Canadian Man Convicted of Polygamy After Marrying 25 Women, Fathering 145 Children

BOUNTIFUL, B.C. — A Canadian man has been convicted of polygamy after being found to have married 25 women over more than two decades, and fathering 145 children over that time.

Winston Blackmore, 61, was found guilty on Monday of practicing plural marriage and now faces up to five years behind bars. He is an adherent of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, which believes in having “celestial” marriages.

“I’m guilty of living my religion and that’s all I’m saying today because I’ve never denied that,” Blackmore told reporters following the hearing, according to CBC News. “Twenty-seven years and tens of millions of dollars later, all we’ve proved is something we’ve never denied. I’ve never denied my faith. This is what we expected.”

Ex-wife Jane Blackmore took the stand during the 12-day trial, testifying that Blackmore once told her that he was “only doing what God told him to do.” She left

However, Blackmore was supported by a number of his daughters, one of whom also took to Facebook to share her thoughts.

“Never has my dad denied it, never has he been ashamed of it, and never has there been a need for either because we’re all proud of each other,” wrote Dolly Blackmore Roundy. “I’m proud of my father and my family and no guilty conviction, or amount of ‘experts’, who have no idea, trying to rescue me from my ‘brainwashed background’ can change one bit of that.”

Her comments and photograph generated over 200 likes.

  • Connect with Christian News

An expert on LDS history was likewise brought in during the trial, who spoke about Mormonism’s history and explained that fundamentalists still believe in having multiple marriages.

James Oler, 53, was also convicted of polygamy after this week as it was discovered that he had five wives. Both had formerly served as bishops in the fundamentalist sect, and both had previously been investigated, but were not charged due to confusion over Canada’s laws prohibiting polygamy. An unrelated 2011 court case brought clarity to the matter.

Blackmore’s attorney, Blair Suffredine, says that he will file suit to challenge the law.

“Twenty-seven years ago adultery was a criminal act. Twenty-seven years ago, when they started with us, same-sex marriage was criminal,” Blackmore said. “Those people all successfully launched constitutional challenges on the basic right to freely associate. For us, I imagine it will be [that] this is entrenched in our faith and I would have been hugely disappointed if I would have been found not guilty of living my religion.”

As previously reported, in the U.S., the Supreme Court let stand earlier this year an appeals court ruling reinstating Utah’s ban on polygamous cohabitation, which initially had been struck down by U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups.

Waddoups opined that the law violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and interfered with the right to privacy. He pointed to the 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which decriminalized sodomy in the nation, and differentiated unmarried sexual conduct from criminal bigamy.

The appeals court’s basis for reinstating the ban, however, was based on the fact that the Plaintiffs—TLC’s reality show stars Kody Brown and his five live-in lovers—were unlikely to be charged.

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • InTheChurch

    If he was in love with all 25 women, what is the problem?
    Same-sex supporters can not be against this type of love.

    • Blake Paine

      The issue in Canada is they nationally recognize common law marriage, any such marriage becomes a legal marriage with the passage of time. As such, anyone practicing polygamy even without an official license become legally entangled regardless. Promising to share everything with one spouse is marriage, doing it again at the same time is fraud.

      In the United States most states do not recognize common law marriage and so this condition of someone being legally entangled with more than one spouse doesn’t occur. In states that only consider polygamy having multiple spousal legal status at the same time, don’t have adultery laws, and don’t recognize common-law marriages, the polygamy practiced by Blackmore and his spouses is completely legal. At last count in the US that includes Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, California and Nevada.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        and Texas ………..

        • Blake Paine

          I forgot one other criteria – no-fault divorce. A spouse can still get an award if the spouse is found to have been adulterous. But you are right, adultery is not a crime.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “adultery is not a crime.”

            1. Arizona

            Getting it on with someone other than your spouse is a Class 3 misdemeanor here, punishable by up to 30 days behind bars. And not only will the spouse be penalized but also the other person (now that’s justice!).

            2. Florida

            In a place where bathing suits are the dress code, how can eyes not wander? Still, he should keep his hands to himself: Floridian adulterers can spend up to two months in jail and be charged up to $500.

            3. Kansas

            “Intercourse or sodomy” with someone other than your spouse is a Class C misdemeanor here, punishable by up to a month in jail and a fine of up to $500. Remember, Kansas couples: There’s no place like home.

            4. Illinois

            Frank Sinatra probably wouldn’t consider Chicago “His Kind of Town” if he knew about this state law. The consequences for adultery in Illinois is up to a year in jail for both cheaters.

            5. Massachusetts

            Straying in the Bay State is a wicked bad idea. It’s considered a felony with a fine of up to $500 and a jail sentence of up to three years.

            6. Oklahoma

            If Oklahoma native Dr. Phil’s anti-cheating advice doesn’t persuade him, perhaps this will: Not only do adulterers face fines of up to $500 but also incarceration for up to five years.

            7. Idaho

            The penalty for cheating in Idaho is no small potatoes: Adultery is a felony that comes with a fine of up to $1,000 and as much as three years in jail.

