Criminal law, Society, Torts

Oklahoma Woman Arrested For Allegedly Attacking the Corpse of a Former “Frenemy” and Pulling Out Her Hair, Messing Her Makeup, and Cutting Her Face

2There is a truly bizarre case out of Tulsa where Shaynna Smith (also known as Shaynna Sim), 27, is accused of going to her “frenemy’s” funeral and smudging her makeup and messing with hair. She is also accused of cutting the face of the deceased. However, the charge may surprise you.

The family said that Smith was jealous of the deceased for dating her ex-boyfriend and they watched her reach into the casket. When they approached her, they found hair pulled off the corpse and the smearing of makeup and as well as a long gash cut along the hairline.

If true, this could be a case of mental illness. However, pending such a finding, it was surprising to see that Smith was only charged with misdemeanor illegal dissection. A misdemeanor seems incredibly light for attacking a corpse and carving it up in front of grieving relatives.

It seems bizarre that you can get years in prison for stealing a car or having a tryst on a beach but only register a misdemeanor for assaulting and desecrating a corpse.

In torts, there is a long line of mishandling or abuse of corpses cases. The family could certainly sue though it is not clear what assets Smith has to satisfy any judgment.

Source: PIX11

23 thoughts on “Oklahoma Woman Arrested For Allegedly Attacking the Corpse of a Former “Frenemy” and Pulling Out Her Hair, Messing Her Makeup, and Cutting Her Face”

  1. Isn’t the desecration/mutilation of a corpse generally classified as a felony in most jurisdictions?

  2. I have said before in this forum that it is interesting how much we care for the dead.

    From washing and cleaning them and having a memorial service, to following their wishes in a will.

    This visceral response to desecration suggests a very basic human behavior.

    So, as much as this mutilation of a corpse is viewed as abhorrent, one must wonder why that is so.
    If you prick them, they do not bleed. They do not feel mockery, hate, or debasement.

    So why such a reaction over what is nothing more than inanimate decaying flesh?

    The fact that we harbor those reactions about the dead despite the seeming irrationality should be instructive to those who wish to deface and mock tradition, e.g., how they laugh at those of us who are aggrieved by their desecrations (e.g. gay marriage).

    Remember, GK Chesterton called tradition ‘the democracy of the dead.’

  3. So a ‘tryst on a beach’ is having sex in public and it’s totally acceptable. Amazing.

Comments are closed.