Let's Put Children in Jail for Sexting, Shall We?

[Lemur]

Sexual panic makes for bad laws, and worse, bad application of existing law, as I believe this case illustrates.

Short version: Boy meets girl, girl develops crush on boy. Boy tells girl he will not be her friend unless she sexts him with a video of her masturbating. Girl does so. Boy puts video on his PC, uploads it, video gets around, girl is devastated. Girl's family files lawsuit under child exploitation and pornography laws, boy's family argues that two kids sexting do not a child porn ring make. Judge rules all child porn laws do, in fact, apply.

These cases with teenagers strike me as an extremely unwise use of legal resources. Exemplum gratum, Wilson v. Georgia, in which a seventeen year old was labeled a sex offender for life for receiving oral sex from another teenager.

Can any rational case be made for criminalizing hormonally induced stupidity in teenagers? Does anyone care to play Devil's Advocate and argue for the horrific status quo?

[Greyblades]

I'm afraid that this sort if thing isnt going to be changed until a judge decides to ignore all the previous case's precident... Good luck with that.

[Beskar]

It was all "fine", until it the boy pressured the boy into doing it.
Then the boy uploads it to youtube.

The boy receiving punishment should actually be receiving it in that case. It is far from legal to do what he just did.

Two slightly underaged and one of them having oral sex with the other, should not be on the sex offenders list.

[Lemur]

The boy receiving punishment should actually be receiving it in that case. It is far from legal to do what he just did.

I agree that what the boy did was wrong, but I do not believe it falls under child exploitation and child pornography law.

[Beskar]

What offense would you list it as? It does have the very unfortunate incident of falling under child exploitation and child pornography because of the age.

[Viking]

How can 14 year olds have anything to do with child pornography? 14 year olds are certainly not children.

[Sarmatian]

Bah, it would be the same if two kids got into a fist fight and we put the kid who won in jail for 20 years as a child beater/abuser/what ever.

If an adult person beats a kid up, that's a different story, naturally. Same here, child pornography and child exploitation refers to an adult person(s) consciously trying to break the law. It shouldn't apply to teenagers with raging hormones.

[Strike For The South]

How can 14 year olds have anything to do with child pornography? 14 year olds are certainly not children.

A 14 year old child is in no way prepared to make the decisons that come along with sex

Now if two 14 year old have sex am I going to charge them with child rape? NO. But then again God gave me common sense

[Viking]

A 14 year old child is in no way prepared to make the decisons that come along with sex

That is a completely different issue, linked to the age of consent.

[HoreTore]

The offence committed here is harassment. The judge deserves the gallows for his utter failure to understand the real world.

Pornography is a consentual depiction of sexual acts. What people calls child pornography has absolutely zero to do with that, and as such it should be called what it is, child abuse photography. It is the abuse that is the crime in such situations, not the underage sex. It is illegal because it is a depiction of rape, not because it depicts sex, as the demand for such depictions drives people to commit more rape.

The boy harassed the girl. But there are no child abuse photos.

[Crazed Rabbit]

How can 14 year olds have anything to do with child pornography? 14 year olds are certainly not children.

In the US, if you take a picture of someone under 18 in a sexual pose, you can be charged with child pornography.

"But CR," you say, "Surely you don't mean that a Grandmother could be arrested for taking pictures of her 3 year old granddaughter naked?"

Yes, I do mean that.

So in sum, if you don’t want to get arrested and charged for taking nude photos of your infant or toddler, make sure you know what criteria your local prosecutor uses when navigating that “gray area” between a cute butt and a criminally alluring one (note: you probably don’t want to actually pose this question to your DA). Also, if you find yourself under investigation after dropping a roll of film off at the CVS, you might want to bake the prosecutor some cookies, since it appears that his “gut” will be the final arbiter of whether you’re a doting parent or an accused child pornographer.

Finally, even if the nude photos you’ve taken of your kids pass the clear-as-mud “cute butt,” “gut feeling,” and “reasonable people can disagree/that’s when it comes to us” tests, and are deemed innocent as a basket of puppies, you could still be in violation of the law if the state determines that the clothed to unclothed-but-innocent ratio in your family photo albums is inappropriate.

Lemur's OP may not have been the best case, since the boy in this cause is a slime who deserves punishment - if not a child pornographer.

But teens can and have been charged with child pornography for taking nude pictures of themselves, and in extreme cases even when the pictures haven't been nude.

Of course the prosecutors say charging these kids and getting them labeled, legally, as sex offenders for the rest of their lives is just to protect them.

There's only fives states in the union looking to charge kids with something other than child pornography for this right now.

