NationStates Jolt Archive

What: Teenagers taking risque photos of themselves are prosecuted for violating child pornography laws.

When: Florida state appeals court rules on January 19.

Outcome: A 2-1 majority upholds conviction on grounds the girl produced a photograph featuring the sexual conduct of a child.

What happened, according to court documents:
Combine unsupervised teenagers, digital cameras and e-mail, and, given sufficient time, you'll end up with risque photographs on a computer somewhere.

There's a problem with that: Technically, those images constitute child pornography. That's what 16-year-old Amber and 17-year-old Jeremy, her boyfriend, both residents of the Tallahassee, Fla., area, learned firsthand. (Court documents include only their initials, A.H. and J.G.W., so we're using these pseudonyms to make this story a little easier to read.)

On March 25, 2004, Amber and Jeremy took digital photos of themselves naked and engaged in unspecified "sexual behavior." The two sent the photos from a computer at Amber's house to Jeremy's personal e-mail address. Neither teen showed the photographs to anyone else.

Court records don't say exactly what happened next--perhaps the parents wanted to end the relationship and raised the alarm--but somehow Florida police learned about the photos.

Amber and Jeremy were arrested. Each was charged with producing, directing or promoting a photograph featuring the sexual conduct of a child. Based on the contents of his e-mail account, Jeremy was charged with an extra count of possession of child pornography.

Some more background: Under a 1995 ruling in a case called B.B. v. State, the Florida Supreme Court said that a 16-year-old could not be found delinquent for having sex with another 16-year-old.

"The crux of the state's interest in an adult-minor situation is the prevention of exploitation of the minor by the adult," the majority said at the time. The court ruled that a Florida statute punishing sex between teens was "unconstitutional as applied to this 16-year-old as a basis for a delinquency proceeding."

The same applies to Amber and Jeremy. Even though he is a year older than her, he is still a minor in Florida.

In other words, under Florida law, Amber and Jeremy would be legally permitted to engage in carnal relations, but they're criminals if they document it.

Amber's attorney claimed that the right to privacy protected by the Florida Constitution shielded the teen from prosecution, an argument that a trial judge rejected. Amber pleaded no contest to the charges and was placed on probation, though she reserved her right to appeal her constitutional claim.

By a 2-1 vote, the appeals court didn't buy it. Judge James Wolf, a former prosecutor, wrote the majority opinion.

Wolf speculated that Amber and Jeremy could have ended up selling the photos to child pornographers ("one motive for revealing the photos is profit") or showing the images to their friends. He claimed that Amber had neither the "foresight or maturity" to make a reasonable estimation of the risks on her own. And he said that transferring the images from a digital camera to a PC created innumerable problems: "The two computers (can) be hacked."

Judge Philip Padovano dissented. He wrote that the law "was designed to protect children from abuse by others, but it was used in this case to punish a child for her own mistake. In my view, the application of this criminal statute to the conduct at issue violates the child's right to privacy under Article 1, Section 23 of the Florida Constitution."

Am I the only one who finds this somewhat appalling? Although I can't quite find what punishment they got.

http://news.com.com/Police+blotter+Teens+prosecuted+for+racy+photos+-+page+2/2100-1030_3-6157857-2.html?tag=st.num

Wait what? If they didn't show it to anyone how did the police get hold of it? Two how the hell can they be arrested for photos they both consented? Silly idiotic ancient laws. If anything the age of consent in America should be 16 like it is here in the UK.

Wait what? If they didn't show it to anyone how did the police get hold of it? Two how the hell can they be arrested for photos they both consented? Silly idiotic ancient laws. If anything the age of consent in America should be 16 like it is here in the UK.

Here, I'll bold the speculation on how the coppers found out in the OP.

:headbang:

Words are pointless.

Am I the only one who finds this somewhat appalling? Although I can't quite find what punishment they got.

http://news.com.com/Police+blotter+Teens+prosecuted+for+racy+photos+-+page+2/2100-1030_3-6157857-2.html?tag=st.num

You're not the only one, man. This is fucking stupid. Teens having sex getting arrested. They consented. Can't these idiots learn the meaning of teenage consent?

