Charges Against Gay Men Draw Criticism
St.
Louis Post-Dispatch, April 2, 2002
900 N. Tucker Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63101
Fax: 314-340-3139
Email: SiteEditor@stltoday.com
http://www.stltoday.com/
By Matthew Hathaway of the Post-Dispatch
Some gay-rights activists contend that the prosecution of six men on
charges of having homosexual sex in Jefferson County might spark new
challenges to what they call Missouri’s "archaic law" prohibiting
gay sex.
Last month, in a raid on an adult video store in High Ridge, undercover
police arrested 13 people on charges ranging from sexual misconduct and
prostitution to drug possession.
Police arrested several store patrons, alleging they had engaged in illegal
sex acts, but charges were filed only against those men who allegedly violated
Missouri’s ban on gay sex, a class-A misdemeanor.
Some national and local groups say they are watching the case closely.
Opponents of the law said they hoped that the case would be the last use of
the law, which was successfully challenged in a Missouri appeals court and,
activists say, is encountering stronger opposition in Jefferson City.
Jefferson County prosecutor Bob Wilkins said that he hesitated to apply the
rarely used law but added that it was needed to stamp out the "open and
notorious activities at Award Video."
"It is not my intention to judge the conduct of consenting adults.
This is not about throwing homosexuals in jail. This is about trying to
prevent future conduct," Wilkins said.
For years, Award Video has been the target of anti-pornography and church
groups.
Jeff Wunrow, executive director of PROMO, a group formed to overturn
Missouri’s ban on gay sex, said, "It is an archaic law, it’s an
obtrusive law and, as you can see in the Jefferson County case, it’s a law
that it is clearly biased against gay and lesbian couples."
Wunrow said PROMO will lobby intensively to try to get legislators to
repeal the law in the current session.
Missouri’s term limits law, which will force out dozens of legislators
this year, could give repeal efforts a boost. Some outstate legislators who
have quietly opposed the ban will not have to worry about the political
ramifications of voting to repeal it, Wunrow said.
Wunrow said that PROMO and other local gay-rights groups have not been in
contact with the men who were charged and that no decision has been made on
whether to offer them legal help.
A national gay and lesbian legal group said any prosecution would be on
shaky legal ground.
"The court of appeals has ruled quite clearly that if sex is
consensual, it cannot be criminal," said Pat Logue, a lawyer for a
national gay legal fund.
In 1999, Missouri’s Western District Court of Appeals ruled that the
state’s ban on gay sex was unconstitutional. The court ruled that "in
order to convict a person of sexual misconduct . . . , the state must prove
that the sexual contact alleged occurred without the consent of the
victim."
The state didn’t appeal that decision to the Missouri Supreme Court,
which had upheld the ban’s constitutionality in a separate case in 1986.
Wilkins said the 1999 ruling is "not controlling" because it hasn’t
been heard and affirmed by the Missouri Supreme Court.
Wilkins said the appropriateness and constitutionality of the ban was a
matter for politicians and courts, but not for prosecutors.
"All I do is look at the statutes, and this statute is still on the
books," Wilkins said. "We don’t make the law, we just enforce what’s
there."
Missouri is one of five states that prohibit homosexual sex acts. Eleven
other states prohibit both homosexuals and heterosexuals from engaging in
certain sex acts. Illinois has no laws that prohibit or limit consensual
homosexual sex.
[Home] [News] [Missouri]
