Patricia Spann, 43, and Misty Spann, 25, of Duncan, Oklahoma, are mother and daughter but but moved from the familial to the illegal in ramping up their relationship.
The two women are changed with the relatively rare crime of incestuous marriage. Patricia is Misty’s biological mother. To make this even more bizarre Patricia also married one of her sons in 2008.
Misty and her brothers were raised by a grandparent after Patricia lost custody. Two years ago, they renewed their relationship. They now face charges of incest.
The incest charge is interesting in light of Patricia’s defense. She insists Patricia told investigators she did not have a sexual relationship with her son but married to prevent him from being deployed with the military. She says she married her daughter in hopes of adopting a child. So if they did not have a sexual relationship, the question is whether it would be deemed incest.
The Oklahoma provision includes marriage alone as a violation:
Persons who, being within the degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are by the laws of the state declared incestuous and void, intermarry with each other, or commit adultery or fornication with each other, shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections not exceeding ten (10) years. Except for persons sentenced to life or life without parole, any person sentenced to imprisonment for two (2) years or more for a violation of this subsection shall be required to serve a term of post-imprisonment supervision pursuant to subparagraph f of paragraph 1 of subsection A of Section 991a of Title 22 of the Oklahoma Statutes under conditions determined by the Department of Corrections. The jury shall be advised that the mandatory post-imprisonment supervision shall be in addition to the actual imprisonment.”
You’re supposed to love your kids, not…looooooove your kids.
Gee, I wonder why Patricia lost custody. It doesn’t sound like the grandparents were any more successful raising Misty as they were raising Patricia, if BOTH the women thought this was a grand idea.
What the heck? I just read a story about how a man “married” his iPhone. Another where some guy “married” a dolphin.
…I now pronounce you mother and daughter.
The Land of the Free…thank you…you created all this.
There is no incest involved. Mom and kids can redefine themselves in the same manner as many others are doing. (Not debating the gender assignment here.) All are consenting adults exercising their free will.
Closely related to this……If there are children with abnormalities, the State will take care of them…so what’s the issue here? It should be noted that healthy unborn babies are aborted all the time while millions are spent to sustain a baby who has fatal birth defects. People with known genetic defects or badly matched genetic inheritable maladies are allowed to marry. If a special needs child results from this requires special schooling or healthcare,the State will provide.
I’m not surreptitiously advocating any type of euthanasia. But we Americans have become a society which is experiencing unintended consequences of an ever expanding freedom of choice.
What I find fascinating is that our efforts to save lives is actually killing us. Most of those who subscribe to unfettered evolution or absolute sanctity of life are at odds with their own philosophy. We are polluting a gene pool and using resources to sustain that which our evolved ecosystem would let perish. Science is responsible for my wife, daughter and I to be alive today. Our daughter would have died at age 2, wife at 35 and I at 36; meningitis, hyperthyroid, pneumonia.
The horrors of pandemics and wars actually cleanse the earth. As we define it, violence is to be avoided at all costs. But this avoidance just isn’t the nature of this universe. We want to have it both ways, but it is leading to the extinction of humanity or at least to its massive reduction.
It looks like we have engineered ourselves into oblivion. In aviation parlance, we are on the backside of the power curve and too low to the ground. But in the end, that’s the nature of things.
Where were they married? Who officiated the ceremony? Do they have a marriage license? I just don’t see how this can be true.
” . . .the elderly, those medically unable to conceive and those who exercise their constitutional right to not have biological children are free to marry . . .” [10th circuit]
No where is an unconstitutional prohibition towards those related noted . . .
“limited intelligence and strange logic”
That is, Democrats.
The Venn diagram overlap is large, but not 100%.
Close enough for government work.
Sounds like incest and the charges fair. It’s possible that no sex is involved, just limited intelligence and strange logic.
KCFleming, why do you insult Atheists by suggesting they are the same as Democrats?
Just add the letter I (Incest) to the whole LGBT thing. It needs vowels.
Seriously as Squeeky mentioned, in a culture where one can declare their gender identity is whatever they “feel” like that day, who’s to question that this family identifies as “not related” to one another? And as far as breaking the law, the family should declare they identify as a wealthy, progressive political family and voila, they are instantly above the law.
“There has to be some religion somewhere that will back these mutts up”
Democrat Atheists.
But I repeat myself.
Prof. Turley is out of step.
We who warned about this were ignored and ridiculed.
Opponents to gay marriage pointed this inevitability long ago, but we were just hysterical haters.
Now Turley posts this news article.
Why?
Is he part of the rump of Democrats still thinking he lives in 1950s America, only improved because whites are replaced by their betters?
Is he shocked shocked that there’s decadence going on in what’s left of Western Civ?
Is he rubbing our noses in it?
Opposed to incest being illegal?
Meh.
Liberals want this kind of thing to happen. It’s part of the Great Decline.
For the same reason, the US Constitution is a dead letter.
The law is whatever the elites say it is.
Today these grotesqueries are arrested, tomorrow they will be on the cover of Vanity Fair like “Caitlyn” and we will be obligated to praise them for their ‘bravery.’
There has to be some religion somewhere that will back these mutts up: Really, Really, Really Old Time Mormons, R, R, R Serious Muslims, R, R, R Righteous Jews, R, R, R Well Coiffed Christians. Or it could be as some declare, sometimes in rhyme, the result of the erosion of all these Really, Really, Really Good Old Sexual Taboos.
Reality Show producers are knocking on the door of their double wide as we speak.
Gay marriage, polygamy, this is just the next step.
All I can say is that the old lady is an ugly dog. But then that castigates dogs. No, she is ugly as sin. But that puts sin down on a low order if she is compared with sin. Jeso. She is the Devil and in the alternative she has a defense of: The Devil made me do it.
This one hurts my brain, I had to struggle to get past the initial reaction. Mostly because this story is meant to shock.
First of all, I believe the government should stay out of the whole marriage business.
What we have here is an overreaching government vs a woman and her kids who tried to outsmart the system, and you’ll never win that game, especially if you are poor. The sad part is, if she was a woman of any means, none of this would have ever happened.
Back to reality and logic:
I’m not clear on the reason why she married the son, ‘to save him from being deployed with the military.’ That doesn’t seem to be explained here, how precisely does any of this save him? I may have to assume…
Now it says she married her daughter in order to adopt a child. Again, the state should stay out of the marriage business – when kids are involved that can simply be worked out through contract law in advance, same with any partnership.
However, in the case of adoption if the bio-mother places her child up for adoption with say a Catholic Organization; so that the child will be raised Catholic, then that is the choice the birth mother, owner, has taken. There are still state safety standards even religious adoption organization must follow in the placement of a child – background checks, employment vitrification, etc…
Now I understand OK. is filled with ass-backwards Christians who want to impose not only their morals on other people, but use the power of the state to do it for them, but hey, state’s rights, right?
And I understand creating moron children by way of incest – see the royal family – it is never a good idea. Family members having sex, even as consenting adults, in the age of individual freedom is still never a good idea, yet we still have the Royals.
However, in our modern times with so many people having so many kids with so many different people the odds are better, not great, but better, you could end up marrying your step brother/sister without even knowing it, and with all the diversities of cultures moving into the US… well, that’s another topic.
—-
The son, let us assume…
I’m guessing the kid signed a contract with the military. So, it doesn’t matter what he did, his intent regardless, was to commit fraud; to get out of his signed contract obligation. Apparently, buyers remorse.
However, Science vs State: assuming all of the above, we also know that the human brain isn’t fully developed until the age of 25, so the son is not in full command of all of his adult thinking capacities yet, and yes, this can be said of all those under the age of 25 who sign any contract, military or otherwise. Banks and insurance companies have known this for decades, it’s much easier to get a credit card and driver’s insurance is cheaper after the age of 25.
On the one hand the body says, start reproducing at age 13 to preserve the species, it also says you are at your top physical form between the ages of 18 through 21; the military loves that age. However, the brain says, you’re rational thinking capacities are not fully developed until the age 25, so you’re more likely to make poor and less rational decisions until that time.
Further, realizing you are being deployed to protect wealthy corporations, who’s members, people of means, are less likely to send their own kids to fight and die, doesn’t ring any bells of honor on the part of the government, thus questioning the intent of the government on a citizen(s) that hasn’t fully developed all of his rational faculties yet.
Unfortunately, that’s not how most of this stuff works, but it could be put in the basket of ‘making a good argument’ in order to develop a basket of free zones in the US or the basket of state secession.
Well, under the new sexual rules of “Whatever I Feel Like Today”, one of them needs to say they don’t feel like they’re related to each other. And Presto Chango! – – – they are no longer related!
This is where you get when you start tampering with sexual taboos. Pretty soon, there are no taboos at all. And society breaks down.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
If she lost custody of the kids, this muddies the waters. I would make the case that it is two unrelated consensual adults.
Besides, who is the DA to be presuming that marriage implies sex?!
Kevin – assuming Hillary were to end up in jail, how many here think Bill would be asking for conjugal visits?
Wow, you mean that they weren’t even from Kentucky and they do that stuff, shazam!