Norblad was arrested January 27, 2000, by State police in response to reports of an erratic driver on Interstate 5. http://www.avoiceforchildren.com/cases/mtangel_case/norblad.htm

 

Many people are concerned about the impairment of judges in America's judicial system. It appears, from their records, that many judges have no regard for the safety and well-being of women and children. They execute judgments that, in many cases, are viewed as bizarre and inhumane with no repercussions to their careers.

 

In July 1997, Dr. Kuttner wrote a letter to the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability. Dr. Kuttner stated in his letter. "I have spoken with other therapists and attorneys in this area, and understand that Judge Norblad has a reputation for making capricious and bizarre decision, but that no attorney feels safe to question them."

 

The Judicial Fitness Commission responded to Dr. Kuttner's complaint by saying they saw this as only his (Dr. Kuttner's) complaining because he disagreed with the judge's decision. They didn't think there was anything wrong.

 

On March 1, 1996, during the temporary custody hearing, Judge Norblad asked my husband, Mr. Marty Warner, while he was on the witness stand and under oath, why he had impregnated me during the time I was suffering a mental/nervous breakdown.

 

COURT TRANSCRIPT

 

JUDGE NORBLAD: "Sir, I have one question. Maybe this is curiosity, more than it has to do with the case. If your wife was going through so much emotional difficulties, she realized it, and you realized it, why did you attempt to have an additional child and two pregnancies?

 

MR. WARNER: We didn't attempt to have an additional child.

 

JUDGE NORBLAD: No, you succeeded, I guess.

 

MR. WARNER: Yes, sir. Zachary's pregnancy was a surprise. We were trying to avoid that.

 

(Note: No contraceptives were used. I was living with my brother out-of-state at the time.)

 

JUDGE NORBLAD: Twice?

 

MR. WARNER: The other pregnancy was a surprise as well. Both those.

 

(Note: Pregnancy No. 1 during my mental/nervous breakdown. This pregnancy ended in miscarriage.)

 

JUDGE NORBLAD: Okay.

 

MR. WARNER: I was very committed to doing my part to avoid pregnancy.

 

JUDGE NORBLAD: All right. Thank you. You can step down.

 

MR. WARNER: As you can tell, Kathy (Coral) and I have not had too much difficulty conceiving. (Laughs)

 

JUDGE NORBLAD: Yeah, I got that figured out. (Laughs)

 

My friends and I wonder what Mr. Warner meant by, "I was very committed to doing my part to avoid a pregnancy." These two pregnancies pushed my health farther over the edge. It was not a humorous situation. What is humorous about rape?

 

Throughout our marriage Mr. Warner often referred to me as a "cow or a horse in need of being bred." Mr. Warner insisted on sexual relations immediately before and after the birth of each of my children. He had no regard for the risk of infection he subjected me to or the pain he caused. He used me sexually when I was physically ill and during my breakdown. He made me promise before we were married that I would never say "no" to him. I thought he would have respect and decency, but I was mistaken. Mr. Warner had bitter memories of his mother. He detested seeing his father sleeping on the couch and said he would not be treated like that.

 

The most painful and insidious act committed against me was being raped by my ex-husband during the period of my mental nervous breadkown./tt>

Until now, to survive the court trauma and shock, I kept my feelings regarding the rapes deep within me.

Severe trauma can so impact our ability to recognize our self, that even the face in a mirror is a stranger.

On April 22, 1999, I legally changed my name to Coral Anika Theill at the Marion County Courthouse, in Salem, Oregon.  Kathy Hall was laid to rest.

Andrea Dworkin, in her book, Intercourse, analyzes the institution of sexual intercourse and how that institution, as defined and controlled by patriarchy, has proven to be a devasting enslavement of woman.

Rape Count 1 as described in Chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, 163.375:   Rape in the first degree.  (1)  A person who has sexual intercourse with another person commits the crime of rape in the first degree if:...(d)  The victim is incapable of consent by reason of mental defect, mental incapacitation or physical helplessness.  (2)  Rape in the first degree is a Class A felony.  (1971 c.743 s.111; 1989 c359 s2; 1991 c.628 s.3)  (3)  "Mentally defective" means that a person sufferes from a mental disease or defect that renders the person incapable of appriasing the nature of the conduct of the person.  (4)  "mentally incapacitated" menas that a person is rendered incapable of appriasing or controlling the conduct of the person at the time of the alleged offense because of the influence of a controlled or other introxicating substance administered to the person without the consent of the person or because of any other act committed upon the person without the consent of the person.  (5)  "Physically helpless" means that a person is unconscious or for any other reason is physically unable to communicate unwillingness to an act.

While the legal definition varies within the United States, marital rape can be defined as any unwanted intercourse or penetration (vaginal,anal or oral) obtained by force, threat of force, or WHEN THE WIFE IS UNABLE TO CONSENT (Bergen, 1996; Pagelow, 1984; Russell, 1990).  On July 5, 1993, marital rape became a crime in all 50 states, under at least one section of the sexual offense codes.  In 17 states and the District of Columbia, there are NO EXEMPTIONS FROM RAPE PROSECUTION GRANTED TO HUSBANDS.  Oregon is one of the 17 states.

I do not understand why the criminal actions of my ex-husband were not brought up by attorneys during my civil divorce trial.  Both Mr. David Gearing and Mr. Mark Lawrence were aware of my previous breakdown and my pregnancy at the time of my breakdown. 

"A Florida legislator who opposed criminalizing rape in marriage stated, "The state has absolutely no business intervening into the sexual relationship between a husband and a wife."  In other words, the state has legally created that relationship and has protected the husband's forced access to the wife.  It is this conception of privacy---keeping the wife sexually subjugated to the husband as a matter of law---that cloaks the abuse of wives in legitimacy and a secrecy that stops interference.  The right of a man to use his wife the way he wants has been the essential meaning of sexual privacy in law."   Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse

This is where domestic violence originates.  Conforming to this ideology contributed to my mental/nervous breakdown in 1993.  Dworkin also writes, "Anyone who legal status is that she exists to be touched, intimately, inside the boundaries of her own body, is controlled, made use of:  a captive inside a legally constructed cage."  In 1979, Bob Wilson, a state senator from California, while talking to women lobbyists eloquently stated "But if you can't rape your wife," the lawmaker asked, "who can you rape?"  The answer, of course, is "no one."

In these cases, intercourse remains the fundamental expression of male rule over women, a legal right protected by the state especially in marriage.  My case speaks loudly of the insidious crimes that are legally permitted and condoned under the guise of state-sanctioned domination of males in marriage.  Laws must be changed to protect vulnerable people who cannot protect themselves.  Presently, women prisoners around the country are winning lawsuits against guards who have raped and impregnated them.  One woman prisoner was awarded $100,000.

Until our country becomes more healthy-minded in matters of sexuality, rape cases will continue to be a horror for women in America.  In our country, sexuality is often synonymous with power, control, possession and ownership. Rape in marriage stated, "The state has absolutely no business intervening into the sexual relationship between a husband and a wife." In other words, the state has legally created that relationship and has protected the husband's forced access to the wife. It is this conception of privacy---keeping the wife sexually subjugated to the husband as a matter of law---that cloaks the abuse of wives in legitimacy and a secrecy that stops interference. The right of a man to use his wife the way he wants has been the essential meaning of sexual privacy in law." Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse