The first one, I find pretty disgusting. I really have no idea what would motivate someone to do this. I guess we should have just let the guy run around with an assault rifle shooting people, cause you know, we don’t really like cops.
I find it disturbing that a school would take a seized cell phone and then rifle through its contents. Taking physical possession of the phone does not entitle one to view its contents. Sounds to me like the only people guilty of child pornography are the officials who looked at the phone. The purpose of those laws is to protect the kids. But, the kids obviously don’t mind having certain other students see the pics, but I’d bet they definitely mind having a bunch of officials see the pics. In this case, the prosecution IS the crime.
I live near Pittsburgh, and that second one’s been on all of our news and in the papers. I think it’s the second time they’ve gone after kids for having pictures of other kids on their phones.
Sounds like a situation that at most should involve the parents, and maybe the school. I know they’re not supposed to have the phones in school, but they all do, and I’m not sure how having the phone gives the school the right to go through it (although they go through backpacks, lockers, and everything else to look for ‘guns and drugs’). This should be fun to watch, especially with our sensational local media.
Next, kind of swinging to the opposite spectrum, how does possessing a nude photo of yourself constitute child pornography?
This creates a quandry does it not? Let’s say the phone is not siezed, but the girsl send the pictures to their 16-17 year old friends. At this point a law is being broken as it is child pornography.
It’s still highly doubtful that there will be or should be any “Prosecution” as all involved are the same age etc, but there could be.
Now let’s say one of the 16-17 year old boys decides to post it on his myspace. I’d say this is not a stretch. Then another guy comes along who is 40, not knowing the age of the girls originally, downloads the picture and Voila! He’s now a pervert and goes to jail.
At what point should one take responsibility? Is it not as dangerous and illegal for the pictures to exist on the girls phone as they are for them to exist in the 40 year olds PC?
I completely agree the “authorities” should not have “Found” these in the first place, they had no cause to search. But assuming there was cause and they were found, what then?
Point is If it’s illegal for the 40 year old to have them should it not be illegal for the 15 year old to make them and most certainly for the 15 year old to send them?
You raise a fair point. The 15 year old who took the pics and the student(s) to whom she sent the pics all have the pics with the consent of the 15 year old. There really is no victim, yet. If one of the students then resends the pics to someone else without the consent of the 15 year old, then that’s child pornography.
If two kids decide to play doctor and take pics of each other, that’s not a crime. If they then give those pics to someone else (especially an adult) without consent, that’s a crime.
So, in the case discussed in the news, the only crime was committed by the officials who looked at the pics. Not saying you necessarily prosecute that case, but they did the very thing the laws are designed to prevent – an adult looking at pics of a naked minor and, to make things worse, did so without the minor’s consent.
Next, kind of swinging to the opposite spectrum, how does possessing a nude photo of yourself constitute child pornography?
This creates a quandry does it not? Let’s say the phone is not siezed, but the girsl send the pictures to their 16-17 year old friends. At this point a law is being broken as it is child pornography.
It’s still highly doubtful that there will be or should be any “Prosecution” as all involved are the same age etc, but there could be.
Now let’s say one of the 16-17 year old boys decides to post it on his myspace. I’d say this is not a stretch. Then another guy comes along who is 40, not knowing the age of the girls originally, downloads the picture and Voila! He’s now a pervert and goes to jail.
At what point should one take responsibility? Is it not as dangerous and illegal for the pictures to exist on the girls phone as they are for them to exist in the 40 year olds PC?
I completely agree the “authorities” should not have “Found” these in the first place, they had no cause to search. But assuming there was cause and they were found, what then?
Point is If it’s illegal for the 40 year old to have them should it not be illegal for the 15 year old to make them and most certainly for the 15 year old to send them?
~Matt
No, it should not. This is the same logic that people used to label a 16 y/o having sex with a 14 or 15 y/o as a child molester and a sex offender. There is an age appropriateness here that is being neglected. If it were a case of a 15 or 16 y/o taking nude pictures of a much younger child and using and / or distributing them for sexual purposes I think that would be a different case. When the children are the same relative age and consent was clearly given how can you treat their interaction the same as you would between an adult and a child?
