The judicial world is capable of absurd and bizarre behaviour from time to time: many rulings have bordered on fantasy. For example, it used to be the case that animals appeared in court, allocated defence counsel, their grunts and whines being interpreted as denials or guilt or confessions. Court rulings followed in accordance with such interpretations. In the realm of human sexual behaviour the rulings have often been harsh in the extreme. Sometimes the judgments seem so ridiculous as to be almost incredible. Here's just one example- in Dittrick v. Brown County 1943: 9 N.W. (2d) 510 the Supreme Court of Minnesota upheld the commitment as a sexual psychopath of a 42-year-old father of six who "was mentally bright, capable, and a good worker," because of the extreme craving for sexual intercourse with his wife, amounting in the year before his commitment to approximately 3 or 4 times a week."