Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Fuck You, Mountains.  Fuck You. Previous entry: Put the PUMA story to bed already

Missouri’s Rep. Scott Muschany: This week’s Republican Sexual Hypocrite

Can the GOP keep up the pace of having at least one embarrassing elected official busted per week for violent criminal sexual behavior all the way through to the election?

They dipped down into the fetid well to give us Missouri state Rep. Scott Muschany, R-Frontenac. What did he do? It’s a hat trick of disgusting behavior.

* He has been indicted for sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl who is the daughter of a state employee;

* He was involved in a sexual relationship with

the victim’s mother

;

* Muschany’s married with two children.

A Cole County grand jury returned an indictment today charging Muschany with the Class C felony of “deviate sexual assault.” The indictment identifies the victim only by initials. It says that on May 17, Muschany “had deviate sexual intercourse” with the girl, “knowing that he did so without” her consent.

Muschany, 42, was booked into the Cole County Jail today at 2:50 and he was released after posting a $5,000 bond. If convicted, Muschany faces a fine of up to $5,000 and a prison term of up to 7 years.

Muschany surprised many in political circles by announcing in late May that he was not running again this November. At the time he said he wanted to spend more time with his family.

It sounds like he should have thought about staying homebound for a long time before that. And the allegations get even worse:

Last Friday, the father of the girl filed a motion for temporary child custody in Cole County Circuit Court. In the filing he argued that the mother’s “believed paramour was believed/alleged to have had inappropriate sexual contact with one of the minor children.”

The document also alleges that the mother “did admit that the incident did take place, including her witnessing same.”

And the drum roll please…back in 2006, Muschany was a co-sponsor of legislation that toughened sex offender laws.  A reader at my pad also noted:

He is a licensed foster parent ... and on the Board of a private Christian school.  Missouri only recently relented in lifting it across-the-board ban on gay foster parents… seems like they need to worry less about the gays and take a closer look at other applicants…

Hat tip, to PHB reader Nancy, who said, “the city of Frontenac is a very tony suburb of STL, the average house valued around $500,000.  Such a scandal… What will the neighbors think!?”

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Pam Spaulding on 07:59 AM • (22) Comments

Dear Pam, Thanks for the post, and thanks to PHB to whom you gave the hat tip.

I’m in total agreement that if Scott Muschany did what he’s alleged to have done, he’s a total creep. Worse than that, he’s a criminal bum who should suffer severe consequences, the first of which is the loss of his political career.

What’s weird to me though, is that Pamela Anderson’s flabby breast is right next to the story. I know Amanda wrote about this several posts down, but I still don’t get it. In addition, the ad that appears on my browser right below this post, which might be regionally determined, I’m in Italy, is for a Russian dating service. Come on.  What is that?

I know it’s a free world and you guys can run any kind of blog you want, but I’d like to know how you reconcile these things. Don’t you find them incompatible to say the least?

Comment #1: mikeb302000  on  08/07  at  08:35 AM

Put this guy *under* the damned prison, if it comes out that he did, in fact, perpetrate these crimes.  And start running criminal background and psychological checks on any and elected GOP politicians.  Bet you dollars to doughnuts that a lot of them are sexually repressed authoritarians who conceal their lusts until said lusts explode like lanced carbuncles.

Comment #2: The Wanderer  on  08/07  at  08:44 AM

“Can the GOP keep up the pace of having at least one embarrassing elected official [per month?] busted for violent criminal sexual behavior all the way through to the election?”

(correction suggested: you need to have a time period in there.  Or is “per week” more accurate?)

Well, color me happy. I get to recycle old signs from the 2006 election (Reduce? Ha! Reuse! Recycle!)

GOP: come for the corruption,
    stay for the molestation!

GOP = Greasy Old Perverts

How long before a McCain yard sign is taken as equivalent to a sexual offender domicile warning?

Comment #3: Snarki, child of Loki  on  08/07  at  09:03 AM

Ha, ha. I left out “per week” guess I couldn’t decide between per week and per day. A month is way too long.

Comment #4: Pam Spaulding  on  08/07  at  09:52 AM

“Deviate sexual intercourse without her permission” is usually called “rape.”  Nice obfuscation they have, there.

Comment #5: Ivyfree  on  08/07  at  10:11 AM

Bush’s list of pardons is going to be extremely interesting, I think…

Comment #6: Scott  on  08/07  at  10:31 AM

Ivyfree, I was going to mention that if no one else did — of course, it’s hardly unusual, more’s the pity.

Comment #7: smadin  on  08/07  at  10:33 AM

(er, that was unclear.  I meant, “if no one else had yet.”)

Comment #8: smadin  on  08/07  at  10:44 AM

““Deviate sexual intercourse without her permission” is usually called “rape.” Nice obfuscation they have, there. “

The Missouri penal statutes on sexual offenses appear to make a distinction between forcible rape and several other offenses.  The indictment uses the specific wording of section 566.070 “Deviate Sexual Assault” as opposed to 566.030 which applies to forcible rape.  Indictments have to be specific.  Its interesting that Missouri still uses the term rape at all, because as I understand it, if anything, a lot of penal codes have been going away from using the term rape and using Sexual assault as the general term since the term rape originally had a more limited meaning.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/STATUTES/C566.HTM

Comment #9: Antinome  on  08/07  at  10:47 AM

Can the GOP keep up the pace of having at least one embarrassing elected official busted per week for violent criminal sexual behavior all the way through to the election?

