Slog
News & ArtsFriday, February 27, 2009
News "Off-the-charts Weird"
Posted by Paul Constant on Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Cincinnati freaks me the fuck out:
On many nights over 16 years, Kenneth Douglas engaged in his own personal macabre workplace party.He often brought drugs or alcohol to work and sometimes had sex with women.
At least three of those women were dead, Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said Thursday.
But if Douglas is to be believed, he could have had sex with as many as "over a hundred" bodies in the 16 years he worked as night attendant at the Hamilton County morgue.
He could wind up going to jail for three years for his crimes.
5
It really annoys me that they continually referred to his "victims" throughout the article. Dead bodies are not victims. The article also lacks info on how he was caught, though leaving semen in bodies that are about to be autopsied sounds pretty fucking stupid.
6
I'm waiting for Dan to defend this guy. It's gross but it seems about as "harmless" (as in "not totally harmless, but it's the weirdo's choice) as coprophagia.
Just don't tell the families of the dead folks.
Just don't tell the families of the dead folks.
9
I tend to wonder how non-consensual that sex was especially since none of the hundred bodies ever complained to authorities. I'd have to say they enjoyed it. In fact, they deserved it since this guy was probably, like, the corpse fucker in math class, the guy they made constant fun.
11
@6,
Contaminating evidence is a serious crime. Theoretically a murderer could be acquitted if someone else's semen is found on a dead body. This guy got off easy with three years.
Besides, not telling the families is bullshit and is criminal behavior in itself.
Contaminating evidence is a serious crime. Theoretically a murderer could be acquitted if someone else's semen is found on a dead body. This guy got off easy with three years.
Besides, not telling the families is bullshit and is criminal behavior in itself.
12
@5 ... he missed a parole hearing and consequently his dna was taken and added to a sample database. once there, it matched with two or three previous samples taken from autopsies.
20
@7: I lived in Cincinnati for seven years, and you're right; it's the worst. But as far as I could tell, Westwood was never a nice place -- unless you were white, Catholic, and staunchly Republican. Anyone else was a scary, not-to-be-trusted outsider.
God, Cincinnati sucks.
God, Cincinnati sucks.
24
@4:
I've read several interviews with convicted necros and they all same the same thing: It happens ALL THE TIME. When funeral parlors and morgues catch someone they usually fire them but it's kept covered up because people would freak (obvs).
I've read several interviews with convicted necros and they all same the same thing: It happens ALL THE TIME. When funeral parlors and morgues catch someone they usually fire them but it's kept covered up because people would freak (obvs).
25
There used to be a webcomic about a guy like this... part of the reason why not much shocks me any more.
26
None of this story compares with the depth of creepiness that is what they call "chili" in Cincinnati (shuddering, suppressing rising gorge)...
27
@26: we make cincinnati chili at home with buffalo or lamb - it is good & you are crazy.
@20: funny, i am white and was raised catholic (like everyone on the Cincy's westside). did you know the westside elected a democrat to congress this time?
westwood WAS a "nice", high-walkscore kind of place: i could walk to school, the library, the savings & loan (remember those?), the YMCA & it's 10 ft. diving board, multiple historic churches, the sledding hill, the $1 movie theatre, a bakery, 2 drugstores, restaurants, and a bar that sold me 3.2% beer in a gallon jug when i was 16. this was the 70s/80s.
now, it is just this side of a ghetto. what happened? the city decided the poor african american population of downtown would be provided with vouchers to "leave" over-the-rhine so it could be re-developed for effete urbanites. & so they came to westwood, where rents were lower than the eastside of cincy, and the staunch german catholics, including me ma n da, ran away to their sterile western cul de sacs as fast as they could sell their houses. now all those places are history.
@20: funny, i am white and was raised catholic (like everyone on the Cincy's westside). did you know the westside elected a democrat to congress this time?
westwood WAS a "nice", high-walkscore kind of place: i could walk to school, the library, the savings & loan (remember those?), the YMCA & it's 10 ft. diving board, multiple historic churches, the sledding hill, the $1 movie theatre, a bakery, 2 drugstores, restaurants, and a bar that sold me 3.2% beer in a gallon jug when i was 16. this was the 70s/80s.
now, it is just this side of a ghetto. what happened? the city decided the poor african american population of downtown would be provided with vouchers to "leave" over-the-rhine so it could be re-developed for effete urbanites. & so they came to westwood, where rents were lower than the eastside of cincy, and the staunch german catholics, including me ma n da, ran away to their sterile western cul de sacs as fast as they could sell their houses. now all those places are history.
28
I have a problem with the term "having sex with" to describe what was going on there. It would be rape if the women were alive. How about "raping corpses"?
