Virginia Adultery Case Roils Divorce Industry
  Washington
  Post, December 1, 2003
  By John F. Kelly
  When John Raymond Bushey Jr. became the first person in
  as long as anyone can remember to be convicted of adultery in Virginia,
  several things happened:
  He resigned his position as attorney for the Shenandoah
  Valley town of Luray, Va., a job he’d held for 32 years.
  People who heard of his situation scratched their heads
  and said, “You mean, adultery is actually a crime?”
  And those who wade into the messy aftermath of alleged
  infidelity—divorce lawyers and private investigators—started pondering
  what impact the ruling would have on their jobs.
  As for the folks in Luray, they’re just curious about
  what the snowy-haired Bushey—65 years old, married for 18 years to the town
  clerk and the very model of a courtly Southern lawyer—was up to.
  “You always hear gossip, but you never know what to put
  any credence to,” said a woman who works on Luray’s Main Street. Like
  virtually everyone else interviewed in the town of 4,500, she spoke on the
  condition that her name not be used when commenting on the Bushey case.
  Because the charges were filed in Virginia’s lowest
  court, there are no records that reveal exactly what Bushey did, with whom he
  did it or why prosecutors would pluck such a rarely used statute from
  Virginia’s criminal code and apply it to him. Bushey declined to be
  interviewed about the case. And the prosecutor wouldn’t give many details of
  Bushey’s Oct. 23 guilty plea, the result of a plea agreement.
  “There’s nobody peeping in a window saying, ‘Mr.
  Bushey did this,’ “ said Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Glenn R.
  Williamson, when asked how authorities found out about the indiscretion. The
  complainant, he said, was the woman involved with Bushey. She has not been
  charged.
  Although he pleaded guilty in District Court, Bushey is
  allowed to appeal to Circuit Court. On Halloween, that’s what he did. More
  details might come out when the case goes before a judge Jan. 27. Until then,
  Williamson isn’t discussing the case, beyond saying, “I think that the
  state has an interest in protecting the sanctity of marriage.
  Like other Class 4 misdemeanors in Virginia, adultery
  carries a maximum penalty of a $250 fine. Bushey paid half that, plus $36 in
  court costs. Adultery is also against the law in Maryland, where the penalty
  is a fine of $10, about the cost of a pecan bar and two large caramel
  macchiatos at Starbucks. The District will soon join about half of the states
  in the country by repealing its adultery statute.
  Prosecutors in the Washington area couldn’t recall the
  last time anyone around here had been charged with adultery. Many laws seen as
  holdovers from an earlier morality have been repealed in periodic overhauls of
  state statutes. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June striking down
  Texas’s anti-sodomy statute has prompted many states, including Virginia, to
  scrutinize laws concerning private acts between consenting adults.
  The Virginia State Crime Commission has spent the past
  three years studying the state’s criminal code and next month will recommend
  repealing its sodomy statute and the fornication statute, which prohibits
  sexual intercourse between unmarried people.
  Also recommended for repeal: “Conspiring to cause a
  spouse to commit adultery,” a leftover from the wild days of fault divorce,
  when a wife might hire a woman of questionable virtue to seduce her husband
  and a camera-toting private investigator to kick down the door of their love
  nest.
  Adultery, though, has held on, even though the commission
  staff said the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas could be
  interpreted to suggest that Virginia’s anti-adultery statute is
  unconstitutional.
  “There’s still a public policy concern,” said Del.
  Brian J. Moran (D-Alexandria), who serves on the crime commission. “Adultery
  is wrong, and we were not going to eliminate a criminal action even though it
  has been infrequently prosecuted.”
  Maryland isn’t tossing out its adultery statute any
  time soon either.
  “You can imagine what would happen if you tried to take
  adultery off the books at this point,” said Joseph F. Murphy Jr., chief
  judge of Maryland’s Court of Special Appeals and chairman of a committee
  that has been examining that state’s statutes. “You would have a large
  group of people who would complain bitterly about it as another example of the
  state losing its moral compass.”
  The District had no such qualms. On Tuesday, Mayor
  Anthony A. Williams (D) signed the Elimination of Outdated Crimes Amendment
  Act of 2003. If Congress doesn’t act within 30 days, adultery will become
  legal in Washington.
  As for the disparity between the District’s law and
  those in Maryland and Virginia, D.C. Council member Kathy Patterson (Ward 3),
  chair of the judiciary committee, said, “Well, once again we’re out in
  front.”
  There’s another reason it’s useful to have on the
  books a law that is seldom prosecuted, said those who follow philandering: It
  allows individuals in civil divorce cases to assert their Fifth Amendment
  right against self-incrimination when asked about their extramarital exploits.
  If adultery were not a crime, spouses involved in divorces would have no legal
  protection when presented with such questions as, “What were your
  secretary’s pantyhose doing in your glove compartment?” or “Why is the
  pool boy always smiling?”
  With adultery a crime that conceivably could be
  prosecuted, “a lot of this kind of dime-store novel testimony just doesn’t
  get presented,” Murphy said.
  But some judges in civil cases do compel bickering
  spouses to testify, arguing that the crime of adultery is never prosecuted.
  Bushey has ensured that’s no longer the case.
  “That’s going to have an impact on future cases
  because I think while in the past the argument was that nobody ever’s been
  convicted [of adultery] so it’s not really a risk, this is saying something
  differently,” said Carol Schrier-Polak, a family law lawyer with the
  Arlington firm Bean, Kinney & Korman.
  Sanford K. Ain of Sherman, Meehan, Curtin & Ain in
  the District agreed: “The decision may have some very significant
  consequences,” he said.
  As for the District’s repeal of the adultery statute,
  Ain said a savvy lawyer still could cut off a dangerous line of questioning on
  the grounds that it might lead to evidence that hanky-panky had taken place in
  Maryland or Virginia, states where the laws remain on the books.
  The infidelity industry has changed over the years, as
  the role adultery plays in court cases has evolved. The rise of no-fault
  divorce meant that establishing adultery was no longer as important as it once
  was. But in Virginia it still is a factor when a judge divides assets, sets
  alimony and makes custody decisions.
  Private investigators in Virginia pore over such court
  rulings as Coe v. Coe and Watts v. Watts, cases that establish just what
  constitutes “clear and convincing” proof of adultery. Public displays of
  affection caught on videotape are a start, said Caren Chancey of Background
  Brokers in Bristow. Courts also look favorably on videotape of an adulterous
  couple entering a motel room in the middle of the day and spending at least
  two hours inside with no one else present. If a private investigator can
  document the sex act—in a vehicle or through open vertical blinds—so much
  the better.
  Chancey said most tapes are never shown to a judge. Their
  existence often is enough to force the cheating spouse to a settlement.
  Deborah Aylward of A Woman-Owned Private Investigation
  Agency in Falls Church predicts that publicity surrounding the Bushey case
  will make the unfaithful toe the line—for a while.
  “We’re going to see a dip in our sales as people are
  more cautious,” Aylward said. “Absolutely. People are going to be very,
  very good. But I’ve got to tell you, this industry is cyclical.”
  And that means the Seventh Commandment will continue to
  be broken.
  Bushey, who guffawed loudly when his secretary announced
  the arrival of a reporter from The Washington Post at his office recently,
  declined to talk about the case.
  In a brief telephone interview, Bushey’s wife of 18
  years, Cindy Bushey, chose not to comment on her husband’s legal problems
  beyond saying, “We’re going to stay together.”
  
  
  [Home] [News] [Virginia]