Of course they can. This has been another edition, etc.

Comment #10: Steve LaBonne  on  08/07  at  11:31 AM

What’s weird to me though, is that Pamela Anderson’s flabby breast is right next to the story. I know Amanda wrote about this several posts down…

Then you also know that she approved an ad with a different photo and PETA, tools that they are, switched it. However, this blog isn’t funded by magical sprites giving away leprechaun gold, so she’s honoring the contract that they violated and making fun of it.

Reading comprehension: It’s not just a river in Egypt.

That said, good. Lord. That picture is foul.

Comment #11: ross  on  08/07  at  12:16 PM

Were any of the above acts classified as “gay”?  No?  Then expect him to get a standing ovation when he returns to his congressional seat in the face of brutally unfair liberal media criticism.

And the drum roll please…back in 2006, Muschany was a co-sponsor of legislation that toughened sex offender laws.

Well, of course he did.  Can’t let politicians get all the fun.  If every sex offender gets his name splashed across newspapers and tv headlines, maybe it won’t look so bad when a state rep does it.

Comment #12: Zifnab25  on  08/07  at  12:58 PM

I don’t believe he should be allowed to spend time with his family.  Or anybody else’s family.

Comment #13: Older  on  08/07  at  01:33 PM

I lived in STL for a few years, and the fact that this happened in Frontenac—well, the fact that a Frontenac politician was CAUGHT, anyway, is indeed shocking.  I hope he gets what’s coming to him.

Comment #14: Wroth  on  08/07  at  02:39 PM

“spend more time with his family” = getting out just ahead of the indictment.

Statutory rape, adultery… watch out for another offense -  this guy is going for a trifecta!

Comment #15: CParis  on  08/07  at  03:14 PM

Statutory rape, adultery… watch out for another offense - this guy is going for a trifecta!

Sounds like they’re specifying forcible rape rather than statutory—that’s what the language about not having the underage girl’s consent was all about.

Comment #16: Mnemosyne  on  08/07  at  04:00 PM

A 42 year-old dude was indicted for “deviate sexual intercourse” with a 14 year-old girl, and he’s out on $5000 bail!?!?!

What the fuck!?

Comment #17: PhysioProf  on  08/07  at  04:49 PM

What PhysioProf said.

Comment #18: mustelid  on  08/07  at  05:07 PM

It looks like they had three choices of charges:

566.060 Forcible Sodomy:  1. A person commits the crime of forcible sodomy if such person has deviate sexual intercourse with another person by the use of forcible compulsion. Forcible compulsion includes the use of a substance administered without a victim’s knowledge or consent which renders the victim physically or mentally impaired so as to be incapable of making an informed consent to sexual intercourse.

566.064. Statutory Sodomy:  1. A person commits the crime of statutory sodomy in the second degree if being twenty-one years of age or older, he has deviate sexual intercourse with another person who is less than seventeen years of age.

566.070. Deviate Sexual Assault:  1. A person commits the crime of deviate sexual assault if he has deviate sexual intercourse with another person knowing that he does so without that person’s consent.

Both Statutory Sodomy and Deviate Sexual Assault are Class C felonies, My guess is that they charged him with Deviate Sexual assault because there is no issue that she “consented.” Forcible Sodomy is subject to up to life in prison, they may not have been able to show force ( though I did not see a definition of force so I am not sure how broad it is interpreted.)

Comment #19: Antinome  on  08/07  at  06:16 PM

Two years ago I worked my ass off canvassing in the horrid St. Louis heat to get this cretin out of office. The woman who was running against him was a phenomenal person and a strong candidate.

This just makes me sick. He represents a much larger area than just Frontenac-much of his constituency is lower-middle class Catholic. He won on the stem-cell issue.

Comment #20: hanna joergel  on  08/07  at  09:47 PM

My brother, Mark Zoole, is now running against this guy’s hand-picked successor.

Hanna, I hope you and others will consider supporting Mark for the Missouri House of Representatives. (Remember, you don’t have to live in the district to donate to the campaign, tp://markzoole.com/.)

It’s time for a change!

Comment #21: Becky Zoole  on  08/11  at  12:08 PM

So uh where’s the John Edwards coverage? Hmmm…

Can the DNC keep up the pace of having at least one embarrassing elected official busted per week for violent criminal sexual behavior all the way through to the election?

Oh yes and less we forget I believe Johnny “Haircut” Edwards missed the Ambulance he was chasing in Beverly Hills recently and locked himself in the men’s room.  Haircut Edwards has some explaining to do to the Feds for the EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS HE ILLEGALLY FUNNELED to his Ho’bag from campaign funds.

Don’t worry though the completely corrupt Howard Dean will make it all better for Johnny Haircut. Dean will make sure to block a criminal or civil probe of the campaign finance violations. Typical left wing DNC hypocrisy…typical.

Pot Kettle…pot ketle….pot kettle…

Comment #22: SPQR_US  on  08/12  at  03:26 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.