30
@27: So what you're saying is, your neighborhood was nice when it was mostly white Catholics? And when African-Americans (e.g., scary, not-to-be trusted outsiders) starting moving in, the staunch German Catholics (e.g., white Republicans) "ran away .. as fast as they could sell their houses"?
That's my point exactly, dude.
And would the Westside ever have elected a Democratic congressman if all those blacks hadn't moved into the neighborhood? Sorry, no. African-Americans are the only reason any Democrat gets elected in Cincinnati, ever.
I'm not trying to insult you or devalue your childhood memories, but I stand by my assertion: Cincinnati, on the whole, is a racist, ultra-conservative city that fiercely resists change. Which is why it sucks.
That's my point exactly, dude.
And would the Westside ever have elected a Democratic congressman if all those blacks hadn't moved into the neighborhood? Sorry, no. African-Americans are the only reason any Democrat gets elected in Cincinnati, ever.
I'm not trying to insult you or devalue your childhood memories, but I stand by my assertion: Cincinnati, on the whole, is a racist, ultra-conservative city that fiercely resists change. Which is why it sucks.
31
@28: You can't rape a corpse. It's dead. A corpse has no rights, no privacy, and no feelings.
I've said it before: lady-shaped steak.
I've said it before: lady-shaped steak.
32
I was forced to live in Cincinnati for two years and the above poster's comments are all correct concerning its place in the Hall of Weird Shit. (I had a pass to The Mapplethorpe “illegal pornography” Show for opening night.) The only place that's worse is where I grew up. Duluth, MN. Necrophilia? That's nuthin'.
http://www.brainlesswonders.com/more.php…
Enjoy the linked story. Be sure to pay close attention to the last sentence.
http://www.brainlesswonders.com/more.php…
Enjoy the linked story. Be sure to pay close attention to the last sentence.
33
@32: what's wrong with Duluth? Proposed to my wife at Enger Tower. Spent our first anniversary just up the road in Silver Bay. Elects democratic Mayors, democratic Legislators- what's not to love?
35
@31 I see what you're saying, but I think the term "raping corpses" covers the fact that the corpse is dead. The problem I'm having with the term "having sex with a corpse" is that, for the same reasons you mentioned, a corpse can't have sex. There is no "with." I think "raping corpses" is more presise that "having sex with corpses", because a corpse can't give consent, being dead and all.
Also, a corpse does have the right to not have sex visited upon it, otherwise it wouldn't be against the law. A corpse has a myriad of rights in the eyes of the law-- to not have organs harvested without prior consent while alive, on up to not having gold teeth removed by graverobbers.
Also, a corpse does have the right to not have sex visited upon it, otherwise it wouldn't be against the law. A corpse has a myriad of rights in the eyes of the law-- to not have organs harvested without prior consent while alive, on up to not having gold teeth removed by graverobbers.
38
@31, 35: I think we can all feel a little better about our society, that it does not have a technically correct term for sexually violating corpses.
39
I saw a movie called "Kissed" or something about a woman who has sex with corpses in a morgue. Wasn't shocked by this.
40
38, you have stumbled upon the right phrase: "sexually violating corpses" is what the dude did. having sex with and raping are both off the mark, imo.
41
@11: I imagine that the pain of losing a loved one can only be compounded by hearing that the body was violated while in the morgue. So tell me what good can come from telling the families. I think this would be a perfect example of ignorance being bliss. There are all sorts of gruesome things done to corpses just to make them presentable for a funeral and I deliberately don't look into what they are because I don't want to know about normally painful things done to my dead friends or family. Imagining a teenage daughter raped (which is how a parent would see it even if the term doesn't fit) can't do anyone any good.
As for the morality of the subject, I'm on the fence. I certainly see it as non-consensual since no consent was given but at the same time my logical brain insists that corpses are inanimate objects and this is sort of like calling sex with/on a blowup doll non-consensual. I personally think this is completely icky and gross and wrong wrong wrong, but I'm leery of imposing my ick factor on anyone else. Perhaps criminal damage to private property or trespassing would be more apt comparisons than rape.
As for the morality of the subject, I'm on the fence. I certainly see it as non-consensual since no consent was given but at the same time my logical brain insists that corpses are inanimate objects and this is sort of like calling sex with/on a blowup doll non-consensual. I personally think this is completely icky and gross and wrong wrong wrong, but I'm leery of imposing my ick factor on anyone else. Perhaps criminal damage to private property or trespassing would be more apt comparisons than rape.
42
@41 What if a necrophiliac serial killer murdered a woman and then "violated" her corpse? Would you still go with criminal damage to private property as a definition? I'd want to see the guy charged with rape as well as murder.
I think the families should be told what this man did, because it is their right to seek justice through the justice system, even if it is of little consolation.
I think the families should be told what this man did, because it is their right to seek justice through the justice system, even if it is of little consolation.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (42) RSS