And due to some states having age of consent set lower than 18, you can legally have sex with people that you would become a child pornographer for photographing nude.

CR

[HoreTore]

Isn't the age of consent for nudy pics 21 in some states, CR? I also believe some other countries have 21 as the legal age for pornography...

But seriously; child pornography is a misnomer and clouds the severity of the issue - and may also be the cause of additional guilt problems for the victims, as "pornography" is associated "slutty behaviour", and guilt issues is one of the most prominent issues rape victims have. There's no reason whatsoever to ban nude pictures of underage children, and hsving such a ban leads to all sorts of idotic legal situations, as the one qouted in CR's post demonstrates quite clearly.

[Hosakawa Tito]

I have to agree that the 14 year old in question is a creep guilty of harassment. Child pornographer, I don't think so. Perhaps the penal code needs to be amended to reflect these distinctions and the technical evolution of communication. Back in the old days her big brother would just pound the snot outta the punk. It's time for little Johnny's parents to step up to the plate and do their job too. My kid wouldn't know what a cell-phone was after that till he was out of the house and on his own, which nowadays means he'd be close to 30. No more Charlie Sheen programs either.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Pornography is a consentual depiction of sexual acts.

Eh? No. Pornography is where the suggestion in erotica ends and its made all (graphically) explicit. (Mutually consensual or not has nothing to do with it, it's the depiction that counts. The distinction matters, at least when it gets entangled with justice/law.)

The boy harassed the girl. But there are no child abuse photos.

Well trouble is that technically all he did was uploading a video he obtained under false pretences. I'm not sure how this qualifies as harassment. Taking advantage of her, that is a more accurate description.

[Ronin]

she's a for caving in and sending the video....he's a moron for not covering his steps better if he was gonna post the thing online.....remember the 11th commandment: thou shall not get caught!

there...next case!

[Greyblades]

Amen.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Being foolish isn't against the law, and that girl learned a hard lesson for her misplaced trust & infatuation. Learning how to be a better con man is hardly the lesson junior needs though.

[Xiahou]

This should be a lesson to all parents. Monitor your child's cell phone use and their Internet use. When my child is old enough for such things, her texts will be read and her Internet access will be filtered.

On the case, I think the boy should absolutely be in legal trouble. One teen making the video for another? Meh. But when he distributed it, he crossed a line.

[Tellos Athenaios]

This should be a lesson to all parents. Monitor your child's cell phone use and their Internet use. When my child is old enough for such things, her texts will be read and her Internet access will be filtered.

What's the bet she'll find a way regardless?

[Samurai Waki]

When it comes down to it, the parents of the boy (and girl) are culpable. True, they weren't the ones committing the act; but you don't hand a gun to a person unfamiliar with their use (unless sed subject is an adult) without explaining what it's for, and what circumstances can get you thrown in prison... the same goes for computers/cellphones. If you are using them outside the parameters of the law, it should come as no surprise that you are going to get punished.

As for the verdict, and sentence... I think the judge went overboard (perhaps making an example?) A slap on the wrist? certainly not. Being put on the registry of sex offenders, an injustice in itself. I think community service would have been sufficient.

[Shaka_Khan]

Sexting is a mixture of sex and texting?

[Lemur]

Sexting is a mixture of sex and texting?

It can be dirty chat, sure, but more often it refers to people taking naughty pictures and sending them from phone to phone. Quite popular with the kids, but it's all a bit before my time. In my day we sexted using morse code and smoke signals. You would not believe how irritating it is to spell out R U HORNY in smoke.

[rory_20_uk]

Of course the girl was pressured. Blame it all on the male - again. The minute the idea was raised by him she was clearly stripped of all free will... The girl's parents are overreacting to how their "little princess" is now turning into a "horny slut". Squaring this circle clearly needs others to blame.

The "birds and bees" talk needs to be updated more regularly these days to encompass more things what one should not do - although I do think that this falls under the heading of "pretty obvious things not to do".

Unless you don't want information getting out, don't give it out.

[Xiahou]

It can be dirty chat, sure, but more often it refers to people taking naughty pictures and sending them from phone to phone. Quite popular with the kids, but it's all a bit before my time. In my day we sexted using morse code and smoke signals. You would not believe how irritating it is to spell out R U HORNY in smoke.

.-- .... .- - .-. ..- .-- . .- .-. .. -. --. ?

[Populus Romanus]

.-- .... .- - .-. ..- .-- . .- .-. .. -. --. ?

Google translator does not have morse code.