:headbang:

Words are pointless.

Your words explaining your silence speak volumes.

Yeah.

"By a 2-1 vote, the appeals court didn't buy it. Judge James Wolf, a former prosecutor, wrote the majority opinion.

Wolf speculated..."

that about sums it up. fucking christ, this doesn't pass the basic plausibility test.

Your words explaining your silence speak volumes.

Yeah.

Yay!

*Sigh* :rolleyes:

Fucking puritan Americans. :headbang: Hate them with a passion.

*Sigh* :rolleyes:

Fucking puritan Americans. :headbang: Hate them with a passion.

All americans, or just the puritan ones?

All americans, or just the puritan ones?
All of them, cuz they're all puritan.

what a retarded decision. it's like they willfully avoided reason just so they could see a couple of kids behind bars. it's just moronic.

All of them, cuz they're all puritan.

Umm...aren't you american? You're not puritan. I'm not either. Maybe we should stop with the stereotypes. What are you, some sort of wine-drinking, cheese-eating, sexaholic frenchmen?

You're not the only one, man. This is fucking stupid. Teens having sex getting arrested. They consented. Can't these idiots learn the meaning of teenage consent?

1) they are still minors.
2) they were not arrested for having sex, but having their pics of said sex on their computer. that is Child Pornography.
3) they were stupid to use E-Mail. putting it on CD or a thumb drive would've been safer.

All of them, cuz they're all puritan.

Shut up, emo. If I'm so puritan, then how come I just looked at porn for an hour today? There are non-puritan Americans, so don't pretend you're better than us because you're (or you think you are) more enlightened. I'm just trying to make a point, mods. Please don't mod me.

Umm...aren't you american? You're not puritan. I'm not either. Maybe we should stop with the stereotypes. What are you, some sort of wine-drinking, cheese-eating, sexaholic frenchmen?
rofl. no, i'm american. and hating it. I wanna move to australia someday.... *dreamy state*
Shut up, emo.
No. :p

what a retarded decision. it's like they willfully avoided reason just so they could see a couple of kids behind bars. it's just moronic.
Stupid sadistic courts... :rolleyes:

*points and laughs at silly people across the pond yet again*

*points and laughs at silly people across the pond yet again*

*Points out the silly people across the pond trounced you despite having less soldiers, supplies, and general stuff.*

EDIT: Damn, you're swedish. Not british.

There are intelligent Americans. They just aren't in government.

"The danger of not going into politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors" - Plato.

*Points out the silly people across the pond trounced you despite having less soldiers, supplies, and general stuff.*

EDIT: Damn, you're swedish. Not british.

Quick edit there. Saves me the trouble of making fun of your poor geography skills. :p

Quick edit there. Saves me the trouble of making fun of your poor geography skills. :p

No, it's just you sounded like you were from England until I spotted your location.

No, it's just you sounded like you were from England until I spotted your location.

I get that a lot seeing as I speak actual English.

*Points out the silly people across the pond trounced you despite having less soldiers, supplies, and general stuff.*

Battle of yorktown (1781)

10,800 French & 8,800 Americans vs 7,500 British (incl. german mercenaries)

So if by less soldiers, you mean less than the french, then yes, you're right. :p

Wait what? If they didn't show it to anyone how did the police get hold of it? Two how the hell can they be arrested for photos they both consented? Silly idiotic ancient laws. If anything the age of consent in America should be 16 like it is here in the UK.

it is 16 in most places, lower in some, you see, its on a state by state basis http://www.coolnurse.com/consent.htm

And he said that transferring the images from a digital camera to a PC created innumerable problems: "The two computers (can) be hacked."
And they could be stolen by Columbian drug lords in the middle of the night with about the same likelihood.

I get that a lot seeing as I speak actual English.

Well, you do speak far better English than most native speakers I've encountered.

And they could be stolen by Columbian drug lords in the middle of the night with about the same likelihood.

you are right - and, of course, this makes them drug kingpins as well as child pornographers.

I get that a lot seeing as I speak actual English.

Too bad I don't know any good Swedish jokes.

