Nick Grunke, Alex Grunke, Dustin Radke
Wisconsin - Two years ago, when the site was a bit different, we posted an article about the three young men who attempted to dig up a corpse so one of them could have sex with it. They were busted before being able to get the body out of the grave and arrested. Since this happened in Wisconsin, the appeals court upheld dismissal of charges against the three claiming there was no law against necrophilia. But things have changed as the state Supreme Court is now stating that Wisconsin law makes sex acts with the dead illegal.
State law bans sexual intercourse with anyone who does not give consent “whether the victim is dead or alive at the time………A reasonably well-informed person would understand the statute to prohibit sexual intercourse with a dead person”.
Third-degree sexual assault charges have now been re-instated against the three and they are now facing up to 10 years in prison. Read on for the gruesome details.
Back in 2006, Nicholas Grunke, 22, saw the obituary of 20-year-old Laura Tennessen . She had died a week prior in a motorcycle accident. Nicholas then enlisted the help of his twin brother, Alex and their friend 22-year-old Dustin Radke, to help in a plan that involved them digging up the corpse of Laura Tennessen so that Nicholas could have sex with her in a predetermined spot behind Grunke’s house.
So, on the night of 9/2/06, the three headed out to St. Charles Cemetery equipped with digging tools and a tarp. Along the way, they stopped at a Wal-Mart in Dodgeville where they bought condoms. At some point during their activities in the cemetery, a Village of Cassville Police Officer was dispatched to the area to investigate a report of an unoccupied, suspicious vehicle. When the officer arrived, he observed Alex Grunke walking toward the vehicle, dressed in black. He was also extremely nervous and sweating profusely. After some questioning, Alex he confessed that there were two people in the cemetery digging up a corpse. When officers investigated, they found Laura Tennessen’s grave had been tampered with, the top of the vault that held the coffin being visible. Nick and Dustin were nowhere to be found, but were arrested the following morning walking down the road 8 miles from the cemetery.
So, have fun in court Alex, Nick and Dustin. I hope this case drags on and on for you three creepy motherfuckers and I am more than happy to keep your three ugly faces right smack in the limelight. Just a shame that Laura’s family will have to deal with this on top of losing her. Fuck the three of you.
Edit:
Here is the original preliminary hearing for the three idiots. This was when the defense was stating that there was no law against having sexual intercourse with human remains. You also learn that Nicholas Grunke has had some issues, including threatening to blow up his school.
71 responses so far ↓
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
1
Lizard
Jul 10, 2008 at 10:59 am -I think Nick deserves a special set of criminal charges for his nasty ass hair. No wonder he can only get pussy from dead chicks. And my guess is he actually intervened to make it look that way.
2
MissRight
Jul 10, 2008 at 11:02 am -good fucking God-weirdo mother fuckers
3
thepooh5
Jul 10, 2008 at 11:06 am -Not one but THREE - WTH?
4
funkmama
Jul 10, 2008 at 11:26 am -I read this yesterday… this is so disgusting I can hardly think of anything smartass to say about it. My question is, how did all three guys think this was a good idea? Did not one of them think, “Wow, this is sick.” Because it is. Its just SICK.
Excuse me while I vomit.
:puke:
5
Harley_Tech
Jul 10, 2008 at 11:59 am -What is up with their parents? People…BIRTH CONTROL!
R
6
WryBread
Jul 10, 2008 at 12:22 pm -Was some kind of teen-satanic-bs involved in this? Or was the guy just so hard up that he figured a dead woman MIGHT let him screw her? This would make a great start for a low-budget horror film — guy goes to screw dead woman and she finds it so offensive that she COMES TO LIFE. And what the hell were the condoms for — was he so ignorant that he was afraid he’d IMPREGNATE HER? I guess that would be Act II of the movie.
Now that that moment is over for me, I’d like to say that there aren’t enough years in jail for these guys to pay for what they have done to this poor woman’s family. They should have let her rest in peace. Repulsive human beings, if one can call them that.
7
Morbid
Jul 10, 2008 at 12:54 pm -I have added the preliminary hearing video to the article. Some details in it not in the actual article.
8
WryBread
Jul 10, 2008 at 1:06 pm -?
This is an assault on a corpse! A home invasion of a coffin! God, what sick creeps. The video is just repulsive.
Can you imagine being a lawyer and arguing that there is no more “she” or “her,” only “human remains,” and there is no law against having sex with human remains? The judge agrees, but notes there was damage to the cemetery, so the creeps can be charged on that count. So someone who screws your dead sister in the funeral home is a-okay because no property was damaged? What kind of world has this become?
