Ohio Morgue Worker Admits to Sex with 100 Corpses

[Northern_Piper]

@The_Second_Stone

Because the employer knew and approved? Because it was part of his possible job duties?

I would assume it’s an allegation of either vicarious liability, or alternatively, that the employer failed to take steps to ensure nothing like this could happen to corpses under its control.

Off-thread, a poster has suggested that it is under federal court jurisdiction under s. 1983, which is a general basis for civil actions based on improper conduct by public bodies, such as a county morgue.

[Wile_E]

@Malthus

You mean, other than the guy sitting on death row because this fellow literally fucked with the evidence?

I don’t understand why there’s a difference. Rape and kill someone = death penalty, Just plain kill someone = life imprisonment (which probably means 30 years). Why is taking someone’s life not considered bad enough in and of itself for a death penalty? He didn’t rape her so that means at least he’s a nice murderer?

Not defending the sex with corpses guy at all because that’s all kinds of wrong. Just confused why the very permanent act of murder isn’t considered the worse act.

[Chefguy]

The victims are the deceased’s families, who get to relive not only the death of their loved ones, but to have the specter of some perv screwing the corpse firmly and forever planted in their brains.

[Miller]

@Bricker

That’s one of those events that someone might throw out as a sarcastic rejoinder: “Sure, anything is possible. Maybe a Star Trek transporter placed your semen there! Or maybe a necrophiliac morgue worker with your exact blood type was on duty that night! Is that what happened?”

Um… yes?

Now I’m wondering how many potential murderers might have been let go for basically the same reason.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@Northern_Piper

…Off-thread, a poster has suggested that it is under federal court jurisdiction under s. 1983, which is a general basis for civil actions based on improper conduct by public bodies, such as a county morgue.

Looks like that’s it:

14a0190p-06.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_1983#As_later_amended_and_codified_as_section_1983

[Malthus]

@Wile_E

I don’t understand why there’s a difference. Rape and kill someone = death penalty, Just plain kill someone = life imprisonment (which probably means 30 years). Why is taking someone’s life not considered bad enough in and of itself for a death penalty? He didn’t rape her so that means at least he’s a nice murderer?

Not defending the sex with corpses guy at all because that’s all kinds of wrong. Just confused why the very permanent act of murder isn’t considered the worse act.

I think it is one of them there policy decisions.

People kill each other for all sorts of reasons. We treat deliberately premeditated murder, or murder of a cop in the line of duty, more seriously than knifing someone in the heat of an argument, because we want to discourage people from deliberately killing people or killing cops in the line of duty.

Now, your rapist has a built-in motive to kill someone - namely, to shut them up. As a society, we strongly want to prevent rapists from taking that step and murdering the victim of their crime. Naturally, we want to prevent the rape as well; but recognizing that there are rapists out there, we want to avoid giving them a positive incentive to become murderers as well. Hence, rules that apply a more severe penalty to those who murder following a rape, than those who simply murder (for example) in the heat of an argument.