Kentucky Still Criminalizing Consenting Adults

People tend to bring up Discredited Argument #18 when attempting to justify bigotry and discrimination against intrafamilial sex, including consanguinamory, but cases like this are an example of why that's a bogus argument.


Beth Smith reported at thegleaner.com that two adults are facing "incest" charges for the victimless crime of having sex with each other, even though they are not blood relatives. This is happening in Kentucky.

A Henderson woman and her stepson are facing incest charges after an investigation which started in June on an unrelated incident.

Henderson police said Ashley Johnson, 29, contacted the police last month to report that her stepson, Isaiah Johnson, 20, 800 block of Kingsway Court, had punched her vehicle's windshield causing it to shatter. The next day, Johnson called the police again stating the windshield was being fixed and she didn't want to press charges, a news release said.

See, if there is a problem at all, it is that there appears to be a contentious situation. Shattering her windshield can easily escalate to shattering her jaw, if he actually did that.

While speaking with authorities, Ashley Johnson said she was Isaiah's stepmother and that she and her stepson were involved in a sexual relationship, a news release said.

There was absolutely no reason to tell the police that. People are often surprised that there are still laws in many places against consenting adults, especially steprelations, having sex, but there are. Protect yourselves!!!

City police said when questioned, Isaiah Johnson confirmed he was having sexual intercourse with his stepmother.

He shouldn't have said anything like that, either.

On Tuesday, Isaiah Johnson was arrested on warrants for incest, third-degree criminal mischief, harassment and two bench warrants for failure to appear in other cases.

Sounds like he has other issues. The "incest" charge is just piling on.

Henderson police said there is an active warrant on Ashley Johnson also for the charge of incest. This investigation is still open.

That's a waste of public resources and yet another example of why we need relationship rights, including full marriage equality, for all consenting adults. Here's how you can help.

Prosecute people for crimes that have actual victims. Stop wasting time prosecuting adults for being affectionate with each other and loving each other how they mutually agree. There are people everywhere, in every demographic, having sex with their potential, current, or former stepsibling or adult stepchild or stepparent. It is common enough that everyone knows people in these situations, whether they know it or not. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. It shouldn't be a matter for police or courts if adults are having sex. If people commit assault or vandalism or destruction of someone else's property, that's a real crime.

Building a Family, But Denied the Right to Marry

If my recollection is correct, this is the 41st ongoing relationship I've covered through exclusive interviews in which the lovers are denied the freedom to be open about their love and are, by law, denied the freedom to marry and have that marriage treated equally under the law.


The woman in interview below, "Devi," is a adult, someone you might live next to see every day, in a consensual relationship. They are an attractive couple that look very happy together. Yet they face discrimination and prejudice for their love, and must hide the truth. They aren't hurting anyone; why should they have to hide and be denied their rights?


Read the interview below and see for yourself what this woman has to say. You may think their relationship is interesting, or it might make you uncomfortable, but either way, should they be denied equal access to marriage or any other rights?



*****

FULL MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Describe yourself.

Devi: I live in Kentucky. I have an Associate’s degree as a paralegal and am currently working on a Bachelor’s degree in psychology with a concentration in forensic psychology. I’m 5’4”, dark hair, blue-green eyes, petite. I have a half-sister from my mom, and two half-sisters and a half-brother from my dad. They are all older than me. I am 24.


FME: You currently live with...?

I currently live with my half-brother/husband, as I have for the last five years and our son. He knows we are Mommy and Daddy. He will be four in June. My oldest son lives with us through the week and goes to his dad’s on the weekends. In 2013, the court granted us joint custody of three of my husband's grandchildren and, later, a baby. They all know that we are in a relationship and have never asked any questions. They are happy, doing well in school, and are overall well-adjusted.


FME: To be clear, you are in a sexual and romantic relationship with your genetic half brother, correct?

Yes. Our relationship has been both romantic and sexual since April 2010. He is older than me by 28 years. Our dad got started early and quit late. [laughs]

Kentucky Still Prosecuting Consenting Adults

This absurd waste of resources and violation of civil rights was reported by Kenneth Hart at dailyindependent.com...

In an unrelated case, the grand jury indicted a South Shore man and his adult stepdaughter for allegedly engaging in an unlawful sexual relationship.

As we've seen before, the prejudice against consanguinamory has been extended to prosecute lovers who aren't genetic relatives.

Roger D. Howard, 44, and Clara P. Walters, 21, both of Little White Oak Road, both were charged with incest, a Class C felony that carries a five- to 10-year prison sentence.

And who is the victim???

The indictments, which resulted from a KSP investigation, allege Howard and Walters engaged in “sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse” between April 1 and July 1 of 2012. Under Kentucky law, sex between a stepparent and stepchild is considered incest. The charge A, B or C felon, depending on the age of the victim, whether force was involved and whether the victim suffered serious injury. Howard and Walters were charged with the least-serious variety because both are consenting adults.

It shouldn't be a crime in the first place. What a waste of resources.

Was He Prosecuted for Assault or Consensual Encounters?

Is Kentucky prosecuting consenting adults for having sex with each other? There's no way to know from what is reported in this article at cynthianademocrat.com. Beck Barnes has the blurb.