9
Morbid
Jul 10, 2008 at 1:22 pm -Well, the case is back in the news because the state Supreme Court is now saying that it is illegal to fuck around with a corpse. I think that only 20 states even have laws against necrophilia.
10
Athena
Jul 10, 2008 at 1:39 pm -Died in a motorcycle accident, and these dudes thought she was a contender? Hell, maybe she got lucky, but all the photos I’ve ever seen of motorcycle accident victims have been tore the fuck up.
That being said, I don’t think necrophilia should be specifically criminalized. The deceased are inanimate objects.
11
Baffled by idiots
Jul 10, 2008 at 1:46 pm -It always puzzles me how the defense attorney could keep a straight face while presenting an argument - “Your Honor, He refers to her as “She” but the truth is there is no “She” anymore.” I sometime wonder who is worst, The criminal or the defense attorney concocting the story and defense to get these fuckers off the hook.
12
Morbid
Jul 10, 2008 at 1:47 pm -I am inclined to agree with you, except for when it involves humans. The mental damage it can to friends and families of the deceased should be accounted for.
13
Miss. Hill
Jul 10, 2008 at 1:50 pm -Sick…sick disgusting. I am thrilled they are charging them what they did, attempted to do! It is beyond sick. Ugly fuckers too, it’s sad they probably can’t even pay for a piece of ass but that’s no excuse!
14
Athena
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:09 pm -The “emotional damage” argument is…not solid. I mean, do we typically protect “feelings” with legislation? Not really. I’d compromise by making it an offense that could be dealt with in civil court, where most emotional damage is dealt with. If it affects them, let them file suit for monetary recovery of damages. No jail time.
15
Morbid
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:16 pm -I understand that you are of the mindset that a person should be able to dig up the corpse of a 9-year-old girl and then fuck it in front of the family and only be punished by a monetary fine of which the family may never collect.
That is almost as sad and disgusting to me as what these three deviants attempted.
16
WryBread
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:17 pm -I don’t even want someone screwing my dead cat. So that leaves only wild dead animals — like that dude who found the deer by the road and went to town.
Is a corpse considered property? Could damage or unauthorized use of property be appropriate here? I think stealing a corpse is a crime, so would be disturbing it or depositing semen in it be one? I’m curious about this aspect of the law.
17
Gohn
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:29 pm -To top all of this off, when you click on the link of her name it states that her brother died only months after her in another vehicular accident. Her’s in August. His in December. Those poor parents.
18
Athena
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:31 pm -I understand that you are of the mindset that a person should be able to dig up the corpse of a 9-year-old girl and then fuck it in front of the family and only be punished by a monetary fine of which the family may never collect.
*sigh*
You’re a BIG fan of reductio ad absurbum, aren’t you? Problem with your little scenario is that the behavior is already criminal in two other ways. Digging it up would be illegal (just like what these boys were originally charged with) and sex in public is illegal. In fact, the vast majority of ways one would obtain a corpse are already illegal. Specifically criminalizing necrophilia would just add another, unnecessary layer to behavior that will already be punished for the sake of “principle”. I hate that, no matter how noble the intent.
19
Morbid
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:31 pm -The aspect of the law, in regardsw to the states that make it illegal, is a consent issue. Yeah, it is strange as the person is not living, but basically it is based on the fact that if you didn’t want three zit-faced emo fuckers sticking their dicks in you while lkiving, you wouldn’t want it done while you were dead.
Personally? You can do whatever you want with my corpse. I mean, it will be a good-looking one. Besides, no matter what happens when I die…Heaven, Hell, Nothing…I wont give two shits about what you do with it.
But I just cannot subscribe to a world like Athena’s, where dead children can be taken and gang banged by individuals whose only fear will be a possible civil suit. This isn’t a “victimless crime” as in today’s society, the thought of ones mother being pulled out of her coffin and getting banged in the ass doggie-style while draped over her tombstone…well, that can probably cause someone a bit of anguish.
I am pretty sure there are already laws on the books in regards to fucking with corpses (mutilation or whatever) and I feel the act of necrophilia should be treated the same. The deviant nature of the act just has me liking the idea of it being a bit stiffer penalty than a civil suit or something akin to a traffic ticket.
Unless it is a horny zombie or a consenting vampire, fucking corpses taken out of their graves should be illegal. Thank Hudge, Wisconsin agrees.
20
Gohn
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:39 pm -Okay, as far as myspace if anyone is interested… I have two possible sites I think might be Dustin’s.
