Sex Romp in Park Ends With Rare Adultery Charge


Flickr photo by takomabibelot
Adultery may be grounds for a divorce, but in a rare move it's being used as a criminal charge against a New York woman who had sex in a public park.

And yes, this is happening in 2010.

According to a story on Rochester's WHAM TV station, the 45-year-old woman was having sex with a 29-year-old male who wasn't her husband, and witnesses complained that there were children and families nearby.

Sounds like a pretty clear-cut case of public indecency.

So why the adultery charge? Because Suzanne Corona admitted to the act (albeit denying it was done with children around).

Adultery is technically a law-breaker in a number of states based on rarely enforced laws. So rarely used that when we hear of people like Jesse James cheating on Sandra Bullock or even governors like Mark Sanford or Eliot Spitzer cheating, we think "that SOB," not "that jailbird."

And while states such as Pennsylvania have completely repealed their adultery laws, others carry harsh penalties -- in Utah it can earn you three years in prison.

The Democrat and Chronicle in Batavia, New York, says Corona is only the 13th woman in the last 40 years to have this charge levied against her. And because her sexual partner, Jason Amend, was not married, he's walking away with only the public lewdness charges.

There's no defense for cheating, but this smacks of a woman being persecuted for her sexual proclivities. Her defense -- that her husband is transgender and they no longer have sex -- shouldn't have to be trotted out. It's up to a woman to consent to have sex with whomever she pleases and for her and her spouse to deal with the consequences.

Are we not still allowed say over our bodies?

We can choose our rights to abort (or not to abort). Choose who is a sexual partner versus a rapist. Provided it's consensual, whose business is it other than those three parties?

Well, the state's.

Marriages are granted legal status by the state, constitutionally setting an unfortunate precedent for the justice system to oversee a violation of the vows.

Should the adultery charge stand?



To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

Cafe... Cafe Suzanne

Only if the state plans to start enforcing it all round ... there's a pretty clear-cut adultery case against Eliot Spitzer, and I can think of, oh, one or two others.

lovin... lovinangels

lol, Suzanne, I was going to say the exact same thing... Um, sure. File charges against Spitzer, then we'll talk.

LoriA... LoriAnn87

Sure if starte have them then the person should be charged.

29again 29again

If the law is on the books for that state, fine.  But apply it equally to every single case of it!  You can't just pick and choose who gets charged with a crime, and who doesn't for the same action.  What's the word I'm looking for??  Oh, yeah, d i s c r i m i n a t i o n. 

nonmember avatar James Smith

This is just another case of the religious reich forcing its sick beliefs on everyone else.  Not content to practice their "faith" for themselves, they have to restrict everyone's freedoms, income, and health, too. 

Most of the problems of the world are, and always have been, caused by religion.  Mankind will never truly be free until the black yoke of religion is lifted by the clear lights of truth and rational thinking.

1-5 of 5 comments