The Harrison County man who was indicted in August on three counts of incest has changed his plea.

Handsome Lee Tolliver, 45, will be sentenced Jan. 7 in Harrison Circuit Court following a pre-sentencing investigation and evaluation.

Tolliver entered a guilty plea to each of three charges of incest on Tuesday in Harrison Circuit Court.

The August indictment stated that Tolliver had sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse with a person whom he knew to be his descendant.

Why not a "sexual assault" or "rape" charge? Without such a charge, this sounds like it could have been consensual. A 45-year-old man could easily have a "descendent" who is well into adulthood and fully consented. There isn't even any information on whether he was involved in the person's life while they were growing up. Consensual sex should not be a crime. Rape should be called what it is... rape. And it should be prosecuted as such.

Kentucky Fried Law

A ruling by the Court of Appeals of Kentucky denies justice to one Larry Raines.

Larry Raines appeals from a judgment of the Jessamine Circuit Court on his conditional guilty plea to seven counts of incest.

Seven counts of incest? What, did he rape his 14-year-old daughter? He was sentenced to five years in prison, which would be too short of a term for such crimes.

But hold on.

Raines reserved his right to appeal based on whether the incest statute, as enacted in 2006, was applicable to the sexual contact between him and his stepdaughter since she was an adult at the time of the sexual incidents.

He had consensual sex with a grown woman who is not his biological relative, and was sentenced to five years in prison for it. For consensual sex. Not even incestuous consensual sex.


As we saw out of another state recently, general sex-negative attitudes and bigotry against consanguinamory specifically not only means absurd laws against consenting adults enjoying a consanguinamorous relationship, but also against people who aren’t even blood related having sex with each other.

Raines argues that the incest statute, which was in effect in 2006 when the incest occurred, did not criminalize consensual sexual relations between adult persons whose familial relationship was stepfather and stepdaughter, that is, in cases where the parties were adults and not blood-related. The Commonwealth counters that the statute did criminalize sexual intercourse between a stepfather and a stepdaughter notwithstanding that the stepdaughter was an adult.

Just to be clear…

At that time, KRS 530.020 stated:

(1) A person is guilty of incest when he has sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse, as defined in KRS 510.010, with a person whom he or she knows to be an ancestor, descendant, brother, or sister. The relationships referred to herein include blood relationships of either the whole or half blood without regard to legitimacy, relationship of parent and child by adoption, and relationship of stepparent and stepchild.

(2)(a) Incest is a Class C felony

This is ridiculous. I would applaud attaching enhancements to sentences for rape, sexual assault, and molestation committed by a guardian or under the color of authority. But anti-incest laws that criminalize consensual sex between adults, even unrelated adults, are a waste of law enforcement. An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults, without prosecution, without bullying, and without discrimination.

Clarification Would Be Nice

Here’s another example of a news report that is too brief and lacking in detail, given the important subject matter. It is just three sentences long. The title is “Incest Defendant Gets 30 Years” and it comes to us from kentuckynewera.com…

A Hopkinsville man will spend at least 20 years in a state prison for having sex with a girl in his family, Christian Circuit Judge Andrew Self ruled this week.

Now, “incest” in a news report could refer to rape, or it could refer to consanguinamory. Those are two very, very different things. It is like saying a man will go to prison for “having intercourse” with a woman.

I don’t refer to rape as “sex.” Sex is a beautiful thing involving consenting participants. Rape is an ugly violation of one or more people. Also, “a girl in his family” may or may not refer to a minor. This could be his sister, his niece, his daughter, his stepdaughter. The article doesn’t say what the actual charge was. The headline calls him an “incest defendant,” but with a prison sentence like that I’m guessing it was a rape of a minor girl, in which case I hope he serves his full sentence, But, if this was a matter of consensual sex with a female of the age of the consent, it shouldn’t have been a criminal matter and this was an unjust prosecution. Either way, it is important news and there should be more information provided. They can do so without revealing the identity of the victim.

The two remaining sentences shed no light on the situation. There’s not even an indication that the victim referred to in the article made a complaint, or if this was a matter of consensual sex that someone else reported.

Old Consensual Sex Case Prosecuted Recently

I found another story from March of last year that seems strange. An elderly Pulaski County (Kentucky) man was charged with a crime for having sex with his daughter two decades ago, when she was an adult.

Police have said the case began in 2005 when officials investigated a neglect complaint about the child, who was born in 1991.

Police said DNA confirmed the man was the child's father and grandfather.

The Associated Press doesn't name alleged victims of sex crimes and isn't naming the man in this case to protect the identity of the daughter, who is now in her 40s.

Did he have custody of the child? If so, charge him with neglect, if the complaint was indeed valid (the paper doesn't indicate the child was, in fact, neglected.) The child would have had to be around 18 years old at the time the man was indicted. If he didn’t have custody, then charge the mother with neglect. Why charge someone with what was apparently consensual sex, especially when it happened two decades ago? The woman was in her 20s at the time. And notice, she chose to have and keep the child instead of choosing abortion, adoption, or abandonment. There is no indication given that the child had any birth defects or that the woman was raped. What a waste of court resources. Either that, or incomplete reporting.