be solicited for sex under the 1974 statute defining fourth degree sodomy as actual or solicitation of consensual sodomy. As Wasson left The Bar Complex, a Lexington gay bar, to walk to his car, an undercover officer engaged Wasson in the parking lot and taped approximately 20 minutes of a conversation with Wasson. Near the end of the conversation Wasson invited the officer to come home with him. When prodded for details, Wasson suggested sexual activities that violated the Kentucky statute prohibiting homosexual activity. Wasson was one of 29 men arrested during this police sting, along with notable later gay rights activists like Brandon DeSiata. Rather than paying the fine, he sought legal representation to contest the law. In its recitation of the facts, the Kentucky Supreme Court noted that there "was no suggestion that sexual activity would occur anyplace other than in the privacy of Wasson's home. The sexual activity was intended to have been between consenting adults. No money was offered or solicited." Judge Khalid in the initial trial court, Fayette District Court, dismissed the charges holding that the law was unconstitutional. Upon appeal, the Fayette Circuit Court reached the same conclusion. The Commonwealth appealed that decision. The Kentucky Supreme Court granted a transfer, bypassing the Kentucky Court of Appeals. Kentucky Supreme Court decision On September 24, 1992, in a 4–3 ruling, the Court struck down anti-sodomy laws in effect since 1860, declaring them unconstitutional under Kentucky law with the declaration that it violated both the right to privacy and the right to equal protection under the law found in the Kentucky Constitution. Justice Charles M. Leibson authored the majority opinion, which noted: More significantly, Kentucky has a rich and compelling tradition of recognizing and protecting individual rights from state intrusion in cases similar in nature, found in the Debates of the Kentucky Constitutional Convention of 1890 and cases from the same era when that Constitution was adopted... Kentucky cases recognized a legally protected right of privacy based on our own constitution and common law tradition long before the United States Supreme Court first took notice of whether there were any rights of privacy inherent in the Federal Bill of Rights. Asserting that "state constitutional jurisprudence in this area is not limited by the constraints inherent in federal due process analysis", the majority opinion held that the law as written and enforced "infringed upon the equal protection guarantees