If they then give those pics to someone else (especially an adult) without consent, that’s a crime.
Problem here is that the 40 year recieved the picture WITH consent as it was posted on a public forum, thus I would think “Consent” is assumed. The only person that broke the law was the 15 year old that posted it without consent, but the person that would be going to jail would be the 40 year old.
**an adult looking at pics of a naked minor and, to make things worse, did so without the minor’s consent. **
What if she had sent the pictures to the other 15 year old and the parents of that child found the pictures in their childs phone? In essence at that time the parent has broken the law and in fact if they had unknowingly had the phone in their possession with those pictures might in fact be prosecuted.
All I’m saying is that the very existence of the pictures somehow must carry some responsibility if indeed it is illegal for certain people to have the pictures.
Look at it as if it were alcohol. Since I’m over 21 I can have the alcohol, however if the alcohol I have somehow gets in the hands of a 15 year old I am likely to carry some responsibility for that.
Based upon the second article, it sounds like these officials would like it if there was a law that if someone had sex with a 16yo old, even if that person was 16yo themselves, they could get charged with sex with a minor. Think about it, a couple of teenagers have sex and both of them are charged with crimes. This would definitely put an end to all of these teenage pregnancy issues. Oh, wait, I don’t want the religious right to hear about this because they may think it’s a great idea and try to get laws passed.
When the children are the same relative age and consent was clearly given how can you treat their interaction the same as you would between an adult and a child?
I’m not saying you treat there interaction the same as if it where between an adult and child. I’m saying there are consequences for allowing the interaction between an adult and a child occur.
As I posted in my other response there are consequences for an adult allowing a minor to get alcohol or cigarettes despite both being legal for adults.
If the pictures are perfectly legal for a minor to have, but not for adults to have should there not be consequences for allowing an adult to get them. There will most certainly be consequences if the adult is found to have them, and in some cases even if they “think” the child is an adult.
In todays day and age it would be VERY easy for a 40 year to get these pics 3rd, 4th, 5th hand and have no idea of origin or age. Yet I’m guessing they could be charged for having them. At some point doesn’t the minor child carry some burden for allowing them out of their control?
Based upon the second article, it sounds like these officials would like it if there was a law that if someone had sex with a 16yo old, even if that person was 16yo themselves, they could get charged with sex with a minor. Think about it, a couple of teenagers have sex and both of them are charged with crimes. This would definitely put an end to all of these teenage pregnancy issues. Oh, wait, I don’t want the religious right to hear about this because they may think it’s a great idea and try to get laws passed.
I don’t know of any cases where the kids were the same age, but there have been several recently where the kids were only 1 year apart. It’s just ridiculous.
You raise a fair point. The 15 year old who took the pics and the student(s) to whom she sent the pics all have the pics with the consent of the 15 year old. There really is no victim, yet. If one of the students then resends the pics to someone else without the consent of the 15 year old, then that’s child pornography.
You might want to consider the phrase “age of consent.” A fifteen year old doesn’t (in most states) have the right to give consent to something that the law considers illegal. That’s why statutory rape laws exist.
When the children are the same relative age and consent was clearly given how can you treat their interaction the same as you would between an adult and a child?
I’m not saying you treat there interaction the same as if it where between an adult and child. I’m saying there are consequences for allowing the interaction between an adult and a child occur.
As I posted in my other response there are consequences for an adult allowing a minor to get alcohol or cigarettes despite both being legal for adults.
If the pictures are perfectly legal for a minor to have, but not for adults to have should there not be consequences for allowing an adult to get them. There will most certainly be consequences if the adult is found to have them, and in some cases even if they “think” the child is an adult.
In todays day and age it would be VERY easy for a 40 year to get these pics 3rd, 4th, 5th hand and have no idea of origin or age. Yet I’m guessing they could be charged for having them. At some point doesn’t the minor child carry some burden for allowing them out of their control?