[Husar]

Google translator does not have morse code.

http://morsecode.scphillips.com/jtranslator.html

@ X

[Scienter]

Of course the girl was pressured. Blame it all on the male - again. The minute the idea was raised by him she was clearly stripped of all free will... The girl's parents are overreacting to how their "little princess" is now turning into a "horny slut". Squaring this circle clearly needs others to blame.

I agree w/ you here. It's not the guy's fault that she sent him pictures. It is is fault that he distributed them. Unfortunately, many teenage girls will do pretty much anything to keep a boyfriend. Even things they don't want to do. It's sad, really. When you're a teenager, you don't really have a concept of the future. For a lot of girls "you aren't going to be with your high school boyfriend forever" doesn't seem like a realistic statement.

The "birds and bees" talk needs to be updated more regularly these days to encompass more things what one should not do - although I do think that this falls under the heading of "pretty obvious things not to do".

For a lot of kids, the sex talk doesn't even exist. In addition to the list of stupid stuff not to do (like trust some boy you've been dating for not a very long time), I would like to see parents try to instill some self confidence in their daughters. If a girl feels pressure to do something stupid like send naked pictures, and she doesn't want to do it, she should have the confidence to realize that the guy is a and not worth dating. A lot of girls feel peer pressure to have a boyfriend, and the idea of breaking up/being single scares them. I don't know what the solution is.

Blaming the boy for her actions isn't the answer. (But it's totally okay to blame him for distributing the pictures, that is his fault). I don't think that he should be prosecuted under child porn/sex offender laws. Since she did not consent to the distribution, I think something like intentional infliction of emotional distress would work nicely. Or if they can't prove intent, negligent infliction of emotional distress. He could argue that she was contributorily negligent for doing something as stupid as sending naked pictures, but it would be for the courts to decide. These are torts and not criminal, so the punishment would be monetary.

[HoreTore]

The distribution part was what I referred to when I said that it was harassment. Having someone send you pictures is OK(provided it wasn't along the lines of "if you don't send me pictures I'll rape and kill you tonight"), but distributing such material without consent is obviously(to me) a breach of privacy and with bad intentions(ie. "I'll send these pics to everyone so they'll all call her a slut") it is harassment.

[Jaguara]

This should be a lesson to all parents. Monitor your child's cell phone use and their Internet use. When my child is old enough for such things, her texts will be read and her Internet access will be filtered.

On the case, I think the boy should absolutely be in legal trouble. One teen making the video for another? Meh. But when he distributed it, he crossed a line.

Agreed totally.

There have been many cases here in Canada of rapes by teens that were recorded and then uploaded to the internet. As fast as the police shut one down, another appears. In one particular gang-rape case, the police warned that because the girl was a minor, the video actually constituted child-pornography and that anyone uploading the video could be charged with distribution of same. This was mostly to try to stop it from spreading. The trajedy here is that the girl ends up not just being victimized once, but over and over again. Anyone who uploaded that video is a sick **** and deserves to face real ramifications for it.

In the case you present...You can say she should learn her lesson etc...but you know what something like this can do to a teenager. It is bad enough in the old days when it would be just shared with his friends...but now she knows that the whole school has probably seen it. And this could follow her for her whole life...that is a serious violation, and should have real consequences.

all he did was uploading a video he obtained under false pretences. I'm not sure how this qualifies as harassment. Taking advantage of her, that is a more accurate description.

No actually what he did was upload a video without her consent. That video was of a minor performing sexual acts. That is thus defined as child pornography. Thus he has been involved in the exploitation of a minor to perform sexual acts and then the distribution and possession of child pornography.

I am of the opinion that all distibution of pornography (minors involved or not) should require explicit written consent from the participants. The whole videotaping a one-night stand and uploading it thing is getting out of hand. It is at the point now where a woman would have to do an electronics sweep of the house/room first to ensure she is not being taped. That is absurd.

Yes, the girl shares blame in agreeing to do this, but you are missing the point. She is a minor, and thus is not considered to have the ability/wisdom to judge the consequences of her actions or give consent. Inducing a child to do this sort of thing is not harrassment, it is exploitation.

[rory_20_uk]

She is also guilty of creating child pornography, so she too has broken the law. They are both minors, so neither is responsible for their actions... or they both are.

Filtering the internet and checking one's children's phones... Aaaah, nothing will make the child feel trusted and in turn trust their parents...

And unless you have particularly stupid children, they will get around your controls in minutes. Expect backup phones that daddy doesn't know about and the use of internet routers / borrowing others wireless or merely using a dongle; if you go for the computer itself expect them to use a live disk operating system to bypass all the controls at a stroke. You've got a few minutes to try to block things, they've got all day and a wide circle of others trying to break through the system. Face it - you aren't going to win that one.