‘Romeo and Juliet’ case ruling frees Indiana man
ALEXANDRIA, Ind. — An Indiana law that allows consensual sex between teens in ongoing relationships freed a man from prison after he was convicted twice of sex-related crimes with his underage girlfriend.
The law, known as the “Romeo and Juliet” provision, addresses relations between two teens who are no more than four years apart, in a romantic relationship and having consensual sex.
In the Alexandria, Indiana, couple’s case, their sexual encounters produced two daughters, born about 17 months apart.
The father, Larry R. Beedy II, was 17 and 18 at the times of conception. The mother was, respectively, 13 and 14 years old. Beedy’s case is unique in that it set precedent for repeat offenders.
The Herald Bulletin, of Anderson, Indiana, did not identify the girlfriend due to the nature of the crimes. She was reportedly abandoned by her mother. Now 17, she is attending an area high school and is living in foster care with the two daughters.
Indiana’s current legal age of consent is 16, so long as one partner doesn’t hold a position of trust or power over the 16-year-old, among other stipulations.
However, a seldom-used Romeo and Juliet provision was adopted by the Indiana General Assembly in the mid-1990s, as laws were being created to identify what type of criminal should be listed on national sex offender registries.
Many states have varying forms of this law, which recognizes the stigma that could follow teens in ongoing relationships if they faced criminal charges. Under Indiana Code, a defense attorney can use the Romeo and Juliet provision for a client accused of sexual misconduct with a minor if: the suspect is not more than four years older than the victim; the relationship is ongoing; and the crime was not committed by someone 21 years of age or older.
Beedy is exactly three years, nine months and 12 days older than his girlfriend.
The two have not seen each other in months as local attorneys sort out whether there is a court order barring contact as a result of the first conviction after they had an encounter.
However, when the girlfriend is 18, which is the legal age to marry without a parent’s consent, and finishes high school later this year, Beedy plans to be at her door.
“I’ll be at her house with a ring and a necklace saying let’s get married. As soon as she’s done with school we’ll get married. I promise you,” he said.
Beedy met the Alexandria girl, then 13, during a get-together of friends.
He recalled, “She was cute. She was smart. She wouldn’t argue and fight with me. She had long, brown beautiful hair, amazing smile and she gave me my two beautiful kids.”
They didn’t have sexual relations for about 11 months, Beedy said. He never considered using a condom or practicing safe sex, he said. Their first encounter produced the girl’s first pregnancy, he said.
That act landed Beedy in juvenile detention. He was adjudicated on Dec. 6, 2013, for child molesting and child exploitation. He was serving a 120-day sentence in detention when the first daughter was born on Feb. 24, 2014; the mother was 14.
In September 2014, Beedy was convicted of theft and burglary in a case unrelated to the girlfriend. The girl moved in with Beedy’s parents; she had been abandoned by her mother, according to court records.
When Beedy got out of prison to serve in-house detention, he and the girl had unprotected sex again. Under an order to monitor his whereabouts, Beedy was wearing an ankle bracelet at the time, he said.
Their second daughter was born July 9, 2015. The mother was now 15 and Beedy was 19.
This time the encounter led to a conviction of sexual misconduct with a minor. He received a six-year sentence with three years to be served in prison. He was in prison when the second child was born, who he has not seen in person.
Beedy’s mother, Crystal, developed an affection for the girlfriend and the infants.
She said, “When I found out about the relationship I was against it, but she was already pregnant. What could I do?”
By the second pregnancy, the girlfriend was a member of the family.
“It didn’t bother me because they already had a kid together,” said Crystal Beedy.
At his Alexandria home, Beedy displayed emails he says he received through a third party. They are thoughts from his girlfriend, he said.
In part, one read: “I love you because you can be funny and sweet, and you can make me smile, even at the worst time. You absolutely amaze me. And you are so perfectly imperfect that I wouldn’t rather be with anyone else, yeah. You drive me up the wall sometimes but you are most definitely worth it cause the way I feel when I’m with you.”
Beedy’s trial for sexual misconduct with a minor was held in Judge David Happe’s Madison Circuit Court 4. Before the trial began, Beedy’s attorney, Evan Broderick of Anderson, filed a motion to dismiss the charge based on the Romeo and Juliet defense.
But Broderick was denied when the prosecution successfully alleged Beedy was disqualified because he had a prior sex offense of child molesting and child exploitation; he had video recorded some of the couple’s sex acts.
The law also states the suspect cannot have committed another sex offense against “any other person.”
It was uncertainty over the definition of “any other person” that Happe questioned.
“I think what the legislature has done is say if you’re a sex offender, if you’re a sexual predator, if you’re someone who’s victimized other people sexually, then you don’t get to use the Romeo and Juliet defense,” Happe said, according to the court documents.
Defense attorneys Paul J. Podlejski and Broderick handled the appeal arguing that “any other person” referred to anyone other than the victim in this case.
However, the state, represented by the office of then-Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, argued the phrase meant any other person besides Beedy.
In August 2016 — as Beedy was serving prison time — the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in Beedy’s favor, writing, “Indeed, it is illogical to interpret the language in that manner because the defendant cannot commit a sex crime against himself, thus there is no need for the additional language.”
Though ruling in Beedy’s favor, the appellate court was split, with Judge Cale Bradford dissenting. He wrote, “Beedy should have learned his lesson before, that even true love would not be an excuse to, in essence, recommit the same unlawful act.”
The attorney general’s office asked the Supreme Court to hear the case but the request was denied this month, leaving the appellate ruling intact.
On Jan. 20, Beedy was released from the New Castle Correctional Facility. He is working as a concrete mason and said he hopes to help his girlfriend attend medical college.
Like many people, Beedy had never heard of the Romeo and Juliet provision, named for the teenage lovers in Shakespeare’s famous romantic tragedy.
“I didn’t know nothing about it. I don’t even know what the movie’s about,” Beedy acknowledged.
Though the state law would protect a small group of teens who find themselves in a similar situation, defense attorney Broderick said he thinks the decision could impact all Indiana courts.
“It sets precedent for all trial courts in the state of Indiana,” Broderick said.
He added, “The legislature realized there was a population of people out there and wanted to protect them if they engaged in a relationship with exactly the same person later on. If they re-engage in a relationship it’s OK. But it’s not giving them carte blanche to hook up with every freshman girl they meet.”
Miley writes for the Anderson, Indiana Herald Bulletin.