~Matt
I will concede that there should be some consequences, however I really object to these consequences being categorized as a “sex crime” as that carries serious future ramifications as well as a stigma of pervertedness that is just not relevant. Next they’ll be prosecuting a child who masturbates for molestation and calling them a pedophile.
You might want to consider the phrase “age of consent.”
This is also why I thru the parents in there. A parent has every right to look at their 15 year olds cell phone and I might even argue so does a principal or school authority although I don’t know hte legalities of that. If that parent saw pictures of some other school girl nude, what legal position does that put them in? What if they didn’t know the pictures were on the phone in their possesion and somehow it was discovered that phone contained pictures?
I’m just saying if we are going to prosecute for possession of such pictures than creating them must carry some responsibility.
Legally I have no idea how this would all shake out so the above and my arguments are meant more as questions than statements.
You raise a fair point. The 15 year old who took the pics and the student(s) to whom she sent the pics all have the pics with the consent of the 15 year old. There really is no victim, yet. If one of the students then resends the pics to someone else without the consent of the 15 year old, then that’s child pornography.
You might want to consider the phrase “age of consent.” A fifteen year old doesn’t (in most states) have the right to give consent to something that the law considers illegal. That’s why statutory rape laws exist.
I think, and I would think that most people would agree, that “consent” generally applies between a child and an adult. It would be patently ridiculous to prosecute 2 15 y/o kids who had consensual sex both with statutory rape.
You raise a fair point. The 15 year old who took the pics and the student(s) to whom she sent the pics all have the pics with the consent of the 15 year old. There really is no victim, yet. If one of the students then resends the pics to someone else without the consent of the 15 year old, then that’s child pornography.
You might want to consider the phrase “age of consent.” A fifteen year old doesn’t (in most states) have the right to give consent to something that the law considers illegal. That’s why statutory rape laws exist.
I think, and I would think that most people would agree, that “consent” generally applies between a child and an adult. It would be patently ridiculous to prosecute 2 15 y/o kids who had consensual sex both with statutory rape.
I don’t think you are disagreeing with what I said. Most statutory rape laws don’t apply to consenting minors. Hence a minor can “consent” to sex with another minor and not run afoul of most such laws (other less serious laws may come into play).
I don’t know of any cases where the kids were the same age, but there have been several recently where the kids were only 1 year apart. It’s just ridiculous.
If that one year is an 18 year old and a 17 year old then why is that ridiculous? Also most states have “Varying degrees” of this offense. An 18/17 combo isn’t eligible for the same penalty as a 20/15 combo and 20/15 isn’t the same as a 20/10 and so on.
None the less there has to be line drawn somewhere and in my state, Illinois, I don’t think an 18/17 combo is even prosecutable, would have to be an 18/16 which is the minimum spread I believe.
Is that right? Is it illegal for two 15 year olds to have sex?
That analogy aside, I don’t see a consent problem with a 15 year old taking a picture or herself and sending it to another minor. It might not be the brightest thing to do, but I certainly would not want to make it illegal. The problem is what to do about further distribution of the pictures.
“Problem here is that the 40 year recieved the picture WITH consent as it was posted on a public forum, thus I would think “Consent” is assumed. The only person that broke the law was the 15 year old that posted it without consent, but the person that would be going to jail would be the 40 year old.”
I don’t think anyone has the right to assume that pictures on a public forum of a naked minor were placed there with the consent of the minor. By that logic (and I may be missing your point), one could buy a child porno magazine. Since the initial posting on the forum was without consent of the subject, and further viewings are equally without consent.
"I don’t think anyone has the right to assume that pictures on a public forum of a naked minor were placed there with the consent of the minor. "
The problem is that a picture posted on a public forum of a 15 year-old could easily be mistaken for pictures of an 18 or 19 year-old. There’s no way to verify, and frequently no reason to suspect that the person is a minor. By contrast, someone buying a child porno magazine would be expecting it to have minors in it.
Problem is, as I understand it, in many States you don’t have to know it’s a minor to be charged with child pornography.