sodomy

Quick Hits

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:36:22 -0500

* The Greensboro News-Record's Mark Binker cautions casual political fans not to expect too much too soon from the legislature.

* The House selects new Democratic whips: Reps. Larry Bell, Larry Hall, Jean Farmer-Butterfield, Deborah Ross and Bruce Goforth.

* More cutbacks in the field of journalism: UNC-TV will no longer pay political analysts who appear on its "Legislative Week in Review" show.

* Liberal blogger Andrea Verykoukis says the state's anti-sodomy law "has been used to persecute ... certain parties with certain proclivities" for centuries.

Bill would strike old sodomy law

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:06:03 -0500

Rep. Rick Glazier wants to take an unconstitutional law banning sodomy off the books.

As previously noted, North Carolina's anti-sodomy law dates back to the reign of Henry VIII, becoming a part of state statutes in 1715 when English common law was declared to be part of our law.

The U.S. Supreme Court declared anti-sodomy laws unconstitutional in 2003, but it remains on the books despite several attempts to remove it.

Glazier filed a bill today that would rewrite the statute — which currently says "the crime against nature, with mankind or beast" is a Class I felony — is not unlawful if it is "between mutually consenting adults in a private home, private residence, or other private abode."

That change would conform state law to the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, though it would still allow the anti-sodomy statute to be used to prosecute public sex acts and bestiality.

Prosecutors drop sodomy charge

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:35:08 -0400

Wake County prosecutors have dropped a sodomy charge.

After reviewing the case of two men arrested by Raleigh Police, Assistant District Attorney Adam Moyers said the facts showed the acts occurred between consenting adults in private, meaning they are protected by a landmark 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Josh Shaffer reports.

Nelson Keith Sloan, 39, had a $3,000 bond and paid $450 to get out of jail, a typical 15 percent bondsman's fee.

"I am grateful that the DA's office has a better understanding of the Constitution than the Raleigh Police Department," he said in a statement Friday. "However, as long as this law remains on the books it is a crime punishable by an arrest, a stay in jail, media attention, and a fine of $450 since that is how much it cost me to get out of jail."

Previously: Sodomy law dates to King Henry VIII.

N.C. sodomy law dates to Henry VIII

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 27 May 2008 10:53:52 -0400

North Carolina's sodomy law dates to the reign of Henry VIII.

Under the English king's rule, the Buggery Act of 1533 was adopted — the first civil legislation applicable against homosexuals in that country. (Previously, those offenses had been handled by religious courts, but Henry famously had his differences with the church.)

The law defined buggery as an unnatural sex act against the will of God, later modifying it to include only anal sex and bestiality.

Though later repealed, it was re-enacted by Queen Elizabeth I in 1563 and became a part of North Carolina law in 1715 when all previous parliamentary statutes and court cases — known as common law — were declared to be part of our law.

The state statute against sodomy — or "the crime against nature" — still includes citations to the 25th Statute Roll of King Henry VIII, Chapter 6, and the Fifth Statute Roll of Queen Elizabeth, Chapter 17.

The U.S. Supreme Court declared anti-sodomy laws unconstitutional in 2003, but it remains on the books despite several attempts by state legislators to remove it.

Hat Tip: Gerry Cohen

Raleigh police press sodomy charges

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 27 May 2008 08:51:36 -0400

Raleigh police charged two adults with sodomy this weekend.

After a call Saturday about an assault, police charged two West Raleigh men with a "crime against nature" — a Class I felony — for having sex early that morning, Matthew Eisley reports. Each faces up to two years in prison if convicted.

The charge was filed under General Statute 14-177, a century old law most recently revised in 1994. But the U.S. Supreme Court appears to have declared such charges unconstitutional in its landmark Lawrence v. Texas case in 2003.

"The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives," the high court ruled in that case. "The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime."

An attorney for the Raleigh police told officers after the ruling that they could charge people for committing those acts in public, but not in private.

State Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, a Carrboro Democrat, said she has tried for years to get the statute rescinded, but the legislature has not agreed. (Bills in 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003 and 2005 were sent to committee. A similar bill in 1993 was reported unfavorably.)

"I press it every year," she said. "It would be politically difficult, but that doesn't matter — it's unconstitutional."