Ew.

http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/in...120.xml&coll=4

Quote:

Judge says local suspect will stand trial for sodomy
Saturday, February 24, 2007
By CRYSTAL HARMON
TIMES WRITER

Bay County Circuit Judge Joseph K. Sheeran ruled Friday that even though Michigan law does not explicitly define sex with a dead dog as a crime, charges against a Saginaw man will stand.

Sheeran set a trial date of May 8 for the trial, when Ronald E. Kuch, 45, of Saginaw will face charges of sodomy, indecent exposure and resisting and obstructing an Animal Control officer. If convicted of either of the first two charges, Kuch will then have a hearing on May 30, at which Sheeran will determine whether Kuch is a ''sexually delinquent person.'' If so, the judge could sentence Kuch to prison for any amount of time, from one day to a year, on top of the sentence from the initial charges, which carry up to 15 years in prison.

Kuch's defense attorney, Kathryn Fehrman, argued that Michigan's statute on sodomy and bestiality is vague and does not outlaw sex with a dead dog. Kuch is accused of sexual contact with the carcass of his girlfriend's dog on Oct. 20, about a week after the animal had been hit by a car. The alleged crime occurred near the Forest Day Care Center, 2169 W. Midland Road, on a school day. The teacher was leading an Animal Control officer to the dead dog so he could dispose of it when the pair discovered Kuch, who allegedly scuffled with the officer before fleeing into the woods.

Fehrman asked Sheeran to overrule District Judge Craig D. Alston, who found probable cause that a crime had been committed and that Kuch was the perpetrator.

But Sheeran said Fehrman's interpretation of the sodomy law, which outlaws ''crimes against nature'' and bestiality as well, was off base. He said she ''attempts to use textualization to read the meaning out of the statute and argue that morality has no place in the law.''

Fehrman had said in previous written and oral arguments that a dead dog is not an animal and therefore cannot be violated against its will.

Sheeran said the purpose of the sodomy law is not to protect a specific victim, necessarily, but ''to prevent people from debasing and dehumanizing themselves.'' Such laws also protect society, Sheeran said, and ''prevents people from acting like animals themselves.''

Sheeran also upheld the indecent exposure charge. He said it was irrelevant whether the patch of woods where the alleged crime committed was public or private property.

''There was a substantial risk that someone might be offended.''

''If he didn't want to be observed, why did he commit it during the day near a daycare center?'' Sheeran said, saying that Kuch didn't commit the act ''accidentally or inadvertently.''

Sheeran also authorized a private psychiatric examination of Kuch to supplement the one already conducted at the Center for Forensic Psychiatry in Ypsilanti.

Ew.

EWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEWEW !

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Wow. This man should be put to death. I also pity his lawyer. How could someone try to defend this guy?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Furry necrophilia? My god. Just when I thought all the horizons had been unfortunately unveiled...

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

I think this is the news thread to end all news threads.

But seriously, the fact that the defendant is trying to form some credibility out of necrophilia, especially with animals, is kind of ridiculous. Even if it is against it's will, doing it period, especially in front of a daycare is asking for it. It's an interesting show to see someone try to defend that kind of act, though. *pukes*

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Dubble

Sheeran said the purpose of the sodomy law is not to protect a specific victim, necessarily, but ''to prevent people from debasing and dehumanizing themselves.'' Such laws also protect society, Sheeran said, and ''prevents people from acting like animals themselves.''

Living animals don't have sex with dead animals. Necrophilia is a very human thing--we're the only species on this planet screwed up enough to participate in it. It's rather unfair to call such behavior animal-like since it's a product of our huge, highly-evolved brains.

Anyway, this guy needs help in one form or another. I'm not entirely sure that prison is the way to go for him, though. It seems clear to me that his brain is defective. He needs to either be medicated to compensate for whatever it is that is wrong with his brain or just locked away in a padded room forever. And I say forever there because there's no reason to believe that he won't move up from Fido to a cemetery. Fido could've been a test run, and that was bad enough.

On the legal side of things, I can't really say I feel bad for his attorney. She may not have had a choice in whether or not to take his case, but in that line of work, you don't always get to be pick and choose. She had to know that this sort of thing is going to crop up from time to time even before she got into law school. Now, if she had advised him to go ahead and plead insanity instead of quibbling over what constitutes sodomy, I might feel differently for her. But admitting that he did it and trying to have the case dismissed over a blurry definition of sodomy is a pretty screwed up position to take. It's funny that in a system that is supposed to be based on justice, there is an inverse relationship between success and morality.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by tenseiken

Living animals don't have sex with dead animals. Necrophilia is a very human thing--we're the only species on this planet screwed up enough to participate in it. It's rather unfair to call such behavior animal-like since it's a product of our huge, highly-evolved brains.

