Originally posted: May 25, 2008, 2:27p.m.
Updated: May 31, 2008, 11:34 a.m.

RALEIGH, N.C. — On Friday, May 30, the Wake County District Attorney’s office cited the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Lawrence v. Texas (2003) decision in dropping crimes against nature charges against two men.

The two men had been originally charged on May 25 using the state’s Crimes Against Nature statute, as reported by The News and Observer on Saturday.

Police first arrested and charged 40-year-old man, who called them to the private residence to report an attack. Later, police arrested and charged his 25-year-old partner with the same charge.

The 25-year-old was also charged with simple assault for biting Sloan and communicating threats for telling Sloan he was going to disembowel him.

“This looks like a case of a consensual act that may have gotten out of hand,” Raleigh police Capt. T.D. Hardy told the daily newspaper. “The law is still on the books. Our detectives got involved in it last night and decided this was the best thing to do. What the D.A.’s office will do with it, I don’t know.”

The 40-year-old insists that he was the victim of an assault.

“I didn’t allow anything,” he told The News and Observer Saturday. “They knew it and turned it around and arrested me. I have never been so humiliated in all my life. It’s just awful.”

The Crimes Against Nature statute remains on the books in North Carolina, despite the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas U.S. Supreme Court ruling that disallowed use of such statutes in prosecuting private, consensual acts.

Efforts to have the statute repealed in the state legislature have consistently failed, in part due to pressure from conservative activists.

Durham LGBT activist and nationally-respected blogger Pam Spaulding wrote May 25 that the use of the statute in this case is not only unconstitutional but might also be hampering the prosecution of a real crime — sexual assault.

The 40-year-old man had to post a $3,000 bond to be released from jail. The 25-year-old man posted a $4,500 bond.

[Ed. Note — This story has been updated. The names of the accused men have been removed. (July 23, 2012)]

9 replies on “DA drops sodomy charges on Raleigh men”

  1. I really hope Mr. Sloan fights the CAN charge. Doing so will force the court to strike the unconstitutional law from the books in NC. To date, nobody has been willing to challenge the law because most CAN arrests stem from stings in public places, like parks, and prostitution. The arrested want to keep the situation quiet, not go to court. Mr. Sloan’s situation is ideal for defeating the CAN statute.

  2. This CAN charge is a clear violation of U.S. Supreme Court rulings. I really don’t see how the Raleigh P.D. can do something so blatantly unconstitutional. I thought this was a nation where leaders and law enforcement actually strove to follow the rule of law?

  3. Doesn’t he get his money back??? What a scheister system! Let’s arrest the rape victim, charge him alot of money to go home, and then say, “Oh, sorry…” What a crock of shit.

  4. Hopefully he will bring charges against the police department for ignoring what had happened to him

  5. What kind of charge would an individual officer be given. How would Sloan walk in to the department and what kind of charge would he tell the department he wants the officer charged with?

    In this case, I think, only a lawsuit will do.

  6. It’s time for crime against nature law in NC. to change where it would not be a felony, it’s such a outdated law that should be took off the books..My son,Mack Polk Jr.,just got 11 years for consenual oral sex with his live in Fiancee in the privacy of there own home.. She performed it on him and didn’t get anytime.Hello, what is wrong with this picture..Yeah it’s a felon in NC.
    10 year sentence..Man or Woman.. so don’t get your love one mad, they could charge you with this too.She said in front of Jury trail, that it was consentual, but jury found him guilty anyway, what was wrong with this Jury people and the DA and Judge, trying to make a name for there self….What a cruel and unusual punishment,It’s like a witch hunt.. if anyone got a answer, I would love to hear it..Thanks

  7. Hey lady… you aren’t telling the full story here.

    Your son has a rap sheet a mile long: numerous felony drug charges, assault on a female, DWIs, etc.

    The CAN law was used to put him away as a “habitual felon,” and that he is. He belongs behind bars.

Comments are closed.