            8. Michigan

            It’s a felony and a Class H offense to two-time your spouse here, but the price for your crime is “jail or other intermediate sanction,” according to the State of Michigan Sentencing Guideline Manual. With an unclear consequence like that, it’s not worth it to succumb to temptation.

            9. Wisconsin

            Cheating cheeseheads better be rich. Those caught may need to cough up a whopping $10,000. Oh, and the possible three years behind bars doesn’t sound fun, either.

            10. Minnesota

            The law for adultery in Minnesota is just as cold as the state itself. If you’re caught cheating, you can be fined up to $3,000 and imprisoned for as long as a year.

            11. Utah

            We’re not sure how the state’s famous polygamists are free men, but infidelity can land you a sentence of up to 6 months with a fine of up to $1,000.

            12. New York

            Sleeping around in the city that never sleeps, or anywhere else in the Empire State, for that matter, could result in as long as 3 months of jail time.

            13. Mississippi

            Vow-breakers better pray the system treats its inmates to Southern hospitality. The Mississippi statutes say that cheaters “shall be fined in any sum not more than $500 each, and imprisoned in the county jail not more than six months.”

            14. Georgia

            Be a peach to your partner to avoid a fine of up to $1,000 or a jail sentence of up to a year.

            15. South Carolina

            Cheating here can send you to the slammer for anywhere from six months to a year, or could get you a fine between $500 to $1,000.

            16. North Carolina

            This southern state isn’t as hard on their cheaters. The unfaithful spend no more than 30 days in lockup.

          • Blake Paine

            Talking about in states where polygamy is legal. As it turns out Texas tecognizes common law marriage so polygamy is illegal there too since after a time couples are legally married too, potentially concurrent with a licensed marriage leading to bigamy.

    • Mr Cleats

      They’re not exactly known for thinking rationally.

    • Michael C

      Same-sex supporters [whatever that means] can not be against this type of love.

      Why not?

      • InTheChurch

        Supporters of same sex marriages say they marry for love. So this man married multiple women for love. What is the difference? why be against a man that is in love? why is 1 spouse better than 25? Why put limits on love?

        • Michael C

          Supporters of same sex marriages say they marry for love.

          Um, yeah. Gay people get married for all the same reasons that straight people get married.

          So this man married multiple women for love. What is the difference?

          Marriage is a contract between two people. By marrying more than one person, he was in breach of contract with all of the women.

          why be against a man that is in love? why is 1 spouse better than 25?

          Personally, I don’t care how many women this man loves. …but legal marriage is an exclusive contract between two people. Any legal contract encompassing multiple parties would by definition be a totally different legal relationship governed by a different set of laws.

          If Canada or the US wish to create a new legal institution and create all of the new laws required to govern this new legal relationship involving multiple parties, I probably wouldn’t oppose it but it’s an entirely different topic than the legal recognition of the marriages of gay couples.

          Why put limits on love?

          Nobody ever said that there should be no limits on marriage. Nobody. Legally recognizing the marriages of gay couples does nothing to diminish any other restrictions on marriage.

          When the Supreme Court ruled that the ban on the recognition of the marriages of gay couples to be unconstitutional, they didn’t invalidate any other restriction on marriage just as when they struck down interracial marriage bans it didn’t affect anything but that one restriction.

          You seem to be trying to claim that because gay marriage, there are no more rules …and that’s just plain intellectual laziness.

  • FoJC

    Twenty-five wives. The man must be profoundly patient.

    It makes no sense why polygamy would be illegal when all semblance of God’s intent and creation of marriage, and cause for divorce, has been disregarded by most of society and law.

  • Amos Moses – He>i

    ROTFL …… BOUNTIFUL, B.C. ………. does the B.C. stand for birth certificate ………….

    • Trilemma

      Well, it sure doesn’t stand for Birth Control……

    • Mr Cleats

      I guess “Full Quiver” was already taken.

  • james blue

    One can only imagine how long his “honey do” list must be.

  • Oh good grief. I never figure out how a man handles 1 woman

  • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Yet they won’t go after Muslims who practice polygamy.

    • james blue

      Who won’t?

      Can you point to some cases they are ignoring?

      • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ


        • james blue

          Had to google search that.

          1. Could find nothing to say that under Canadian law he was allowed polygamous marriage, it just said in order to meet immigration rules only one marriage could be recognized for immigrants in multiple marriage from countries that allow them. Apparently he made this claim.

          2. There is nothing to suggest that this immigration rule only applies to Muslims. The same rule would apply to polygamous marriage of any faith or lack of.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            The article clearly states that immigration looks the other way when it comes to Muslim polygamy. The only person who has been charged with polygamy in over 100 years is the Mormon guy.



          • james blue

            No, it says in order to enter only one marriage will be recognized and the applicant has to agree. This counts for people who are legally in polygamous marriages in their home nation. They have to renounce all but one marriage.