This first states that the user is from California, however, clicking on his top friends shows they live in Wisconsin. So, it may or may not be him.
http://profile.myspace.com/ind.....d=89898972
The second states that the man lives in Canada and is 33. The rest of the page is pretty blank. However, the pictures on this page do look pretty similar to his mug shot.
http://profile.myspace.com/ind.....=230826355
I’ll let you guys decide. No luck on finding the others yet.
21
Athena
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:41 pm -Is a corpse considered property? Could damage or unauthorized use of property be appropriate here? I think stealing a corpse is a crime, so would be disturbing it or depositing semen in it be one? I’m curious about this aspect of the law.
Exactly. Stealing a corpse is already a crime. Adding more legislation on top of the legislation that’s already there for the sake of peoples’ emotions is unnecessary, in my opinion.
Depite what Morbid falsely argues, in “my” world, the world of the 30 or so states without necrophilia laws, people can’t just go around digging up corpses and screwing them indiscriminately. In many places, “my” world IS the status quo and, amazingly, it’s not a corpse free-for-all.
Shitty stuff happens all the time. If you witness or hear about something traumatic happening to a family member, should there be a separate charge for the emotional damage it might have done you? Nope. Does a live rape victim’s family have criminal recourse because their daughter’s/sister’s rape has done them emotional damage? Nope. That’s just not how the law works.
22
Morbid
Jul 10, 2008 at 2:45 pm -Exactly, but with Wisconsin now adopting the law, the people in Wisconsin wont need a recourse. Neither will the people in the states that will eventually follow.
23
Athena
Jul 10, 2008 at 3:06 pm -So the families of dead victims get more protection/recourse than those of live ones. Yeah, that makes total sense.
Criminalizing necrophilia based on a lack of consent is total bullshit, legally speaking. In fact, I’d be willing to bet it would be overturned on the federal level. But SCOTUS will never hear a necrophilia case.
I hate when legal nonsense is established because the topic is too touchy and emotional for people to be willing to apply formulaic, rational thought to it.
24
missanthropic
Jul 10, 2008 at 3:20 pm -Wow. These kids are…. really fucking creepy, and pathetic might I add. Just be thankful the kid felt the need to bust a nut in a corpse before these sick fucks decided to pull a Columbine or some other shit.
and I agree…. a motorycle accident victim? How low could you go? Couldn’t find a young OD victim? Ugh, sick.
25
MissRight
Jul 10, 2008 at 3:24 pm -<actually Gohn-her bro died in 1996-but yes-how very sad for her parents
26
Gohn
Jul 10, 2008 at 3:39 pm -Oh, wow. I’m sleeped deprived, sorry. *slams head on desk*
27
Not So Speechless
Jul 10, 2008 at 3:48 pm -Um…. He is a Marine- his comments and profile say so and I believe it.
28
Gohn
Jul 10, 2008 at 4:58 pm -Oh. Whoops again, sorry. I’ll shut up for the day. I’m right at the end of finishing up a class and I have not been getting much sleep. What about the other one though? I thought it kind of looked like him.
29
tjangel
Jul 10, 2008 at 6:08 pm -corpse free-for-all - LOL that is one odd mental image you left me with Athena
The people here at work are giving me looks because i really did laugh out loud when i read your comment!
30
Athena
Jul 10, 2008 at 6:22 pm -Ha! For once, I can cause someone else’s coworkers to think they’re a little cooky! Normally, I’m the one getting looks. I hope none of them were scowls, TJ.
31
MadMama
Jul 10, 2008 at 9:31 pm -<
I have been a daily reader on this site for a few months now, and just recently joined in so I could comment. I have religiously read every comment in nearly every story, and I have at times found myself in awe of the some of the members including Athena. I am often quite impressed with her knowledge of the law and the fact that she doesn’t get emotionally involved with these sometimes horrific stories. But in reading this one, I’m just gonna have to call a spade a spade. This is just about the most ignorant shit that I’ve ever seen her write. My problem with it is not the legal aspect of whether it is or isn’t a crime to have sex with a corpse. Its if someone is insane enough to attempt to commit this kind of act, what the hell else would they do ? To suggest that it is unneccessary to charge them with necrophelia and only for digging up the body is cheating the public out of an acurate description of their crimes, or the crimes they were going to commit. Its like finding someone with bomb making paraphernalia that includes a blueprint of an intended building, and only charging them with the illegal items. And maybe its just me, but I would define an inanimate object as something that never walked, talked, and breathed…like a doornob.
32
Unamused Cat
Jul 10, 2008 at 11:15 pm -I talked to this guy. It isn’t him. Someone might want to take his MySpace info down. He has been getting a lot of questions about being involved.
