'SEXTING'

[CCTAU]

OK. I am of the generation that had to know someone at the  drugstore who developed film in order to develop any kind of racy photos. But today's youth have digital photography at their fingertips with cell phones. If an underage person decides to photo themselves nude and send it out, should the person receiving the photo be charged with child porn?

'Sexting': Child Pornography or Free-Speech Right?

Friday , January 15, 2010

AP
ADVERTISEMENT

PHILADELPHIA —
A federal appeals court must decide whether "sexting" by three Pennsylvania teens amounts to child pornography or is a free-speech right.

A three-judge panel in Philadelphia is hearing arguments Friday in a case between a county prosecutor and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The prosecutor is threatening to file child-pornography charges against three girls after racy cell-phone images of them circulated through their high school. The photos show one girl topless and the others in bras.

The ACLU says the case is the first in the nation to challenge whether prosecutors can file child-pornography charges in "sexting" cases. It argues that harmless photos shouldn't be criminalized.

Wyoming County prosecutor George Skumanick Jr. hopes the appeals court will overturn a federal judge's stay of prosecution.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,583104,00.html

[jadennis]

Surprised we've made it to 2010 before this came before a court.  I'm not sure what I think...there are probably good arguments on both sides.  My guess is it comes down to something technical like, how is the cell phone texting defined?  Is it personal communication or a multi-media device?   Who knows?

[Token]

Here's my question.  Why in the flaming phuk, does your under aged child have a phuking cell phone anyway?  Are they that important, that they have their own cell phone?  I mean, what the phuk could possibly be so important in their care free lives, that they need to have instant and constant communication?  

I blame the parents, who either have no trust whatsoever in their child so they need a way to contact them at every moment, or is trying to be a friend instead of a parent by allowing them to have such a phuking ridiculous item at such a young age.  

[AWK]

Surprised we've made it to 2010 before this came before a court.  I'm not sure what I think...there are probably good arguments on both sides.  My guess is it comes down to something technical like, how is the cell phone texting defined?  Is it personal communication or a multi-media device?   Who knows?

It has been before a court before. And the defendant was found guilty of possessing child pornography.

[Saniflush]

Here's my question.  Why in the flaming phuk, does your under aged child have a phuking cell phone anyway?  Are they that important, that they have their own cell phone?  I mean, what the phuk could possibly be so important in their care free lives, that they need to have instant and constant communication?  

I blame the parents, who either have no trust whatsoever in their child so they need a way to contact them at every moment, or is trying to be a friend instead of a parent by allowing them to have such a phuking ridiculous item at such a young age.  

I agree with you in principle but the times they have a changed. 

In the old days a phone number was a place.  If you wanted to talk to Bob you called Bob's house.  Maybe Bob was there. Maybe he wasn't.  You rolled the dice.  You know it has only been 30 years or so since answering machines started being widely used.

Now a phone number is a person.  You want to talk to Bob you call him on the cell phone, then text him, then send him an email, then take your phone and facebook him.  More pinpoint accuracy when trying to get a hold of someone but it comes at a price.

The current technology can be a very powerful tool for parents if used correctly.  At the end of the day if the parent hasn't taught them right from wrong it doesn't matter whether they have a phone or not.

[Buzz Killington]

If an underage person decides to photo themselves nude and send it out, should the person receiving the photo be charged with child porn?

I don't know how you could enforce that.  I get calls rather frequently from people who mistyped the number into their phone.  The same could happen with a text just as easily. 

[Token]

I agree with you in principle but the times they have a changed. 

In the old days a phone number was a place.  If you wanted to talk to Bob you called Bob's house.  Maybe Bob was there. Maybe he wasn't.  You rolled the dice.  You know it has only been 30 years or so since answering machines started being widely used.

Now a phone number is a person.  You want to talk to Bob you call him on the cell phone, then text him, then send him an email, then take your phone and facebook him.  More pinpoint accuracy when trying to get a hold of someone but it comes at a price.

The current technology can be a very powerful tool for parents if used correctly.  At the end of the day if the parent hasn't taught them right from wrong it doesn't matter whether they have a phone or not.

Alright, you made a good case if you need to talk with Bob immediately.  But why would you ever be in a situation where you needed to talk to your child immediately, and couldn't unless they had a cell phone?  Maybe if your child is 16+ and driving....but there's no need for your 10-15 year old child to have a cell phone.  My kid (8) doesn't go anywhere that I can't get in touch with him if I need to call him. 

[jadennis]

Alright, you made a good case if you need to talk with Bob immediately.  But why would you ever be in a situation where you needed to talk to your child immediately, and couldn't unless they had a cell phone?  Maybe if your child is 16+ and driving....but there's no need for your 10-15 year old child to have a cell phone.  My kid (8) doesn't go anywhere that I can't get in touch with him if I need to call him. 

Agree with you to some extent, but as the age climbs, the practicality becomes more legit.  If I drop off my 13-14 year old with 3 of his friends at the varsity football game/movies/mall/etc and then go home (2-5 miles away), it's nice for him to be able to call me should something come up ("game is going long, come 20 minutes later", or "I twisted my ankle and can't walk, come pick me up", etc).

Also, it just says teens, not their age.  I don't know what the cutoff is for when something is child porn and not just regular porn.  My guess is under 18, which could mean these girls are 16 or 17, in which case it would be pretty normal to have cell phones.

[jadennis]

It has been before a court before. And the defendant was found guilty of possessing child pornography.

