April 06, 2005
I'm Speechless, II
Via Margi Lowry:
A Texas lawyer was arrested yesterday and charged with offering to provide legal services in exchange for a sex act and some hot girl-on-girl action. According to cops, Steven Copenhaver, 56, solicited the "deviate sexual intercourse" from the wife of a prospective client and the woman's sister-in-law.
The attorney told the client's wife he would be happy to swap sex in return for his services in representing her husband, accused of assaulting her. I tell you, the man is all heart.
During a visit last month to Heavin's home, Copenhaver allegedly told her--and the woman's sister-in-law, Malinda Tilley--exactly what he was looking for (you'll have to read the document for the dirty details). And, he added, the women "might have to do this a couple of times."
Discovery can be a lengthy process, I'm told, but I suppose it's best to be thorough.
Posted by Cassandra at April 6, 2005 10:02 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Bartering is a time honored tradition in the history of human civilization.
They should have countered with 2 chickens and a goat.
Posted by: Pile On® at April 6, 2005 01:16 PM
I would've thought the last thing they needed was another goat...
Posted by: Cassandra at April 6, 2005 01:27 PM
Ooo that's tempting, but not my bag--unless there are guaranteed deadly consequences.
Posted by: George Felos at April 6, 2005 01:45 PM
Bartering is also difficult to tax. God bless him for trying to avoid paying taxes.
Did I mention that I hate taxes?
Posted by: KJ at April 6, 2005 03:31 PM
Bartering is also difficult to tax. God bless him for trying to avoid paying taxes...
Spoken like a lawyer. You fool :)
Posted by: Cassandra at April 6, 2005 03:45 PM
I see that Texas' notorious "Anti-Trading Legal Services for Hot Lesbian Action" law is coming into effect here.
Seriously, what is he being charged for here?
Posted by: Peter at April 6, 2005 04:56 PM
According to the arrest warrant, it looks like soliciting a paid sex act (prostitution). I'm not familiar with the Texas penal code, but in most states it's a no-no to solicit sex acts and offer payment in return.
Some states even have fornication, sodomy (oral sex, believe it or not, is considered to be sodomy in many states and is against the law) and adultery statutes but the warrant doesn't say anything about that.
Posted by: Cassandra at April 6, 2005 05:02 PM
Lawrence v. Texas. Non-commercial, consentual sodomy, even the oral kind, can no longer be outlawed. It is apparently right there in the Consitution. Where? As Homer Simpson would say, somewhere in the back.
God bless Justice Kennedy and his 4 fellow (or fellatious) justices.
Posted by: KJ at April 6, 2005 05:32 PM
Dang. You're right KJ - I just dropped in hurriedly and wasn't thinking.
Good thing I covered my cute little tuckus six ways to Sunday... and here I was hoping to get partial credit for a certain attorney-like vagueness about my answer :)
Posted by: Cassandra at April 6, 2005 05:38 PM
What was the mental health worker doing hiding in the bedroom? Taking a lunch break?
Posted by: spd rdr at April 6, 2005 06:30 PM
I think she was waiting to counsel Copenhaver about his distress at never having seen two girls together.
From what I hear, that kind of trauma can be severely damaging. The poor man was just trying to seek healing, for pity's sake. Where is the empathy?
Posted by: Cassandra at April 6, 2005 06:39 PM
I have a story where this worked. No time now, check back later.
Posted by: Pile On® at April 6, 2005 07:27 PM
This is what passes for modern therapy? I think I just may need some "healing" also.:)
Posted by: a former european at April 6, 2005 08:51 PM
Steven Copenhaver, a proud graduate of the Howard Stern School of Law and Lesbian Sex.
Posted by: Frodo at April 7, 2005 12:15 AM
But does he like Pudding?
Posted by: Purple Raider at April 7, 2005 10:45 AM
If it is served Pile style.
Posted by: Cricket at April 7, 2005 04:12 PM
Purple: You can't have any pudding! How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?
-- The Wall
Posted by: a former european at April 7, 2005 09:12 PM
Are there no Free Trade Republcians here when you need them?
Posted by: Ciggy at April 7, 2005 09:26 PM