33
majaka
Jul 11, 2008 at 7:56 am -I agree with you…… it just made me wonder about their state of mind. they have to be pretty much screw up to even think about having sex with a corpse…… in the video they say he has always been like that having some strange thoughts so to me he is really having a mental problem and the other two are just moron for agreeing with him…..
34
Athena
Jul 11, 2008 at 6:41 pm -My problem with it is not the legal aspect of whether it is or isn’t a crime to have sex with a corpse. Its if someone is insane enough to attempt to commit this kind of act, what the hell else would they do? To suggest that it is unneccessary to charge them with necrophelia and only for digging up the body is cheating the public out of an acurate description of their crimes, or the crimes they were going to commit. Its like finding someone with bomb making paraphernalia that includes a blueprint of an intended building, and only charging them with the illegal items.
At least you admit that you are unconcerned with the legality involved. When someone clearly intends to do something that they did not get the chance to do, they are typically charged with a “conspiracy to commit (enter crime here)”. There IS no “conspiracy to commit necrophilia”, apparently, in the state of Wisconsin. So, if a person conspires to commit murder, but that charge did not exist for whatever reason, you recommend we just go ahead and charge them with murder, even though they didn’t kill anyone? That’s exactly what you’re recommending, here.
They WERE charged with the crimes they DID commit. They didn’t actually dig up a body, so they should not be charged as doing so.
Furthermore, your “slippery slope” argument is a fallacy. There are people who do all sorts of unpopular or disgusting things and their behavior does not progress. To assume that young boys who would dig up a body would absolutely go on to do something worse is flawed logic. Do people who spank their kids ultimately graduate to beating them? Of course not. Can they? Sure. But we don’t assume a spanker will go on to worse just because they spank. This logic should apply to everything. We tread in dangerous territory when we try too hard to anticipate behavior, and start punishing people because of what they *might* eventually turn into.
And maybe its just me, but I would define an inanimate object as something that never walked, talked, and breathed…like a doornob.
With all due respect, it IS just you. Inanimate is defined as “not animate; lifeless.” Is a corpse not “lifeless”?
35
MadMama
Jul 11, 2008 at 9:46 pm -Ok think about the example you layed out there…people who spank children vs. people who attempt to rob graves with the intent to have sex with a corpse. So, you are taking something that is socially acceptable and comparing it to something that is for most of the world…taboo. Who would you rather have babysitting your kids…a spanker…or a wanna be dead body fucker ? Wouldn’t you want something as extreme in nature as that show up on a criminal background check ? I totally understand that you get off on knowing the law…and I’m gonna hand it to you..you know your shit. And I’m guessing by your remarks that The Godesss of Wisdom does not like to be challenged. I just happen to think, and I dare say that I’m not alone, that you are being way too flippant with your comments as far as this story is concerned.
By all means I accept that inanimate means lifeless, but couldn’t a broader understanding of that mean something that never had life ? Or is that just the human coming out in me ?
36
tjangel
Jul 11, 2008 at 10:01 pm -I think the looks had something to do with the fact that I laughed out loud and when they glanced over they could see I was reading about necrophiles - hah, i grin everytime i think about it.
37
Wonder
Jul 12, 2008 at 6:53 am -I too wanted to smack that bitch… I am sorry but if that had been her daughter or a family friend. how dare her…
the neighboring state iowa has it and the judge dismisses the charges…. someone kudo’s for stepping up and petitioning to have the law changed.
I have to say that these twins were bor4n with half a brain cell and I agree ….. thanks God they didn’t blow up a school first.
athena do i understand you correctly you think its ok - your making my head spin… In my state there is a law for everything and if there wasn’t they make them up as they go…. what these boys did… what they intended to do … just cause they didn’t follow thru … because they got ran off … still makes me wrong wrong wrong and they need locked up… I can’t believe the twin and the friend got talked into being a part of this sicko act.
Still PISSED off at this defense attorney on my far left… no way I could defend the dude … hang him and send the other two to a mental ward and dose them with some heavy meds.
is that a wig in the mug ?
Laura sure is pretty, I am sad that happened to her! Her parents probably find peace that the siblings have each other in heaven.
38
Wonder
Jul 12, 2008 at 7:09 am -was thinking about the timeline
Tom was 9 when Laura was born
Laura was 10 when Tom died
Tom died age 19 Laura at age 20
both in auto accidents
*sounds like shakespear
Tom was looking out for Laura -
***luckily the patrol car came when they did.
39
sugarglider
Jul 13, 2008 at 9:42 am -This question doesn’t make any sense to me. It sounds like a Zen koan or something.