Shut up, emo. If I'm so puritan, then how come I just looked at porn for an hour today? There are non-puritan Americans, so don't pretend you're better than us because you're (or you think you are) more enlightened. I'm just trying to make a point, mods. Please don't mod me.

see if you were'nt puritan you would'nt be sitting in a drak corner looking at porn you'd be out getting laid.

rofl. no, i'm american. and hating it. I wanna move to australia someday.... *dreamy state*

No. :p
well i like it here in australia, but you'll have to put up with being called a yank.

1) they are still minors.
2) they were not arrested for having sex, but having their pics of said sex on their computer. that is Child Pornography.
3) they were stupid to use E-Mail. putting it on CD or a thumb drive would've been safer.

They are teens. Of course they're stupid to some extend.
Other than that, I personally feel that a law that allows minors to engage in sexual activities (which, above the age of 14, I would perfectly agree with) but doesn't allow them to take pictures or videos of themselves is ridiculous to say the least.

Well, you do speak far better English than most native speakers I've encountered.

I guess I should take that as a compliment.

Too bad I don't know any good Swedish jokes.

Hmm, I heard a Norwegian once say this one:

"Why did the Swedish woman return the vibrator she bought? She kept on chipping her teeth!"

I also heard "What do you get if you cross a Swede and a gypsy? A car thief who can't drive".

They made me laugh.

2) they were not arrested for having sex, but having their pics of said sex on their computer. that is Child Pornography.

the danger of calling that 'child pornography' is that it means that there ain't nothing wrong with 'child pornography' as a general category. i don't think we want to go down that road.

they were not arrested for having sex, but having their pics of said sex on their computer. that is Child Pornography.

Not when sanity and sense make an entrance.

the danger of calling that 'child pornography' is that it means that there ain't nothing wrong with 'child pornography' as a general category. i don't think we want to go down that road.

Very good point.

That is so retarded.

You can consent to sex, but you can't consent to your sex partner taking a picture of you naked, or of the two of you naked together?

I don't get it. Sure, it was pretty stupid to send it via eMail, I mean, how often do things go wrong there - but honestly; had he taken the memory stick with him and looked at her at home, all of the sudden he's looking at Child Pornography? While ten minutes ago, he might have made love to the same person?!?

I'm still trying to figure it out.

How old do you have to be to get married in Florida? 18? 16? 18 and 16? What if you take pictures of your wife? Does the same apply?

oh this just add to what i thing where US is going to

Am I the only one who finds this somewhat appalling? Although I can't quite find what punishment they got.

http://news.com.com/Police+blotter+Teens+prosecuted+for+racy+photos+-+page+2/2100-1030_3-6157857-2.html?tag=st.num

What a bunch of losers. I guess they didnt get any as teenagers...

Anyone knows about the sentence?

Not when sanity and sense make an entrance.

hey now, we're talking about the usian legal system - we only recently got the state to end the death penalty for the mentally retarded. it's a long road 'til we get to sanity and sense.

hey now, we're talking about the american legal system - we only recently got several of the states to end the death penalty for the mentally retarded, since many of them did away with it. it's a long road 'til we get to sanity and sense.

I fixed your post.

Dont do porn to begin with!

Dont do porn to begin with!


Yeah kids. If some guy offers you a joint full of anal sex, don't take it! Just say you're much to cool to do porn!

Wait what? If they didn't show it to anyone how did the police get hold of it? Two how the hell can they be arrested for photos they both consented? Silly idiotic ancient laws. If anything the age of consent in America should be 16 like it is here in the UK.

in some states it is. i believe in others its as low as 15.

Stop making fun of Americans. It is getting really old. I have actually been to the U.S. many times, and I want to move there one day.

Too much "Christian right" in politics.

Stop making fun of Americans. It is getting really old. I have actually been to the U.S. many times, and I want to move there one day.


Us Americans learn to accept it on NSG. We get called ignorant and all sorts of names because we don't accept everyone's culture everywhere for no reason (i.e. we don't accept terrorists) but the people that call us this have no tolerance for our culture so it's 6 in one and a half dozen in the other. I hope you have fun in America when you move here.

