It is currently 06/16/24 11:33 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




  Page 1 of 1   [ 23 posts ]
Author Message
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 7:45 am • # 1 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
VERY weird case based on a manipulated law ~ I thought the definition of "incest" was sex with a blood relative, not sex with a relative-by-law-only ~ and I don't understand how they got charged with 7 counts ~ :g ~ emphasis/bolding below is mine ~ Sooz

West Virginia man, 28, and 21-year-old stepdaughter charged with incest
By Travis Gettys
Monday, September 30, 2013 9:14 EDT

A 28-year-old West Virginia man and his 21-year-old stepdaughter have been charged with incest, although they aren’t blood relatives and both are above the age of legal consent.

The Nicholas County sheriff said Kelcey Nicholas had married the mother of Lataura Jarrett five years ago, and the younger woman referred to him as her father.

County authorities told The Charleston Gazette that state law defines a daughter as the natural offspring of a person’s husband or wife, and Nicholas is still married to Jarrett’s mother.

Authorities said they discovered the pair engaged in intercourse after going to Nicholas’ home Sept. 19 to arrest him for violating the terms of his home confinement in an unrelated case.

A sheriff’s deputy said he researched state law and consulted the county prosecutor before charging Nicholas and Jarrett under the incest statute.

Jarrett has not lived with Nicholas or her mother as an adult, authorities said, and she has been married.

Nicholas and Jarrett were each charged with seven counts of incest, a felony that carries a possible 5- to 15-year prison term.

Nicholas remains jailed on $70,000 bond, while Jarrett was released on bond.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/30/west-virginia-man-28-and-21-year-old-stepdaughter-charged-with-incest/


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 7:58 am • # 2 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/20/09
Posts: 8188
That IS really twisted. I don't get the seven counts, either.

They're both above the age of consent.


Top
  
PostPosted: 09/30/13 8:09 am • # 3 

What Chaos said.

Incest shouldn't be illegal if it's between consenting adults.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 10:05 am • # 4 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/05/10
Posts: 14091
Typical red-neck, religious, knee-jerk reactions. Let's face it. The far religious right folks do not like other people having sex. It's a "sin" if it's not within the "sanctity" of <their definition of> marriage....all the while, they are cheating, divorcing and otherwise engaging in all sorts of "sinful" behavior. :ey


Top
  
PostPosted: 09/30/13 10:18 am • # 5 
I think incest should be illegal even between consenting adults if they are blood relation.

I don't think this is incest at all.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 10:38 am • # 6 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/05/10
Posts: 14091
I think sex between consenting adults is just that........and no one else's business, whether they are blood related or not. After all, it's only in modern times that it made illegal. Many cultures still marry relatives, and in the distant past when tribes or clans wanted to maintain their bloodline, they married relatives. Royalty comes to mind.

Adults are adults. Unless they are harming someone else, the law needs to stay out of their bedrooms.


Top
  
PostPosted: 09/30/13 3:03 pm • # 7 
There is recessive allele discussion and birth defects and all that. Why the royals stopped inbreeding.

Mostly it's the psychological ramifications of crossing boundaries that I am not thrilled about.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 3:48 pm • # 8 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/05/10
Posts: 14091
That's fine Kathy. I know the physical ramifications of inbreeding, but sex doesn't necessarily result in pregnancy or birth.

I'm not too thrilled with the psychological effects of a lot of things, but that doesn't mean I think they should be illegal. We have enough damn laws. What consenting adults do is their business and we can't protect all adults from the effects of every bad decision they make. That is my point.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 6:38 pm • # 9 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/23/09
Posts: 3185
Location: ontario canada
i cant believe the police bothered. it almost sounds like a setup for leverage for some other charges or information or something.

I agree though kat. There are some boundries that aren't psychologically healthy to cross, and this was probably one of them. maybe the relationship started when the stepdaughter was a minor, but they can't charge it for some reason.

i dunno though. I don't like that kind of manipulation of the law. i think someone overstepped, here.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 6:39 pm • # 10 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 04/05/09
Posts: 8047
Location: Tampa, Florida
Of course it's not incest. Even West Virginia state law defines a daughter as the natural offspring of a person’s husband or wife.
Me thinks there are some serious comprehension issues in West Virginia's court system.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 09/30/13 10:35 pm • # 11 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
kathyk1024 wrote:
There is recessive allele discussion and birth defects and all that. Why the royals stopped inbreeding.

