The world's weirdest Sex cases

Gracie's picture

From this article in the Times, a list of 20 weird court cases, come the following sex-related ones ~ nearly half of them! 

2. In 2005, a Brazilian woman sued her partner for failing to give her orgasms. The 31-year old woman from Jundiai asserted in her case that her 38-year old partner routinely ended sexual intercourse after he reached an orgasm. After a promising start the action ended in something of an anticlimax for the claimant when her case was rejected.

5. In 2005, the Massachusetts Appeals Court was asked to rule on when a sexual technique was dangerous. Early one morning, a man and woman in a long-term relationship were engaged in consensual intercourse. During the passionate event, and, without the man’s consent, the woman suddenly manoeuvred herself in a way that caused him to suffer a penile fracture. Emergency surgery was required. The court ruled that while “reckless” sexual conduct may be actionable, “merely negligent” conduct was not. It dismissed the man’s case.

7. In 2007, a court in India was asked to decide whether a vibrating condom is a contraceptive or a sex toy. The condoms contain a battery-operated device, and, for the avoidance of doubt, are marketed as “Crezendo”. Opponents argue it’s a sex toy and thus unlawful in India, whereas the manufacturer says it’s a contraceptive and promotional of public health.

10. A Las Vegas law prohibiting strippers from fondling customers during lap dances was ruled by the Nevada Supreme Court in 2006 to be valid. The issue was whether the local law was unconstitutionally vague and therefore unenforceable. The law states that “no attendant or server shall fondle or caress any patron” with intent to arouse him. Lawyers discussed at length whether grinding (of dancers’ bottoms into men’s laps) amounted to a fondle or caress, and whether the brushing of breast into patrons’ faces was prohibited conduct. The local law was declared valid because the court thought enforcers would be able to know a fondle or caress if they saw one.

11. In 1964, the Exchequer Court of Canada was asked to decide whether the expenses of running a “call girl” business in Vancouver were deductible from gross income for the purposes of income tax. The madam and seven call girls were all convicted and imprisoned. And then taxed. Claims for tax deductions in respect of the ordinary parts of the business, such as phone bills, were allowed. Other types of expenses were disallowed because the business couldn’t prove them with receipts, including $2000 for liquor for local officials and $1000 paid to "certain men possessed of physical strength and some guile, which they exercised when set to extricate a girl from difficulties". 

15. In May, 2004 in Connecticut, Heather Specyalski was charged with the homicide of Neil Esposito. He was thrown from a car that prosecutors said was being driven by Specyalski when it spun out of control and crashed. The defendant argued that she couldn’t have been driving because she was in the passenger seat performing oral sex on Esposito, whom she alleged was at the wheel. Esposito was found with his trousers down but prosecutors argue this could have been because he was “mooning” or urinating out of the car window while in the passenger seat. The jury acquitted Specyalski of manslaughter, sparing her a possible 25-year prison sentence. 

18. In 1980, Lord Justice Ormrod, Lord Justice Dunn and Mr Justice Arnold ruled in the UK’s Court of Appeal that a wife from Basingstoke who rationed sex with her husband to once a week was behaving reasonably. Lord Hailsham later revealed that the ruling had provoked some newspapers to try to interview the wives of all the judges in the case.