Stop making fun of Americans. It is getting really old. I have actually been to the U.S. many times, and I want to move there one day.
Just make sure not to buy your daughter a digital camera...

Too much "Christian right" in politics.




Us Americans learn to accept it on NSG. We get called ignorant and all sorts of names because we don't accept everyone's culture everywhere for no reason (i.e. we don't accept terrorists) but the people that call us this have no tolerance for our culture so it's 6 in one and a half dozen in the other. I hope you have fun in America when you move here.

Accept it? I'm from Michigan, and I still insult America.

Stop making fun of Americans. It is getting really old. I have actually been to the U.S. many times, and I want to move there one day.

Pffft! I reserve the right to make fun of stupidity, regardless of nationality.

Accept it? I'm from Michigan, and I still insult America.
Yeah, but we don't give a damn for the whole State of Michigan... (http://www.scarletandgray.info/osu/media/michigan.mp3)... :p

Dont do porn to begin with!

What's wrong with porn, for crying out loud? I LOVE porn!

Am I the only one who finds this somewhat appalling?

Somewhat? It's a fucking disgrace.

Somewhat? It's a fucking disgrace.

QFT.

And yet more proof that everyone in the government is too old (read: outdated 'morals') to do their job properly.

Too much "Christian right" in politics.




Us Americans learn to accept it on NSG. We get called ignorant and all sorts of names because we don't accept everyone's culture everywhere for no reason (i.e. we don't accept terrorists) but the people that call us this have no tolerance for our culture so it's 6 in one and a half dozen in the other. I hope you have fun in America when you move here.

But only if you do so legally.

But only if you do so legally.

And are able to remain legal (read: Ridiculous laws (i.e., a law on the books is that stealing one's horse carries the death penalty (by hanging) in Florida)).

And are able to remain legal (read: Ridiculous laws (i.e., a law on the books is that stealing one's horse carries the death penalty (by hanging) in Florida)).

Jed Bush is the governor of Florida. I am honestly not surprised.

What's wrong with porn, for crying out loud? I LOVE porn!

so you keep tell us :p

Jed Bush is the governor of Florida. I am honestly not surprised.

Ole Jeb got sacked.

And that law hasn't been removed since it was written in like 18 friggin 50.

What's wrong with porn, for crying out loud? I LOVE porn!

Besides the possibility of abuse and degradation, not much - and less today than in the past. I believe that as the taboos connected to porn diminishes so does the potential of abuse - though some might claim that the industry, at least, is still dehumanizing, cold and cruel. So as with anything and everything, there is something wrong with porn ;)

FYI, if you read the actual opinion (http://opinions.1dca.org/written/opinions2007/1-19-07/06-0162.pdf), rather than a biased summary, the decision is still wrong, but not as dumb as some would have you believe.

First, since there has been speculation, but no facts, let me make some things clear. The two teens were charged as juveniles -- each was charged with "producing, directing or promoting a photograph or representation that she knew included sexual conduct of a child in violation of section 827.071(3), Florida Statutes." The punishment was mere probation in juvenile court. Only the young woman appealed in the opinion that is the basis of this thread.

Second, whether it seems fair or not, the young woman was technically guilty of the alleged crime.

Third, the issue in the case was whether or not the young woman had a right to privacy that made application of the statute to her unconstitutional. The court consider a wide range of points (ignored by the OP) in ruling that a minor did not have a right to privacy in digital pictures of underage sex sent over the internet and that, even if such a right to privacy did exist, the state had a compelling interest in seeing that such pictures did not exist.

I think the decision was wrong, as I agree more with the dissent. But I find rather shallow the degree of thought some of you have put into your thoughts on the matter.

Would you really make a blanket exception for child pornography if the creator or possessor was a minor? What if I pay a minor to take dirty pictures of another minor?

Think about it a little more before you condemn the whole US legal system as a bunch of puritanical idiots.

But I find rather shallow the degree of thought some of you have put into your thoughts on the matter.

Business as usual on NSGeneral, no? ;) :p

This same thing happened to a girl I know who lives in Australia. The moral of the story, don't send people a video of you masturbating from your cellphone, it'll get around the school.

