Posted on 06/25/2002 11:17:48 AM PDT by wanderin
US polygamist convicted of child rape
An avowed polygamist who practically dared prosecutors to go after him was convicted of child rape for impregnating a 13-year-old who later became his wife.
District Judge Donald Eyre took just 30 minutes to convict Tom Green for his relationship with Linda Kunz, who is now his legal wife. Green's non-jury trial lasted about an hour.
Green has appeared on TV talk shows, including the Sally Jessy Raphael Show, to talk about his many wives.
Prosecutors submitted Kunz's testimony from previous hearings, as well as her 1973 birth certificate and the 1986 birth certificate of the couple's first child. "Basically, this case comes down to math," the judge said. "We know a normal human gestation takes nine months."
Kunz refused to testify; spouses do not have to take the stand against each other. "We don't feel like this was a crime," she said after the verdict.
Green, who has four other "wives" and 30 children in all, including seven with Kunz, already is serving five years for bigamy and other charges. He was convicted last year in Utah's biggest polygamy case in five decades. Green, 54, could get up to life in prison at sentencing on August 16 in the child rape case. The judge had previously rejected defense arguments that the statute of limitations had run out. The defence had also argued that the case should be thrown out because the alleged rape did not take place in Utah but in Mexico, but the judge agreed with prosecutors that Green hatched a conspiracy in Utah to marry the girl. At the time, someone as young as 14 could legally marry in Utah. The minimum age has since been raised to 16.
The Mormon Church renounced polygamy in the 1890s as part of the agreement that led to Utah statehood. But it continues to be practiced by about 30,000 people in Utah and elsewhere in the West.
IMHO ...Tom Green's opinion as taught to her as a child.
We are a nation of laws not of men. Contrary to Libertine philosophy we are NOT allowed to make up our OWN rules as we go along.
This guy was a child molester and paedophile, and he's goin' down.
Though I agree in principle with Green's conviction, I find it ironic that the only difference between him and, say, "P. Diddy" or "Funkmaster Flex" or Larry Johnson of the Knicks (five children by four women) is that he had the gall to actually MARRY his.
Yeah, the guy revered by Islam as their mucho grande prophet ... the guy who took his wife when she was 6, and took her virginity when she was age 9.
I mean its a bit Orwellian when we show timid, "understanding" signs of mild exasperation with child-on-child sex but then become rabid when one of the participants is an adult. Preditory exploitation is always assumed, or derived by the 'an adult should know better' axiom.
So, if adults should 'know better' -- know that sexual relations are harmful to children -- then shouldn't 'we adults' be making that impression, that ideology, first and foremost in the minds of our children?
What I am getting at is: "Why do we tolerate a culture that sexualizes our children?" We even encourage it, as in the public schools, and tolerate underage children having sex.
Given how the law behaves, given the power of sex itself, would it not be truthful to admit the policies surrounding sexualization of children are fomenting a menance to ALL MEMBERS of society?
Now, as I understand it, the statute of limitations on child abuse/rape, begins a set number of years after the crime is reported to authorities, instead of when the act took place as in some other crimes.
Tom(I have met him more than once) is guilty of the crime, there is no doubt. But, as I understand it, the crime was reported 15+ years ago by neighbors to the police and the authorities did nothing back then, and they have records of it. So, the satute of limitations should have kicked in already. If that is truly the case, then the judge also went against the law. The judge is the one making up his OWN rules as he goes along.
Tom took the risk of having a judge instead of a jury, in hopes of a lighter sentance. He plans to appeal either way.
Reguarding the cases before this one, Tom's prosecution is a perfect example of unintended consequences. They prosecuted him because he was an outspoken polygamist who was bad publicity for the State of Utah before the Olympics. He was convicted of Bigamy and also convicted of "stealing" welfare. But, because of that, the whole nation knows who this guy is and it is 10 times as much publicity for Utah. Good or bad publicity is debatable. Now that he is in Jail, and not legally married to these women, they are all single mothers eligible for welfare, so the state is paying welfare and the cost of prosecution, and the cost of keeping him in jail which is room and board. The state was also playing both sides. Either he was legally married to them and stealing welfare, or he was not legally married to them and therefore not stealing welfare. Legally and logically, he can't be guilty of both, but they convicted him of both.
Yes, Tom is guilty and I do not defend his actions. But, I beleive the state/judges/prosecution didn't follow the laws. Plus, do you really think that Tom is the only Polygamist in the state who has done what Tom has done? There are plenty of them who live on welfare and have many "wives." My neighbor works at a welfare office and they give money to lots of Polygamists. I bet there are plenty of other birth certificates that would also prove child rape (pure speculation on my part). Do you think they will prosecute all polygamists, or just the outspoken ones?
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.