Former flower shop owner appeals sex-torture conviction - GoFuckYourself.com

C_U_Next_Tuesday · 08-30-2004, 07:40 AM

http://ap.theindependent.com/pstorie.../2392979.shtml

"LINCOLN, Neb. ? A former flower shop owner who sexually assaulted, tortured and held a Texas man captive in the basement of his store says his conviction should be vacated because his victim agreed to such treatment.

Roger Van of Wayne was sentenced to up to 30 years in prison on several counts, including sexual assault and false imprisonment, related to the 2001 incident.

In an appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court, defense lawyer Melissa Wentling alleges that Van's conviction was unconstitutional because the "Nebraska Legislature did not intend these statutes to apply to conduct that occurs during a private, consensual relationship" involving bondage and torture.

The high court is to hear arguments in the case on Sept. 10.

During Van's trial, his lawyers argued that the 36-year-old Houston man consented to being beaten, bound and branded.

Before meeting in Wayne, Van and the man exchanged scores of messages and negotiated a no-limits relationship involving torture and bondage, defense lawyers said.

In one e-mail message, the Texas man indicated he might try to escape and that Van should prevent that from happening.

The man also acknowledged writing an e-mail saying that he needed to be afraid of Van, who also sent him a photo of the small cell where he would be kept.

Defense lawyers said the two agreed not to have a customary "safe word" that signals to the master that the slave can no longer stand the pain and that the session is to end.

"As stated by the United States Supreme Court, homosexuals' right to liberty under the due process clause gives them a right to engage in consensual sexual activity in home without intervention of the government," Wentling said in briefs filed in the case.

The Texan said that after a light flogging administered the first day in Wayne, he was ordered to write why he deserved punishment and decided to get out.

But he said Van then refused to believe that he no longer wanted to participate and kept him captive.

The man testified that on one occasion he was placed face down on a table, restrained and branded with the letter "w" on the back of one of his thighs. The pain was so intense that he became ill and broke one of his wrist restraints, the man said.

Wentling said: "Van is entitled to respect for his private life, and the state `cannot demean his existence or control his destiny by making his private sexual conduct a crime.' "

Assistant Attorney General Kevin Slimp rejected that argument.

While the evidence presented showed the Texas man initially consented to a master-slave relationship, "that consent was withdrawn the day after he arrived in Wayne," Slimp wrote.

The man "did not consent to any of the conduct upon which Van was convicted," Slimp wrote. "Van would ask this court to hold that once a relationship is entered, the submissive party may be subjected to any amount of otherwise criminal conduct without the ability to withdraw his consent.

"This would amount to an actual master-slave relationship, rather than the mere role-playing," Slimp said. "Nothing in the Constitution mandates such an absurd result."

Police said the Texas man escaped with the help of Jerry Marshall, an employee at the flower shop who initially participated in assaulting the Texan but later backed out. Marshall served about six months in jail for misdemeanor assault."

I feel for the dumbass serving time for extreme boys major fuck up.. WTF are people thinking when they agree to such shit.

08-30-2004, 07:40 AM	#1
C_U_Next_Tuesday WW4L Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: over the river and through the woods Posts: 10,581	Former flower shop owner appeals sex-torture conviction http://ap.theindependent.com/pstorie.../2392979.shtml "LINCOLN, Neb. ? A former flower shop owner who sexually assaulted, tortured and held a Texas man captive in the basement of his store says his conviction should be vacated because his victim agreed to such treatment. Roger Van of Wayne was sentenced to up to 30 years in prison on several counts, including sexual assault and false imprisonment, related to the 2001 incident. In an appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court, defense lawyer Melissa Wentling alleges that Van's conviction was unconstitutional because the "Nebraska Legislature did not intend these statutes to apply to conduct that occurs during a private, consensual relationship" involving bondage and torture. The high court is to hear arguments in the case on Sept. 10. During Van's trial, his lawyers argued that the 36-year-old Houston man consented to being beaten, bound and branded. Before meeting in Wayne, Van and the man exchanged scores of messages and negotiated a no-limits relationship involving torture and bondage, defense lawyers said. In one e-mail message, the Texas man indicated he might try to escape and that Van should prevent that from happening. The man also acknowledged writing an e-mail saying that he needed to be afraid of Van, who also sent him a photo of the small cell where he would be kept. Defense lawyers said the two agreed not to have a customary "safe word" that signals to the master that the slave can no longer stand the pain and that the session is to end. "As stated by the United States Supreme Court, homosexuals' right to liberty under the due process clause gives them a right to engage in consensual sexual activity in home without intervention of the government," Wentling said in briefs filed in the case. The Texan said that after a light flogging administered the first day in Wayne, he was ordered to write why he deserved punishment and decided to get out. But he said Van then refused to believe that he no longer wanted to participate and kept him captive. The man testified that on one occasion he was placed face down on a table, restrained and branded with the letter "w" on the back of one of his thighs. The pain was so intense that he became ill and broke one of his wrist restraints, the man said. Wentling said: "Van is entitled to respect for his private life, and the state `cannot demean his existence or control his destiny by making his private sexual conduct a crime.' " Assistant Attorney General Kevin Slimp rejected that argument. While the evidence presented showed the Texas man initially consented to a master-slave relationship, "that consent was withdrawn the day after he arrived in Wayne," Slimp wrote. The man "did not consent to any of the conduct upon which Van was convicted," Slimp wrote. "Van would ask this court to hold that once a relationship is entered, the submissive party may be subjected to any amount of otherwise criminal conduct without the ability to withdraw his consent. "This would amount to an actual master-slave relationship, rather than the mere role-playing," Slimp said. "Nothing in the Constitution mandates such an absurd result." Police said the Texas man escaped with the help of Jerry Marshall, an employee at the flower shop who initially participated in assaulting the Texan but later backed out. Marshall served about six months in jail for misdemeanor assault." I feel for the dumbass serving time for extreme boys major fuck up.. WTF are people thinking when they agree to such shit.