FYI, if you read the actual opinion (http://opinions.1dca.org/written/opinions2007/1-19-07/06-0162.pdf), rather than a biased summary, the decision is still wrong, but not as dumb as some would have you believe.
[snipped]


first of all... actually, the only thing I want to say is...



Welcome back Cat-Tribe! :cool:

Think about it a little more before you condemn the whole US legal system as a bunch of puritanical idiots.

I try to let my fingers do the thinking.

I AM A COCKROACH FROM SATURN AND I BELIEVE IN FLOWERS.

They are teens. Of course they're stupid to some extend.
Other than that, I personally feel that a law that allows minors to engage in sexual activities (which, above the age of 14, I would perfectly agree with) but doesn't allow them to take pictures or videos of themselves is ridiculous to say the least.Unfortunatly, teens are still Minors in the eyes of the law.

the danger of calling that 'child pornography' is that it means that there ain't nothing wrong with 'child pornography' as a general category. i don't think we want to go down that road.I was referring to the taking of pics and what the pics were, not the act of them having sex. The post I was responding to made it sound like they were arrested and charged with Child Porn because of the sex itself and not the pics of them having sex.

but agreed, not a road to travel on.

Would you really make a blanket exception for child pornography if the creator or possessor was a minor? What if I pay a minor to take dirty pictures of another minor?

nah. but certainly if the creator/possessor was in the picture, or the picture was of someone they were having consensual sexual relations with. it makes absolutely no sense to legally recognize the right of people to see each other naked and having sex in person but not in pictures.

i'm rather amused by the notion that naked 16 and 17 year olds would be 'child porn', personally. isn't the cut off for other 'child' sexual offenses puberty usually?

Think about it a little more before you condemn the whole US legal system as a bunch of puritanical idiots.

I condemn the US legal system in this case because it seems to define child pornography simply through the people in the pictures being below 18 (instead of looking to the appearance of the children and signs, or lack thereof, of pubertal development), and hence the ludicrous notion that this counts as child pornography at all, let alone that it punishes them for taking pictures of themselves.

It's quite bonkers and anachronistic, really. Ludicrous, even.

This same thing happened to a girl I know who lives in Australia. The moral of the story, don't send people a video of you masturbating from your cellphone, it'll get around the school.

but did she get in legal trouble over it?

I condemn the US legal system in this case because

Because it's in the US. And you're Fass.

Would you really make a blanket exception for child pornography if the creator or possessor was a minor? What if I pay a minor to take dirty pictures of another minor?
Neither of those "choices" takes into account what actually happened - the "child pornographer" was the child in question.
Technically, to be argumentative, I expect you to bring up the fact they were sent to the other and each was therefore "knowingly possessing child pornography."

Think about it a little more before you condemn the whole US legal system as a bunch of puritanical idiots.
Hmm, thought about it, it's still fucking retarded and puritanical.

Dont do porn to begin with!

Doing porn is different than taking a dirty picture for your boy or girlfriend

Because it's in the US. And you're Fass.

Why, thank you. :)

My efforts to persecute you have not gone unnoticed.

Why, thank you. :)

My efforts to persecute you have not gone unnoticed.

You are hating freedom and democracy!

You are hating freedom and democracy!

Hah, as if the US had either.

You are hating freedom and democracy!

:confused: Isn't that what all the cool kids are doing these days anyway?



I blame that Rap-hop music...

so you keep tell us :p

Well, what's wrong with it? So far, nobody could answer me that...
It's fun making it, and it's fun watching it.
I'm not too fond of the professional stuff, too artificial for my taste, but that's really just a matter of preferences.

Unfortunatly, teens are still Minors in the eyes of the law.


I think that is what makes this law so utterly ridiculous....
They are apparently able to consent to have sex with each other, but having pictures of it constitutes a crime.

but did she get in legal trouble over it?

Her trial is still pending, so I'm assuming yes, there's trouble coming.

Her trial is still pending, so I'm assuming yes, there's trouble coming.

that's terrible

and how did the pig fuckers find out? was the rat beaten to a bloody pulp?