40
sugarglider
Jul 13, 2008 at 9:44 am -Actually, it seems to me that Athena answered your queries very thoughtfully.
41
MadMama
Jul 13, 2008 at 4:23 pm -Why don’t you meditate on that for a few years…maybe it’ll come to you.
Wow…I had no idea that my comments would bring out the minions. I’m sure she will be glad to know that you’ve got her back. My intent was not to get anyone’s feathers ruffled, I was simply stating my opionion…thats allowed…right?
42
sugarglider
Jul 14, 2008 at 11:03 am -Dear Mad Mama, I’m sorry you don’t seem to be able to explain yourself. That’s sad. I’m also sorry, but I’m not going to puzzle them out for you.
Minion? You think I am Athena’s minion? Do you even know wha that word means? You’re the one who has an overweening AWE (in your own words) for Athena. Me? I’m pretty sure it’s a case of mutual respect. Now, you can sit there and pout (”poor little me, I didn’t mean to many any waves”), but since you’ve clearly meant to ruffle MY feathers, I’ll state my opinion (as you pointed out, it’s “allowed”): you’re making a fool out of yourself. I mean, way to take it from the frying pan to the fire. Happy now?
43
sugarglider
Jul 14, 2008 at 11:05 am -Hmm, there may be precedent in WI.
44
sugarglider
Jul 14, 2008 at 12:23 pm -p.s. tp Madmama, I feel kinda bad that I won’t be around later to respond to any response you might make about my response to your kinda hysterical freakout over what Athena said about the fallacies of your arguments, so I’ll say it now:
Athena and I don’t even agree on everything. But I think it’s safe to say that we both tend to prioritize critical thinking skills over emotionalism. So, come on in, the water’s fine
And the answer to your question is: I wouldn’t want either a necrophiliac or a spanker babysitting my children.
45
MadMama
Jul 14, 2008 at 6:52 pm -Sugarglider…didn’t someone point out in another thread that you need to calm down a bit ? You are getting way too upset over some words on your computer screen. I apologize for raising your blood pressure. And sweetie I don’t use words I don’t know the meanings of…maybe you should try that. You put alot of earnest into your posts in an effort to seem educated…its really not working on me…my guess is that you are well read, and you use alot of what you read other people saying in your posts here. I did you use the words ” in awe ” when mentioning Athena..because I think she’s smart, and is a very worthy oppenent of banter such as this…you darling are not. Now…its time for you to move on to another story. I’m sure this is not the last time I will hear from you, so until then…Have A Wonderful Day and cut back on the salt..its making you bitter.
46
Athena
Jul 14, 2008 at 7:23 pm -I’m flattered that you’re impressed by my ability to remain unemotional about these topics, really. I think you ought to give it a shot, sometime. Instead of blowing smoke up my ass and suggesting that you respect me, why don’t you show me by explaining to me why someone should get charged with something they didn’t do?
You didn’t care for my spanking analogy, I see. Let’s try another one. Hardcore S&M, perhaps? Most people find that distasteful, and I doubt you’d want someone into severe bondage babysitting your kid, but should it be placed on a person’s record simply because it’s wildly unpopular?
No, I do not “get off” on my legal knowledge. I have this knowledge because I used to intern for a defense attorney, and it serves a very practical role in the discussions I participate in. The “Goddess of Wisdom” doesn’t mind being challenged one bit, I’d just rather the exchange be worth my time.
If your position is, “I don’t care about the legality, these sick fuckers deserve to pay,” there’s no discussion to be had, here. If you’d like to discuss things rationally, however, I’m always game.
SG - Watch out, darlin’…You’re lumping yourself in with public enemy #1 with all this fancy talk about “critical thinking”.
47
MadMama
Jul 14, 2008 at 8:07 pm -Well a big thank you for branding me public enemy #1 for stating that your views don’t always make sense. If its against the law in some states to fuck the dead, it would stand to reason that it should be against the law to attempt to. Lets for example use rape…which is against the law..correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t attempted rape against the law ? We have come way off course of the original comments that were made…in which you stated that because it wasn’t against the law to fuck a corpse, then one shouldn’t be charged with attempting to do it. Maybe there hasn’t been an incident to provoke such laws to be passed. My initial comment was made because I didn’t share your views. If I had known that in doing so I would become PE#1..I would have said nothing. I guess it will serve me better to just read and keep my opinions to myself. I won’t comment again, its just ignorant to continue attacking the unknown. As far as blowing smoke up your ass…I was just showing you respect…which is something I used to think you deserved. Your attack on me was clearly out of anger because I questioned your ‘ authority ‘…guess thats how people get gone around here…