A former Topeka physical therapist assistant, Joseph D. Quinlan, had his medical license revoked by the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts on October 15, 2024, after being found guilty of soliciting a minor for sex in a cemetery.

This revocation comes more than two years after his license was initially suspended.

The incident occurred in 2020 when Quinlan met a child between the ages of 14 and 16 in a cemetery and engaged in sex with the minor. A Pottawatomie County judge sentenced Quinlan to probation for these crimes. Additionally, Quinlan is now on the state's sex offender registry.

In a related report, it was noted that Quinlan had pled "no contest" on July 16, 2021, to charges of Indecent Liberties with a Child, a level 5-person felony. On October 05, 2021, he was sentenced to 32 months in prison, which was suspended, and he was placed on 36 months of supervised probation.

Because of the sexually-violent nature of his conviction, Quinlan is subject to mandatory post-release supervision for the rest of his life and must register as a sex offender for 25 years. https://www.ksnt.com/news/kansas/topeka-physical-therapist-loses-license-after-soliciting-minor-for-sex-in-a-cemetery/

Commentary

A "no contest" plea, also known as "nolo contendere," is a legal term used in criminal cases. When a defendant pleads no contest, they do not admit guilt but also do not dispute the charges against them. Essentially, the defendant accepts the punishment as if they were guilty, without formally admitting to the crime.

The term "nolo contendere" originates from Latin, meaning "I do not wish to contend". This plea is often used in plea bargaining, where the defendant may receive a lesser sentence or reduced charges in exchange for not contesting the charges. One significant advantage of a no contest plea is that it cannot be used as an admission of guilt in a related civil lawsuit.

Although speculative, based on the sentencing of probation (versus incarceration), it is likely the judge was lenient for a first offense.

Any adult who has sex relationships with a minor - even under the belief the person was an adult - is still likely to be charged with a crime. Here are some of the reasons:

• Strict Liability: Child sex crimes often fall under strict liability laws, meaning that the perpetrator's intent or knowledge regarding the victim's age is irrelevant. The mere act of engaging in sexual activity with a minor is enough to constitute a crime.
• Legal Age of Consent: The law sets a specific age below which an individual cannot legally consent to sexual activity. This age is typically under 18 years old. Engaging in sexual activity with someone below this age is illegal, regardless of whether the adult believed the minor was older.
• Protection of Minors: These laws are designed to protect minors from exploitation and abuse. Minors are considered incapable of giving informed consent due to their age and maturity level. Therefore, the responsibility lies with the adult to ensure that their partner is of legal age.
• Due Diligence: Adults are expected to exercise due diligence in verifying the age of their sexual partners. Failure to do so does not absolve them of legal responsibility. Ignorance or mistaken belief about the minor's age is not a valid defense.

The key takeaway is that adults should only engage in sexual activity with other adults.