State v. Valvoda
| Decision Date | 09 April 1915 |
| Docket Number | 29778 |
| Citation | 152 N.W. 21,170 Iowa 102 |
| Parties | STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, v. FRANK VALVODA, Appellant |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Howard District Court.--HON. W. J. SPRINGER, Judge.
THE accused appeals from a conviction for seduction.
Reversed.
Reed & Pergler, for appellant.
George Cosson, Attorney General, Wiley S. Rankin, Special Counsel and Joseph Griffin, County Attorney, for the State.
The law seems more tender of the female than of the male, for no statute condemns a woman for having seduced a man from the paths of virtue. Probably this is because of legislative recognition that ordinarily the male is likely to be the aggressor. It is a matter of common knowledge, however, that this is not so always, and many a youth has been led astray by the blandishments of fair women. More frequently, both are equally at fault, and then neither should be blamed or punished in order to shield the other. The prosecutrix had known defendant several years, had danced with him in November, 1911, and he took her out riding on Christmas when, according to her testimony, he put his arms about and kissed her, told her he loved her and wanted to have sexual intercourse with her and that, if he could, he would marry her, but that she did not want to. He next met her at a dance at Protivin from which she started home, a distance of five and one-half miles, with her brother and two others, at three o'clock in the morning of June 6, 1912. The defendant had taken a young lady to her home and on his return drove up from behind them, about a mile and a half out of Protivin, and inquired if they were crowded. Upon being informed in the affirmative, he asked her or one of them to ride with him, and she got out into his buggy when, quoting from her testimony,
According to her story, the act was repeated before her home was reached, and without stopping the buggy, as the team and buggy of her brother followed them. More remarkable yet is it that this was done with the lines in his hands. Surely this could scarcely have been accomplished without some aggressive assistance, and that this might have been rendered appears from their previous correspondence. Moreover, such correspondence reveals an utter absence of any sentiment of affection on the part of either, and that the thoughts of each concerning the other, as the correspondence proceeded, were more akin to passion than anything else. The postal of March 24, 1911, read:
On the reverse side of the card is printed: "Sweetheart, will you stroll by my side."
He responded:
Again on the same line she wrote among other things:
He wrote:
Another card written by her May 28th following had a picture of a girl sitting on a fence under a tree with the arm of a young man about her tickling her chin and knee under her. On November 8, 1911, he wrote in kind:
She wrote again December 13, 1911:
On the other side of the card is the picture of a woman scantily attired in a combination suit of underwear, stockings and slippers, exposing legs from knees, lying on a couch, and over the picture printed, "Well, Kiddo?"
He responded to this December 18, 1911: "St. Paul Minneapolis, Dec. 18-1865, Dear Friend, Must and will ans your very noble looking card so you got that card all O. K. but will say this beats it all to heaven How is your body these cold nights any-way Ema? wish I was there to warm you up a little hope to meet you face to face very soon as you look good to me, am out of news so I will end off with six doz of Kisses to you if that to much send some back by return mail."
Instead of resenting this, she followed up the advantage gained by writing:
Again she wrote: Evidently he yielded and took her out riding Christmas. And in his letter on the following day, he refers to what then happened.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial