Keeping Kansas Safe for Toto!

But seriously, folks, should a guy who loved his ex-girlfriend's dog, Yodi, just a bit too much, have to register as a sex offender?  Well, these are the kinds of questions they have to confront in the Kansas courts.  I kid you not....

State of Kansas v. Joshua B. Coman, 2009 WL 2633688 (August 28, 2009 - BREAKING NEWS!!!!)

So Josh was dating this woman and really fell for her dog, Yodi, in a big way.  Josh and the girlfriend (not named in the opinion) broke up -- the court doesn't tell us why -- but evidently Josh just had to get it on with Yodi one more time.  (Don't ask....)  Anyway, he got some lube (too much sharing here) and snuck into the ex-girlfriend's garage with Yodi, where they were "doing it" when she came in to get something from her freezer.  Judge Henry W. Greene, Jr.'s decision tells the story with laconic grace:

"Upon entering her garage to access the freezer, the complaining witness reported seeing her ex-boyfriend Coman lying on the floor of the garage with his pants and underwear down around his ankles, his shirt pulled up, and her female Rottweiler lying beside him.  When she turned on the light, Coman moved his hips away from the dog and quickly pulled his pants up.  Coman then said he loved the dog, Yodi, and he told the witness, "I don't expect you to understand, but I had to see her one more time."  When police arrived, a pat-down revealed Coman's penis remained erect and he had a bottle of personal lubricant in his left front pocket.  Coman denied having intercourse with the dog, but he admitted that he tongue-kissed her and digitally penetrated her.  A search of Coman's cell phone revealed several photos of dogs and one video clip of a man engaging in sexual intercourse with a canine."

Coman pled guilty to the bestiality charge in the Sedgwick County District Court, admitted in court that his motivation for his activity was sexual, and was sentenced to six months in the clink (to be served consecutively to a sentence for similar conduct, presumably with a different dog, in Reno County), ordered to receive psychiatric treatment, and required to register as a sex offender.  He filed an appeal.

The court ducked his appeal of the conviction on a technicality.  In wording his appeal, he had stated he was appealing the sentence, so the court said he had failed to appeal the conviction itself.  Since he pled guilty, and it seems highly unlikely any court would find that sex between people and animals is constitutionally protected, there's no great loss there.  But the court did find that the question whether he should have to register as a sex offender was properly before it.

The court divided 2-1 on the result.  The sex offender registration statute in Kansas imposes the registration requirement upon conviction of a sexually violent crime.  It includes a 14-item list referencing various provisions of the criminal statutes, and then has a catch-all provision referring to any other sexually motivated crimes.  The list references the sodomy law, but specifies just 2 of the 3 operative sections in that law, dealing with children, and omits the section dealing with gay sex and bestiality.  The majority of the court said that because Coman conceded that his conduct was sexually motivated, the trial judge could exercise discretion under the catch-all provision to impose the registration requirement.  The dissenter, Judge Steve Leben, says that this construction of the catch-all provision renders the legislative judgment to exclude the bestiality section from the 14-item list a nullity.  The proper construction of the catch-all, he argues, should be to bring in other offenses not considered by the legislature in putting together its list, and NOT offenses the legislature specifically decided to omit.

The upshot: The Kansas Court of Appeals keeps the state safe for Toto and other dogs by requiring sexually-oriented dog molesters to register.  We're sure former Pennsylvania U.S. Senator Rick Santorum would approve, since he was vitally concerned about the problem of "man on dog" sex. Now they just have to teach the state's canine population how to consult the registry so they'll know whom to avoid.  (Just kidding, there, folks.)  We imagine that thus alerted, dog owners can raise the alarm and take preventive measures if Josh Coman or others of his ilk happen to move into their neighborhoods.  If the state regularly notifies residents about who is on the list and where they live, people will be empowered to protect their pets... and to advise their children not to wear dog costumes come Hallowe'en.

Comments

[caprice]

Does one measure the age of consent in dog years?