What's your source for that? Because there's this thing here that says different:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_...ty#Necrophilia

Given the variety of sex toys on the market, I can't say I'm even put off by it. I mean people are into kinky shit. Granted week-dead dog is pretty far out there, but the guy's only fuck up was doing it in public. I mean, if you're going to moralize about the act itself, and not the chosen venue, who was harmed by it? I mean, his girlfriend might have a few choice words on the subject, but that's just funny and the discussion becomes one about property rights etc. If it was his own dog carcass in the privacy of his own meat locker, then the only objection is one of taste. =o

Although I do have to say it was pretty funny the one poster who was like "zomg DEATH PENALTY." That's pretty harsh if all he was doing was tenderizing road kill.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Avalokiteshvara

What's your source for that? Because there's this thing here that says different:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_...ty#Necrophilia

Interesting. I'll admit I've never read about that before. Wikipedia's source links are broken, but I might look around and see if I can find something about it. The point I was attempting to make before is that most animals act purely on instinct. Those instincts tend to be beneficial to the preservation of the species, because if they didn't, they'd probably go extinct. Speaking from that perspective, there is no benefit in copulating with anything that is dead, since obviously a dead animal cannot become impregnated.

Humans, on the other hand, often act in direct opposition to their instincts. I think it's a pretty safe bet that those who do participate in this particular behavior are not doing so based on instinct. Thus my original point about our brains.

FELIPE NO

If nothing else, that's incredibly gross. And the guy certainly needs help. And I doubt his girlfriend is too keen on him right now. And if he ends up going to jail, he'd better hope and pray none of his jailmates discovers what he's in for.

That's a lot of ands. I think I'll leave it at that, right after I try to puke my brains out in an attempt to rid myself of the mental image of a man sodomizing a decomposing dog.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Regarding instincts and natural behavior and everything, I think it's tough to have that discussion. I mean, instincts are just mechanistic biological functions which drive animals to do things under certain conditions. So is the instinct to have sex with female of the same species, or is it just to blow loads at particular points in time? I'm inclined to think it's the latter. From the male perspective at least. Females may be geared to make that more likely to happen in a productive place/time/manner, but now we're talking about probabilities.

And if you're going to define natural behavior to be the behavior exhibited by a certain percentage of the population under certain circumstances, then you wind up with more broken people than you might want. The conditions one might apply pretty much become arbitrary. For instance, sex with a woman, or pro-creative sex with a woman? Really what it boils down to is we start to use different languages, and get no where fast.

Personally, I'd find it much more amusing to point out that since the animal's dead, the guy wasn't restricted only to the orifices on the standard model. With a carcass, you can customize! <3

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Gechmir

Furry necrophilia?

Fursuit snuff is just around the corner.

I would be sorta proud to do something so fucking disgusting that they would have to invent a law just to punish me for it.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

This is why you should always pick 'truth' when playing truth or dare.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Why the fuck do they still have sodomy laws out there? As far as this bestiality-necrophilia thing, whatever floats his boat. The dog is dead, and not by his hands, yet had a fling with it. It's dead, so it's not being harmed. The only person harmed here is the person's reputation for being caught, and maybe contracting any diseases that decomposers leave behind or something.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

It doesn't matter if it's crime or not, it's just friggin' wrong and disgusting. It just shows how bad his relationship was with his girlfriend if he prefers to pound her dead dog instead.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Infernal Monkey

This is why you should always pick 'truth' when playing truth or dare.

osnap, that completely redefines the game. Yeah, going truth from here on out. Truth might hurt, but Dare potentially ends in decomposing stuff on penii. =x

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

A strangely captivating thread title, thar.

That man is most definitely disturbed. This is certainly a gross case. How a lawyer can defend someone like this is beyond me. What surprises me is that the man had a girlfriend before/during this whole ordeal; I would have thought a necrophiliac would...well, to put it lightly, have corpses as friends. To put it bluntly? I would have thought a necrophiliac wouldn't like having sex with living people let alone have any social life whatsoever.

This thread brings to mind the morbid poll from a while back: which is worse, Necrophilia or Bestiality? This is the worst of both worlds (literally! Oh bad taste...).

A disheartening article that just revitalizes the known fact that there are some sick, sick people in the world.

...Thankfully we don't see any cases such as this in Phoenix Wright...lol

Edit:

Originally Posted by Infernal Monkey

This is why you should always pick 'truth' when playing truth or dare.

Oh so true. I do believe that that game is the bane of my childhood memories. o.0

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Fiddlegoof

It doesn't matter if it's crime or not, it's just friggin' wrong and disgusting.

o rly

I hope you're not suggesting that people should be punished for things that you happen to find "icky."

Indecent exposure, sure, charge the guy, and yeah, maybe he needs to see a psychiatrist. But suggesting that there even exists such a thing as a victimless "crime against nature" seems awfully arbitrary in the context of our de-naturalized technological society.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

That's. Just. Gross.