They are apparently able to consent to have sex with each other, but having pictures of it constitutes a crime.

well known fact - representations of a thing are way worse than the thing itself.

well known fact - representations of a thing are way worse than the thing itself.how so?

So I tried to answer my own question and would be grateful if anyone could varify if that's really the case:

Florida: If an individual is under 18 years of age, but older than 16 years of age, a marriage license can be obtained with parental consent. If a minor's parents are both deceased and there is not an appointed guardian, he/she may apply for a marriage license. A minor who has been previously married may also apply for a license. A minor who swears that they have a child or are expecting a baby, can apply for a license if the pregnancy has been verified by a written statement from a licensed physician.

If you're taking pictures of your (pregnant) 16-year-old wife in the nude to maybe later show your kids (or to be able to remember how beautiful you were when young) - would this also get prosecuted?

well known fact - representations of a thing are way worse than the thing itself.

See: The Hoohaa monologues.

no one should EVER be prosicuted for "dirty" pictures.

just as no one should be allowed to make any money off of selling them.

giving them away ought to be totaly free and lawful.

(nsun resolution anybody?)

=^^=
.../\...

see if you were'nt puritan you would'nt be sitting in a drak corner looking at porn you'd be out getting laid.


well i like it here in australia, but you'll have to put up with being called a yank.

*seppo

oh this just add to what i thing where US is going to

Right...

Goodbye.

rofl. no, i'm american. and hating it. I wanna move to australia someday.... *dreamy state*

I see you're going to live the olde english dream

I see you're going to live the olde english dream
I'm half english, so I'm not surprised. :D

What Is the Olde English Dream, btw?

What Is the Olde English Dream, btw?

Living in a half-timbered cottage with a thatched roof and playing cricket on sundays?

And being able to have tea and crumpets whenever you bloody well please. (j/k)

When I was 17 I took pics of my gf who was three days older then me, taking a skinny dip.
So I'd end up in jail in florida for it?
Thats complete bullshit. Adn thats what you get when you have justice system run by antient men and fricking religious right,

In addition, the statute was intended to protect minors like appellant and her co-defendant from their own lack of judgment...

Appellant was simply too young to make an intelligent decision about engaging in sexual conduct and memorializing it. Mere production of these videos or pictures may also result in psychological trauma to the teenagers involved.

And what exactly is making them each a convicted sex offender going to do to them you shit-for-brains worthless sack of crap?

Serously! How the fuck does a moron like this get himself in a position to make these decisions? Is the only qualification for judgeship in Florida that the applicant must be too stupid to know how to operate any clothing more complicated than a black bag with a hole in the top, rendering him unfit for any other employment?

This is what you get when you support conservative politicians in their idiotic war on jurisprudence. This and that idiotic case of the woman who got life in prison for adultery.

When I was 17 I took pics of my gf who was three days older then me, taking a skinny dip.
So I'd end up in jail in florida for it?
Thats complete bullshit. Adn thats what you get when you have justice system run by antient men and fricking religious right,

I think if they were able to do a bit more fricking and were allowed to be a bit more open about it we wouldn't have these problems.

I'm starting to suspect that Wolf wrote this opinion to let his underaged mistress know that she shouldn't even think about taking pictures of them together.

<flame snip>
Flames are bad. You should stop.

Serously! How the fuck does a moron like this get himself in a position to make these decisions? Is the only qualification for judgeship in Florida that the applicant must be too stupid to know how to operate any clothing more complicated than a black bag with a hole in the top, rendering him unfit for any other employment?

This is what you get when you support conservative politicians in their idiotic war on jurisprudence. This and that idiotic case of the woman who got life in prison for adultery.

There was the other case like this too, can't remmeber where, but two children around 14 or 15 were charged with (statutorially)raping each other after having consentual sex. Each was the victim and the perpetrator of the rape.

There was the other case like this too, can't remmeber where, but two children around 14 or 15 were charged with (statutorially)raping each other after having consentual sex. Each was the victim and the perpetrator of the rape.

