Posted on 01/20/2007 5:42:45 AM PST by ShadowDancer
Adulterers Could Face Life In Prison
POSTED: 8:05 pm EST January 18, 2007
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. -- People who cheat on their spouses know they could pay a steep price if caught. But life in prison?
It's possible in Michigan, however unlikely, according to a state appeals court judge. His comment, in a written ruling in a drugs-for-sex case, adds a new twist to perpetual debates over marital morality -- and whether judges should always uphold the letter of the law, even when doing so would produce a wacky outcome.
It also has generated unwanted publicity for state Attorney General Mike Cox, who acknowledged an extramarital affair in 2005. Adultery is still a crime under Michigan law, but no one has been charged since 1971. Not surprisingly, Cox wasn't charged -- and easily won a second term last year.
"The voters got to weigh and sift all the relevant information and they overwhelmingly chose to re-elect the attorney general," said his spokesman, Rusty Hills.
The matter resurfaced this week when Detroit Free Press columnist Brian Dickerson wrote about the case of Lloyd Joseph Waltonen of Charlevoix, a Lake Michigan town about 270 miles northwest of Detroit.
Waltonen, 43, pleaded guilty last year to illegally delivering OxyContin, a prescription painkiller. He was sentenced to four to 20 years in prison. But Circuit Judge Richard Pajtas dismissed four counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC), Michigan's toughest rape charge, punishable by a life term.
The crime is defined in part as sexual penetration involving a felony other than first-degree criminal sexual conduct.
Because adultery is such a felony, a literal reading of the law could boost it to the level of first-degree CSC, Judge William B. Murphy of the Michigan Court of Appeals said in a footnote to his ruling. The footnote doesn't carry the force of law.
In a column Monday, Dickerson said he asked Judge William Whitbeck, who signed Murphy's opinion, whether the reference to adultery "couldn't be cited as justification for bringing first-degree criminal sexual conduct charges against the attorney general"-- at least theoretically.
"Well, yeah," Whitbeck replied, according to Dickerson.
On the Free Press Web site, dozens of readers have debated whether adultery is bad enough to justify life behind bars.
"Infidelity destroys lives," one wrote. "Should there not be a punishment for that crime?"
Another replied, "Not enough jails to house everyone that got caught cheating on their spouse. You cannot legislate morality."
In the Charlevoix case, Waltonen was accused of giving OxyContin to a cocktail waitress in exchange for sex. Pajtas threw out the sex charges because the woman testified she had been a willing participant, although she also said she'd agreed only after becoming dependent on the drug.
Shaynee Fanara, an assistant prosecutor for Charlevoix County, appealed the dismissal to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
A three-judge panel overruled Pajtas in November and reinstated the sex charges.
Murphy said it didn't matter whether the woman had consented. The state Supreme Court has decreed that judges must follow the letter of the law. So any sexual penetration linked directly with a felony can result in a rape charge, he wrote.
In the footnote, Murphy said he doubted the Legislature had such far-reaching intentions when enacting the law. But he said the appeals court was legally unable to draw its own conclusions.
"Technically," he added, "any time a person engages in sexual penetration in an adulterous relationship ... he or she is guilty" of first-degree criminal sexual conduct. He added, "We encourage the Legislature to take a second look at the statutory language if it is troubled by our ruling."
A spokesman for the state Senate majority leader said the matter isn't on the agenda as lawmakers struggle with a gaping budget deficit.
Cox isn't interested, either, Hills said, insisting the Waltonen case had nothing to do with adultery.
"There are a lot of footnotes in a lot of cases that don't become the law of the land," he said.
By raising the point about adultery, Murphy makes a "common-sense appeal" to let judges use discretion in cases where a literal reading of the law could produce an absurd result, said Joe Falvey, a professor at the conservative Ave Maria Law School in Ann Arbor. But he said it's up to the Legislature to fix poorly worded laws.
"When individual judges have that degree of flexibility, the law loses all its predictability," Falvey said.
Kary Moss, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, said denying judges such leeway forces them to "surrender their legitimate role to interpret our laws and lead to just results."
Why shouldn't cheaters go to prison?
Six months to one year for a first offense would be reasonable.
I'm not so sure about imprisonment, but I do think it should be more available and more readily recognized as a remedy in civil litigation such as divorce.
Shariah law.
If smoking and trans fats are "proven" to destroy some lives, why not criminalize adultery etc. esp if children are affected.
BTW I'm not saying I agree with such an approach.
Well, that should end the practice of marriage in Michigan once and for all.
Paging bill clinton...
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Well, there's always the scarlet "A".
Not enough jails???!???!
We'd have to enclose the entire State of Alaska!
Why shouldn't wives who "get headaches" on a regular basis not go to prison?
Once you start criminalizing aspects of marriage, guess what? Nobody with an ounce of common sense would risk marriage any more.
Apples and oranges! Lives are destroyed by spouse cheaters, sometimes even countries.
Why shouldn't cheaters go to prison?
_________
So you want marriages to be safe, available, and rare. Just like abortions.
2 people stand before God to become married, and you want the state standing in the middle of it. Yuck.
Why shouldn't wives who "get headaches" on a regular basis not go to prison? Once you start criminalizing aspects of marriage, guess what? Nobody with an ounce of common sense would risk marriage any more. .... Polybius
Apples and oranges! Lives are destroyed by spouse cheaters, sometimes even countries ...... mariabush
Apples, oranges, grapes, bananas, the entire fruit counter at Publix.
As long as we are criminalizing aspects of marriage, we all get to pick which fruits we want to criminalize and impose prison sentences for.
You picked having sex with someone other than your spouse as what you want criminalized.
I picked deliberately witholding sex from your spouse beyond a certain time period without a legitimate medical reason as what I want criminalized.
Others can now decide what others aspects of marriage they want criminalized:
*** Really sloppy housekeeping.
*** Quitting your job without your spouse's consent.
*** Running up the credit card charges.
*** Refusing to cook.
*** Tracking mud all over the clean floor.
*** Playing poker with the boys more tha X days per week.
*** Having a Girl's Night Out more than X times per week.
*** Flirting with the waitress.
*** Flirting with the pool boy.
Not prison; that would be too much.
I would however support a law saying that if a man commits adultery with your wife; you may seize his goats and sheep.
Once you start criminalizing aspects of marriage, guess what? Nobody with an ounce of common sense would risk marriage any more.
Adultery occurs outside of marriage. But I guess we could make two kinds of marriage, one for those who plege to be faithful for better or worse and one for those who want to leave the door open to commit adultery. As it is now there is no protection for those who take their vows seriously.
There is no-fault divorce. You don't need a reason to get a divorce. Adultery or not, it doesn't matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.