Mostly it's the psychological ramifications of crossing boundaries that I am not thrilled about.


most sex does not result in offspring. that is not even the objective of most sex.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 9:02 am • # 12 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 07/03/10
Posts: 1851
roseanne wrote:
Typical red-neck, religious, knee-jerk reactions. Let's face it. The far religious right folks do not like other people having sex. It's a "sin" if it's not within the "sanctity" of <their definition of> marriage....all the while, they are cheating, divorcing and otherwise engaging in all sorts of "sinful" behavior. :ey


But, but, but they are forgiven because Jesus! The rest of us are going to hell.


Top
  
PostPosted: 10/01/13 9:09 am • # 13 
macroscopic wrote:
kathyk1024 wrote:
There is recessive allele discussion and birth defects and all that. Why the royals stopped inbreeding.

Mostly it's the psychological ramifications of crossing boundaries that I am not thrilled about.


most sex does not result in offspring. that is not even the objective of most sex.


So what? This is not an issue I care much about. If you and Roseanne want to lobby your states and providences to overturn existing laws to allow incest, that's fine with me. It's psychological poison, but c'est la vie.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 9:12 am • # 14 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
macroscopic wrote:
kathyk1024 wrote:
There is recessive allele discussion and birth defects and all that. Why the royals stopped inbreeding.

Mostly it's the psychological ramifications of crossing boundaries that I am not thrilled about.

most sex does not result in offspring. that is not even the objective of most sex.

Au contraire, mac ~ in the hearts and minds of fundamentalists and "true believers", children are the only objective of sex ~

Sooz


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 9:22 am • # 15 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
Kathy, I'm not reading anyone lobbying FOR incest ~ and I understand and mostly agree with your comments about "crossing boundaries" and "psychological poison" ~ but people gamble with those in myriad ways every day, laws or no laws ~ in the op case, it seems to me the law itself is being manipulated, not the people involved ~

Sooz


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 9:23 am • # 16 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
sooz06 wrote:
macroscopic wrote:
kathyk1024 wrote:
There is recessive allele discussion and birth defects and all that. Why the royals stopped inbreeding.

Mostly it's the psychological ramifications of crossing boundaries that I am not thrilled about.

most sex does not result in offspring. that is not even the objective of most sex.

Au contraire, mac ~ in the hearts and minds of fundamentalists and "true believers", children are the only objective of sex ~

Sooz


hahaha. sez them!


Top
  
PostPosted: 10/01/13 9:27 am • # 17 
I was arguing

Incest shouldn't be illegal if it's between consenting adults.

I don't think the case in question qualifies as incest. I think this arrest was about something else and the charges will be dropped for the girl.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 10:31 am • # 18 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/05/10
Posts: 14091
The ONLY thing I am talking about is "consenting adult" sexual activity. Nothing more. Not incest for all. Your implication that I (or mac) want incest to be legal across the board is insulting.


Top
  
PostPosted: 10/01/13 10:58 am • # 19 
I will change my original statement to which I intended when I said it.

If you and Roseanne want to lobby your states and providences to overturn existing laws to allow incest between consenting adults, that's fine with me. It's psychological poison, but c'est la vie.


Top
  
PostPosted: 10/01/13 1:16 pm • # 20 

In a free society, the government has no business telling two consenting adults that they shall not have sex with each other. It's simply nobody's business but their own.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 3:39 pm • # 21 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/23/09
Posts: 3185
Location: ontario canada
SciFiGuy wrote:
In a free society, the government has no business telling two consenting adults that they shall not have sex with each other. It's simply nobody's business but their own.


And there in lies the rub. I think that's the key point where the law is concerned. Though I agree with kat that psychologically incest is landmined with horrors (and that has more to do with the relationship between the people than their biological connection), adults are able to make the decision to take those risks for themselves. Stupid bad ideas are not against the law.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 5:09 pm • # 22 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/22/09
Posts: 9530
I imagine the whole thing is giving Woody Allen the heebee jeebies. He'd be well advised to stay out of West Virginia.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 10/01/13 5:29 pm • # 23 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 05/23/09
Posts: 3185
Location: ontario canada
woody allen gives ME the heebee jeebees.


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

  Page 1 of 1   [ 23 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
© Voices or Choices.
All rights reserved.