Men accused of sex with dog in Evangeline Parish

Two Pine Prairie men are facing charges of crimes against nature after they admitted to having sex with a dog, authorities said Friday.

Joshua Granger, 26, and Nathan Wells, 23, who were roommates, were arrested Feb. 1 after Louisiana State Police received a complaint from Memphis, Tenn., about animal cruelty, Evangeline Parish sheriff’s Detective Mike Perry said.

Bond for both men was set at $7,500, Perry said. By 10 a.m. Friday, Wells had bonded out while Granger remained in jail, Perry said.

State Police and sheriff’s detectives interviewed the men separately, and both admitted to having sex with a Siberian Husky that was found at their residence, 1628 Ash St., and sex with another dog that was not at the residence, Perry said.

“Granger admitted that there is video and images on his computer of these acts …,” Perry said in a news release.

The dog was examined at the LSU School of Veterinary Medicine, which found no internal injuries to the dog, the Humane Society of Louisiana said in a news release.

Comments

1) Comment by Thurston_Howell_III - 05/05/2013

8 point 6 is just mad because his dog didn't have sex with him/her.

2) Comment by RODEO CLOWN - 18/04/2013

Typical of that area of the state: do you know what you call a virgin in Evangeline parish? A tourist.

3) Comment by slye753 - 12/02/2013

uug! two nasty progessives

4) Comment by Ben Around - 11/02/2013

Bouncer, you have made two assertions; that these men are Republicans and that they are Christians. In a later post you offer as evidence of the truth of your claims that all of the Republicans you have ever known are "fascinated" by such acts as the men are accused of and their appearance shows that they are Republicans. However, all of your evidence is simply amounts to additional assertions. And, assertions do not a proof make. While there is no need to disprove such baseless assertions, I would like to point out some problems with your argument. First, while it may be true (though it is highly unlikely) that all your Republican acquaintances are fascinated with salacious sexual acts, it does not logically follow that the reverse is true. That is, that because these two engaged in weird sex acts that they are Republicans. You are guilty of faulty logic. Further, as pointed out by bourbon-soda, we have more evidence that those on the Left would approve of sex with animals. I believe that I can make a solid argument that the two people I will discuss below would fall well outside the realm of Republican thinking. Peter Singer, the subject of bourbon-soda's post, asserts that "sex with animals does not always involve cruelty" and in fact might be mutually satisfying. Another person asserting that sex with animals was not inherently wrong* is Ingrid Newkirk, President of PETA. As to your other assertion that the two men in the story are self proclaimed Christians, you offer nothing in the way of even the weakest proof. I assume that if you did, it would have followed the same flawed reasoning you used for the former assertion; "all the Christians I have known … and they look like Christians." But I would like to point out that that both of the people I mentioned above as being human-animal sex advocates can, I believe, be shown to be decidedly non-Christian. Peter Singer in discussing the Christian argument against abortion said that it is not necessarily wrong to take innocent human life and that the notion of the sanctity of life ought to be discarded as outdated, unscientific and irrelevant to understanding problems in contemporary bioethics. Those are as against Christian thought as you can get. Ingrid Newkirk said of the Nuns who schooled her that "The whole God thing was shoved right down my throat". It would appear that she successfully regurgitated it. Finally your assertion that you can tell someone's political affiliation by their looks, that is so juvenile that it doesn't ever warrant a response. But, I am sure that if you could see me, you would be able to tell that I am a Republican and a Christian. All things considered, Bouncer, I think you are rattling the monkey cage form the inside. *Newkirk later clarified her statements to distinguish between sexual (or sexy activities like French kissing) activities involving animals and actual sex with animals, which she said was abuse.

5) Comment by julwood - 09/02/2013

I think this was just part of the qualification process of becoming a politician. The dog was middle class. Politicians do it to the middle class all the time.

6) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 09/02/2013

Bouncer after reading your post, I would assume that you and Mark bowl for the same team.

7) Comment by Whatnow - 09/02/2013

Bouncer, please stop the name calling.

8) Comment by Bouncer - 09/02/2013

LOL@Attila. I can take whatever pitiful little insults you can heave in my direction. You're a weak, impotent little d-bag of a man as all of your various rants on this and that subject prove. You're a typical piece of Lose-e-anna redneck white trash whose panties get all bunched up when anyone makes a remark about anything that does not coincide with your backward world view. I know that your little panties are all in a knot or else you wouldn't have opened your pie hole when I made the first comment. That's not a problem, though, as I own you. You are dancing to my tune, which is exactly what I want you to do. Now, come back with another comment, please. Dance, puppet. Dance.

9) Comment by Attila - 09/02/2013

Bouncer: You love to give, but when you are on the receiving end you can't stand it...you want to make asinine comment, be prepared for a response to your psychobabble. Now crawl back into your cage and go back to licking your butt.

10) Comment by louisisanared - 09/02/2013

Really? In this day and age? Please you two sick people, there are so many places you can go and not have to do it with an animal. Maybe the only thing that you could have relations with was the dogs, because no human would have either of you.

11) Comment by Bouncer - 09/02/2013

It's fun to rattle the monkey's cage, that's for sure. CountryBoys, Whatnow, and Attilla---the three of you are brothers under the skin with the dog f**kers. Otherwise, you wouldn't get your panties in such a knot.

12) Comment by bourbon-soda - 08/02/2013

This is the next campaign in the sexual revolution. See "Heavy Petting" by Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton << http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/2001----.htm >> or google "peter singer heavy petting."

13) Comment by Attila - 08/02/2013

You sure don't get out much do you Bouncer? Just how many republicans do you know? Evidently not many..but we would be interested in how you come by you knowledge of their sexual preferences...have you engaged in deviant sex with any of them? I would bet that your eyes are closer together than both of those yahoo's.

14) Comment by 8point6 - 08/02/2013

"Men accused of sex with dog in Evangeline Parish " That should read, "Man accused of sex with dog in oval office." That would fit bubba clinton and monica. Or, even the present couple.

15) Comment by Whatnow - 08/02/2013

Bouncer, what a mean thing to say about Republicans and Christians! You sure do get down and dirty with your comments. Especially since this has nothing to do with politics. How would you feel if the Republicans had said that about Democrats first? Why so nasty? You have it real bad, man.

16) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 08/02/2013

Bouncer are you upset because they might be your dad?

17) Comment by Chucky - 08/02/2013

Do not let them into the BSA

18) Comment by Bouncer - 08/02/2013

LOL@teacherguy. You have a point. On the flip side, all of the Republicans I have ever known have been curiously fascinated with salacious sexual acts, such as that reported on in the story. Besides....those two look like Young Republicans, dontcha think? As far as the "Christian" label goes, I'm sure that they (like some of our worthy commentators) self-identify as such. Mere self-identification, however, doesn't make it so.

19) Comment by teacherguy - 08/02/2013

@Bouncer, I don't know about that. (A) liberal democrats tend to promote sexual "freedoms" more than Republicans do and (B) true Christians have rules denouncing bestiality...@WhatNow, ewww gross for the dog is right...these guys have the physical attributes to only be able to mate with captive animals. These guys were probably happy they finally found a "girl" with soft hair...not gross to them!

20) Comment by Bouncer - 08/02/2013

Two things are certain: ( A). you can bet that both of them identify as Louisiana Republican; (B). you can bet that both of them have self-identified as "Christian."

21) Comment by NationalSEC - 08/02/2013

Kudos to the LSP for withholding the names of the dogs to protect their privacy.

22) Comment by Whatnow - 08/02/2013

How gross!!! Ewwww! Poor dog.