitation or child seduction after the alleged victim reaches age 31. The state said the statute was inapplicable and that the prosecution was timely filed within the general five-year statute of limitations for Class C felonies.
“Pavan’s appellate argument is based on a flawed interpretation” of the statute, Judge Robert Altice wrote for the panel, because he argued his aunt was the victim.Right. There was no victim, and this shouldn't have been a criminal matter in the first place!
The case is Kyle Pavan v. State of Indiana, 48A02-1512-PC-2125.Can you imagine sitting up on a bench in robes and sending consenting adults to prison for having sex? Sure, it is better than throwing them off of high buildings, but it is still unjust and a violation of basic human rights.
This man and his aunt were not hurting anyone by being together, and yet both were prosecuted. There's no good reason do deny them there rights.
This needs to be dealt with ASAP. We need to remove any laws that discriminate against consenting adults for their relationships. An adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage (and any of those without the others) with any and all consenting adults, without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination.
![Non-Monogamy Diagram [I:FV]](http://www.obsidianfields.com/lj/nonmonogamy2.5.1.gif){kind=link}
The more Government you have, the more outrageous restraints and intrusions like this you get in EVERY SPHERE of human endeavor, not just sex. Government is the violent instrument of the mob.
ReplyDeleteWhenever I read about cases such as this one where two consenting adults are being persecuted by the state, I always wonder how it is that they were caught in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAll too often these cases seem to come to the attention of state agents because the couple were having sex in public, or the police were called to the scene to deal with another issue.
Consensual relationships between adults should never be persecuted by the state, but they are and will continue to be. Therefore it is of supreme importance that closely related lovers keep their relationship an absolute secret and make sure that they are not doing anything ELSE that would attract the attention of law enforcement.
I mostly agree, although deciminalization will come.
DeleteMany people do unwittingly incriminate themselves, often unaware they are breaking the law. Sometimes, they've done nothing risky at all, but a family member or neighbor, out of spite or envy, rats them out. I wrote more about this here: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-consanguineous-lovers-can-avoid.html