I think that's what you get when you have a justice system which will hold children fully responsible for their actions, but doesn't give them full rights over their bodies. You'll end up in ridiculous legal situations like that : a perfectly victimless crime that has to be treated as a major offence...

Seriously. What the fuck is wrong with America. This is one fucked up country these days

I think that's what you get when you have a justice system which will hold children fully responsible for their actions, but doesn't give them full rights over their bodies. You'll end up in ridiculous legal situations like that : a perfectly victimless crime that has to be treated as a major offence...

Well put. Of course dumb situations crop up whenever you have a law along the lines of: 'You can't drink alcohol if you are 17 and 364 days old, but it'll be okay once midnight has passed because you'll be 18.'

Worse yet, the various ages of consent aren't determined in a sensible way. In Britain, you can appear in a porn film when you're 16, but you can't watch one until you're 18. Makes no sense to me.

[B]If you're taking pictures of your (pregnant) 16-year-old wife in the nude to maybe later show your kids

"Hey kids, here's your naked mom!"

Yeah, that's dodgy.

There's a lot of pregnant woman porn out there too, so it's not like being pregnant makes one so speshul that pregnant nude photos cannot be pornographic.

Wolf is a dumbass, and actually reading the opinion makes me think the outcome of the trial was even more retarded and puritanical.

Charging them as juveniles under a anti-child pornography law? I have rarely seen a more ironic ruling. To charge them as juveniles under an anti-child pornography law? It would make more sense to commend them for only taking pictures of themselves. This was totally a privacy issue. The trial's conclusion that the state has an interest in protecting children from sexual exploitation whether from an adult or from a minor sounds even dumber than when The Cat Tribes said it. They are purposefully ignoring the fact that the "children" they were exploiting were themselves and that should have been a key point in the case and its outcome.

The only reason the two didn't get let off the hook is because the state wanted to look tough on kiddy porn. Hurray for political bullshit.

Never mind utterly ridiculous, it's fucking stupid. "You're too young to know what you're doing, so we'll prosecute you for doing it". With cases like these, no wonder the rest of the world thinks Americans are all morons. What's more, one of the idiots who was FOR this being a crime said "Mere production of these videos or pictures may also result in psychological trauma to the teenagers involved" - so basically he's saying it's O.K. to prosecute a person for a crime which they are a victim of - like someone gets beaten up with a baseball bat, so the person who has been beaten up gets prosecuted for assault. Fucking stupid. Your judges are worse than ours (English judges), and that's saying something.

Seriously. What the fuck is wrong with America. This is one fucked up country these days

...specifically Florida. They're much wackier down there than the rest of us. I promise.

...specifically Florida. They're much wackier down there than the rest of us. I promise.
It ain't shaped like a dick for nothing, my dear.

see if you were'nt puritan you would'nt be sitting in a drak corner looking at porn you'd be out getting laid.

Getting laid when you're 13 gets you arrested in my country. You should know that.

What are you, some sort of wine-drinking, cheese-eating, sexaholic frenchmen? interesting
are all French sexaholic.. ?

The females too?

that's terrible

and how did the pig fuckers find out? was the rat beaten to a bloody pulp?

She recorded it on her camera phone, sent it to her bf who let all his friends have copies, eventually a teacher found out about the school's new viral video and it got traced back to her.

Because there's a copy on her phone, she's been charged with possession.

Getting laid when you're 13 gets you arrested in my country. You should know that.i think its different from state to state.. no?

i think its different from state to state.. no?
Yes, but the youngest is 14, and that in south carolina, IIRC. All the rest are at 16 or above. Though, south carolina is looking at raising their AOC to 16 or something.

Because there's a copy on her phone, she's been charged with possession.

that sucks

and seriously, how does anyone make that charge without feeling like a total retard?

I'm just unsure of exactly how this is supposed to make us all safer. Oh, I forgot. That's no longer a function of law these days.

I'm just unsure of exactly how this is supposed to make us all safer. Oh, I forgot. That's no longer a function of law these days.

It's protecting the kids from eeeeeeevil perverts: themselves!

And are able to remain legal (read: Ridiculous laws (i.e., a law on the books is that stealing one's horse carries the death penalty (by hanging) in Florida)).