            A foreign national who is practicing polygamy in their country of origin, albeit legally, who applies to immigrate to Canada is informed that polygamy is illegal in Canada. They are also told that they may only include one spouse in their application and that it must be their first spouse in order to satisfy the IRPR requirements. Under Canadian law, all other marriages after the first are illegal. For this reason, the first spouse only may enter Canada on a permanent basis, which thereby creates a monogamous marriage.

            If a husband wishes to sponsor a wife other than his first as a spouse, he must divorce his other wives and remarry the chosen wife in a form of marriage that is valid in Canada. He and his chosen spouse must sign a declaration to that effect.

            In the case you pointed to the state did not “ignore” the polygamy, the guy lied about it. It had nothing to do with treating him differently because he is a Muslim. Muslims have to abide by the same rules as everyone else. There is no special exemption. Also it appears the guy was convicted of an honor killing.

            It took 20 years and multiple marriages for the Mormon guy to be charged.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            That’s a dishonest intentional misrepresentation of actual facts. The articles are written by respected Canadian media, and all state that polygamy is commonly practiced by Muslims, and the only person in over 100 years to be prosecuted is a Mormon.

            It’s very common to see Muslim polygamists in Canada. Everyone knows at least one.

            By the way, why are you following me around from article to article, asking for proof, and then when presented with it, pretending you didn’t receive it? Why the harassment?

          • james blue

            I read the articles, I posted what they said.

            If you know a polygamist go ahead and report him. I’m sure there’s more than one Mormon polygamist in Canada, so why did it take over 100 years to bring a case up? Why did they ignore him for 20 years?

            Seems to me you are more concerned with them being Muslims than the polygamy.

            Don’t build up your own importance I’m not following you anywhere, I read a limited amount of articles on certain sites and comment / respond to random opinions. I am not responding to you, I’m responding to what you write.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You are harassing by misrepresenting what the articles actually say, and intentionally doing so from article to article. They acknowledge that Muslims practice polygamy.

            No one reports Muslims for anything in Canada anymore because Muslims get special treatment. A former mayoral candidate was jailed for reporting about things like this.

          • james blue

            Not misrepresenting anything.

            Why don’t YOU report the Muslims breaking the laws.

            I realize this site doesn’t allow direct links so can you name this mayoral candidate please so I can look it up. I rather doubt he was jailed for reporting a crime.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            You can report it all you want. I have. We have. Nothing gets done.

            Here you go:


          • james blue

            Kevin J. Johnston, 45, was charged with a single count of wilful
            promotion of hatred following what a statement called “a lengthy
            investigation into numerous incidents reported to police.

            Nothing in the article suggesting he was charged for reporting a Muslim breaking a law to police, He was charged with a hate crime for targeted harassment of Muslims.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            That’s a lie. He was arrested for reporting that Muslims were arrested on their way to shoot up a college. At first, law enforcement denied it, then photos emerged of Muslims arrested with a vehicle full of arsenal illegal weapons on their way to said college. Now law enforcement is left stuttering and Johnston is in jail.

          • james blue

            I copied the relevant part of the article YOU pointed me to (jihad watch isn’t exactly reliable), an article written on an extreme anti Muslim site. Are you suggesting your opinion article was covering something up?

            It does however shine light on your thought process, one which I’m glad I do not share.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            No you didn’t. You copied a blurb from an article that Jihad Watch posted, without posting the preamble, and the entire article. You also dismissed the other links because they prove you wrong.

            I live in Canada. I know what the laws are. I know what happened to Johnston. You don’t.

            Robert Spencer is very reliable, particularly when it comes to the topic of Islam and its effect on the west, another topic you are not particularly informed on.

          • james blue

            Please see post to which that was a response.

          • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            Why? Did you edit again?

            ETA: Yep, you edited again.

          • james blue

            What edit did I make?

          • james blue

            What edit did I make?

    • Kaz

      They only bully people who don’t fight back.

  • michael louwe

    There is God’s Law and there is man-made Law, eg US Law or Canadian Law, both of which originated from Roman Catholic Church Law during the reign of the Holy Roman Empire, ie there are some similarities between God’s Law and US/Canadian Law, eg “You shall not murder”, “You shall not steal”, etc. The British Empire was Catholic until King Henry VIII in the 1500s

    Hence, US Law had criminalized adultery and sodomy from 1776 until the 1970s when the vote-pandering liberals of the Blue States began abolishing them, first in their States and then in the whole of USA through the US Supreme Court. The liberals had also seek to abolish the death penalty. Notice how the liberals are using the Federal courts to try to abolish Trump’s travel ban against 6 lawless Muslim countries.
    ……. Hence, most of the liberal Blue States have become morally decadent and STD/AIDS-infested. So happened, the deadly gay-disease AIDS “evolved” during the 1980s = a curse from God.?

    • michael louwe


      US Christians should follow God’s Law and US Law unless US Law compels them to forsake God/Jesus or causes them to lose their salvation, eg US Law may require them to receive the mark-of-the-beast = computer chip implants for buying and selling.

      Bear in mind that at ACTS.15:24-29, God has exempted Gentile Christians from any law of Moses which is a burden, eg circumcision, kosher foods, etc..

  • mr goody two shoes

    This proves being stupid should be a crime.