What would possess someone to even want to have sex with something that is dead? Yeah, people are into kinky things, beastiality on of them, but still, the damn dog was dead!

The charges do seem pretty random, in terms of legality, I don't really think they have much of a case. I think this is probably more sensationalism than anything else.

Quote:

Why the fuck do they still have sodomy laws out there? As far as this bestiality-necrophilia thing, whatever floats his boat. The dog is dead, and not by his hands, yet had a fling with it. It's dead, so it's not being harmed.

Would you want someone to fuck you when you're dead? And besides, look what happened to the guy that tried to make a beastiality porn video by fucking a horse...he died whilst having sex with the horse. Nice, right? Clearly, we should all just go out and have sex with animals right now. The deader, the better.

Quote:

On the legal side of things, I can't really say I feel bad for his attorney. She may not have had a choice in whether or not to take his case, but in that line of work, you don't always get to be pick and choose. She had to know that this sort of thing is going to crop up from time to time even before she got into law school. Now, if she had advised him to go ahead and plead insanity instead of quibbling over what constitutes sodomy, I might feel differently for her. But admitting that he did it and trying to have the case dismissed over a blurry definition of sodomy is a pretty screwed up position to take. It's funny that in a system that is supposed to be based on justice, there is an inverse relationship between success and morality.

She may not have had a choice. I'm willing to bet that man didn't want to do a plea bargain that involved him pleading sanity. He probably doesn't want that sort of reputation. Not that it matters, considering he fucked a dog.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by The_Melomane

Would you want someone to fuck you when you're dead? And besides, look what happened to the guy that tried to make a beastiality porn video by fucking a horse...he died whilst having sex with the horse. Nice, right? Clearly, we should all just go out and have sex with animals right now. The deader, the better.

How would I know someone is violating my corpse to begin with? I'm dead. I'm no longer of this Earth. Passed on. Deceased. How many times do I have to put it? Besides, I hopefully won't have a corpse to speak of since I'd like to be cremated.

You do know that sodomy laws were originally to stop homosexual acts, right? Though it's so ambigous that the courts sometimes apply it any sexual act they find 'disgusting'.

As for the man dying while getting fucked by a horse, sucks for him. He realized what he was doing and suffered the consequences. As long as the animals were put in no harm whatsoever, I'm OK with them doing that.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Uhm.. that's really quite disgusting. However, I'm not entirely sure why they're trying to charge the guy for a crime. Indecent exposure, yeah, but sodomy?

I dunno.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Infernal Monkey

This is why you should always pick 'truth' when playing truth or dare.

Unfortunately, this guy now has the answer for "Ever do it with a dead animal?"

But, did the guy drag the dog there, or what? They said it was his girlfriend's dog, and he was behind the Day Care Center, and it was a week old....So, How did the dog get there?

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I think rather than jail, he needs some serious help. I feel sorry for him though, for a few reasons. One being Americas phobia for anyone different.
I mean, if it were a dead human he was having sex with, than I can understand how that might break laws about respecting the dead or something ( I actually don't know the laws about that in America, but I'm assuming there is some kind of law)
a dog though...well..it's wrong, but is it punishable by American law? I don't think so..but maybe it is

I was speaking idiomatically.

Ewwwww. That is really gross and makes me feel physically sick. I feel for the dog, even though its dead it's still not fair on the poor thing.
He needs help, badly and the sooner he can get it the better for him. He should definately be charge for indecent exposure, especially if it was behind a day care centre. and asult if he scuffled with the animal control person.

If he had a girlfriend why did he need to do that with her dog thats been dead for a week? Was she that bad he needed to resort to that?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

That is sick and disturbing.. I mean, I heard of "Dead Girls don't say no..." but "Dead Dog don't say no???"

What kind of person defiles Man's best friend?? I think before he gets sentenced he should also get his head checked b/c there has to be a something loose up there..

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by mindOverMatter

I think rather than jail, he needs some serious help. I feel sorry for him though, for a few reasons. One being Americas phobia for anyone different.
I mean, if it were a dead human he was having sex with, than I can understand how that might break laws about respecting the dead or something ( I actually don't know the laws about that in America, but I'm assuming there is some kind of law)
a dog though...well..it's wrong, but is it punishable by American law? I don't think so..but maybe it is

The law you're thinking of is "Abuse of a Corpse."

I'm sorry, we have all sorts of laws protecting animal rights--this should be covered, too.

Damn lawyer....

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I watched some documentary show on Discovery about birds. And at the height of mating season this one bird was so desperate it started to mate with a dead bird of another species. They showed it on camera, it was quite disturbing...

Anyways...

Yeah, the guy needs help. Jail won't really do anything to stop sodomy...

But sadly, I think I'm too desensitized to really be disgusted or disturbed by this news...

Jam it back in, in the dark.