Grand Theft Equine ? ;) It would have been quite serious once.

...

It's quite bonkers and anachronistic, really. Ludicrous, even.

Yeah. Even taking into account the actual judgement (thanks Cat-Tribe).
This should never have gone to court, since it does nothing to further the prosecution of real child pornographers or even consumers of child porn.

To put it in broad terms: it's a victimless crime if it's a crime at all, and if a strict interpretation of the law requires that anyone be punished for it, then the law is plain wrong.

Like a law specifying the death penalty for stealing a horse, this law shouldn't be applied when the only effect is to punish the innocent and bring law itself into disrepute.

Oh for crying out loud!

What next? Charging a 13 year old boy for child abuse if he gets caught having a wank?

Oh for crying out loud!

What next? Charging a 13 year old boy for child abuse if he gets caught having a wank?

Well I have heard masturbation reffered to as self-abuse.....

Well I have heard masturbation reffered to as self-abuse.....

....By the extrem religious right?

....By the extrem religious right?

In some book that had little to do with religion. It was hardly an attempt at self-censorship by the author, because in the next scene a nurse caring for an old man strips for him, starts humping him, then strangles him to death with her very long hair.

In some book that had little to do with religion. It was hardly an attempt at self-censorship by the author, because in the next scene a nurse caring for an old man strips for him, starts humping him, then strangles him to death with her very long hair.

In porno veritas?

In porno veritas?

Shush you, it wasn't porn.

It's protecting the kids from eeeeeeevil perverts: themselves!

:( Shades of gray don't exist according to the governments of the world. Like so much of the government's thinking, the real world ditched that in favour of something better a looooonnnggg time ago

While I can understand the state's difficulty, I can't really see how they decided this should be prosecuted.

*Points out the silly people across the pond trounced you despite having less soldiers, supplies, and general stuff.*

EDIT: Damn, you're swedish. Not british.

I lolled.

Yeah, but we don't give a damn for the whole State of Michigan... (http://www.scarletandgray.info/osu/media/michigan.mp3)... :p

*shakes fist*

interesting
are all French sexaholic.. ?

The females too?

Based on the 3 weeks I've been living in France so far I would say that you wouldn't be completely wrong in saying that.

:( Shades of gray don't exist according to the governments of the world. Like so much of the government's thinking, the real world ditched that in favour of something better a looooonnnggg time ago

Indeed, why put thought and effort into things, when going along with pre-concieved black and white notions is so much easier.

In some book that had little to do with religion. It was hardly an attempt at self-censorship by the author, because in the next scene a nurse caring for an old man strips for him, starts humping him, then strangles him to death with her very long hair.

Ome of those 'fantasy' genre novels? I've got some friends you would get on well with.

I'm just unsure of exactly how this is supposed to make us all safer. Oh, I forgot. That's no longer a function of law these days.
Silly Bitchkitten. Laws are there to control our CONSENSUAL sexual behavior, not to protect us from abuse, assault, rape, or other forms of non-consensual sex. Laws are about making sure that consenting partners can't choose what sexual activities they will or will not engage in, because if they could choose then they might decide to do something that grosses out some religious PTA members somewhere.

Shush you, it wasn't porn.

Erotica?

So, they are their own victims?

All I can say is, I've come to expect no less (or more) from the State of Florida.

:rolleyes:

Yes, but the youngest is 14, and that in south carolina, IIRC. All the rest are at 16 or above. Though, south carolina is looking at raising their AOC to 16 or something.this reminds me of a married couple of teens ..arrested when entering/returning to Kansas.. orsumetinglikedat

i think its different from state to state.. no?

Yeah, but still, at my age, I'd be a junior sex offender.

Wait what? If they didn't show it to anyone how did the police get hold of it? Two how the hell can they be arrested for photos they both consented? Silly idiotic ancient laws. If anything the age of consent in America should be 16 like it is here in the UK.

Now this might only count for NJ... but from what I heard... it is 16 to legally consent to age. but 18 is the age to take photos/video of it... apparently

The court should just say they need counseling so as to make smart choices so as to allow for them to learn not to make porn until they are 18.