The ACLU says the case is the first in the nation to challenge whether prosecutors can file child-pornography charges in "sexting" cases. It argues that harmless photos shouldn't be criminalized.

Do they say this because maybe this is the first case where the actual kids in the pictures were the very ones to photograph and send the pictures?  I could see some perv that downloaded child porn to his phone from some website being found guilty.  Or even a perv who used his camera phone to take pictures of kids.  

But maybe this is unique because the people being charged are actually the ones who are in the pictures....pictures they took themselves and sent out themselves. (?)

[Saniflush]

20 years ago it was folks my parents age asking "what the hell are these kids doing running around with these Polaroid cameras"?

I can answer that.  We were taking dirty pictures.  Or at least trying/hoping we would get to.

The want to see boobies has never changed.  The technology and culture has.

Remember the hot teacher you had?  Willingly score with her 30 years ago you are a hero.  Willingly score with her now you have been raped. 

[Token]

Agree with you to some extent, but as the age climbs, the practicality becomes more legit.  If I drop off my 13-14 year old with 3 of his friends at the varsity football game/movies/mall/etc and then go home (2-5 miles away), it's nice for him to be able to call me should something come up ("game is going long, come 20 minutes later", or "I twisted my ankle and can't walk, come pick me up", etc).

Also, it just says teens, not their age.  I don't know what the cutoff is for when something is child porn and not just regular porn.  My guess is under 18, which could mean these girls are 16 or 17, in which case it would be pretty normal to have cell phones.

It could be 16 or 17, but I highly doubt it.  The problems we are having in my area is within the age of 13-15.  

And IMO, 13 year old children shouldn't be dropped off anywhere and left without adult supervision.  Therefore, there would be no need for them having a cell phone.  

20 years ago it was folks my parents age asking "what the hell are these kids doing running around with these Polaroid cameras"?

I can answer that.  We were taking dirty pictures.  Or at least trying/hoping we would get to.

The want to see boobies has never changed.  The technology and culture has.
 

Which is exactly my point.  No way in hell am I putting my 13 year old son in a situation where teenage immaturity could rear it's ugly head and get him in a world of poop.

It happens every day.  Even in small little towns.

[Saniflush]

It happens every day.  Even in small little towns.

What does?  Scoring with a hot teacher?  Apparently I need to move.

[Token]

What does?  Scoring with a hot teacher?  Apparently I need to move.

That probably does too.  But I'm talking about the trouble unattended 13 year old kids find themselves in.   

[AWK]

Do they say this because maybe this is the first case where the actual kids in the pictures were the very ones to photograph and send the pictures?  I could see some perv that downloaded child porn to his phone from some website being found guilty.  Or even a perv who used his camera phone to take pictures of kids.  

But maybe this is unique because the people being charged are actually the ones who are in the pictures....pictures they took themselves and sent out themselves. (?)

I know there was a case where a 17 year old boy was texted illicit pictures from his 15 year old girlfriend, and charged with possession of child pornography.  I'm not sure if the case was throw out or what happened, but I can say that this is not a first...  Maybe a first as to the specific circumstances as you mentioned above.

[AWK]

Found it.

High Schoolers Accused Of Sending Naked Pictures To Each Other

Posted: 9:11 am EST January 13, 2009
Updated: 5:44 pm EST January 13, 2009

Comment On This Story ››
GREENSBURG, Pa. -- Three teenage girls who allegedly sent nude or semi-nude cell phone pictures of themselves, and three male classmates in a Greensburg Salem High School who received them, are charged with child pornography.

Police said the girls are 14 or 15, and the boys charged with receiving the photos are 16 or 17. None are being identified because most criminal cases in Pennsylvania juvenile courts are not public.

"It was a self portrait taken of a juvenile female taking pictures of her body, nude," said Capt. George Seranko of the Greensburg Police Department.

Police said school officials learned of the photos in October. That's when a student was seen using a cell phone during school hours, which violates school rules. The phone was seized, and the photos were found on it, police said. When police investigated, other phones with more pictures were seized.

"Taking nude pictures of yourself, nothing good can come out of it," said Seranko.

The Greensburg Salem School District issued a statement on Tuesday saying there was “no evidence of inappropriate activity on school grounds or during the school day other than the violation of the (school's) electronic devices policy.”

The school district said it only became aware of the arrest of the students on Monday and will continue to work cooperatively with police, as well as continue to enforce its electronic devices policy and educate students on the dangers of inappropriate use of electronic devices.

Police said the girls are being charged with manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography while the boys face charges of possession.

"It's very dangerous," said Seranko. "Once it's on a cell phone, that cell phone can be put on the Internet where everyone in the world can get access to that juvenile picture. You don't realize what you are doing until it's already done."

http://www.wpxi.com/news/18469160/detail.html#-

The confusion on my part was due to the fact that this is the same case from a year ago.  The defendants appealed to Federal Court.  Same case, just a year later and in Federal Court.

[Token]

I know there was a case where a 17 year old boy was texted illicit pictures from his 15 year old girlfriend, and charged with possession of child pornography.  I'm not sure if the case was throw out or what happened, but I can say that this is not a first...  Maybe a first as to the specific circumstances as you mentioned above.

Here is where the law is sticky, IMO.  If anyone is to blame here, it's the 15 year old girlfriend's parents who enabled her by giving her the cell phone.  No way in hell should that kid be charged with possessing child pornography. 

[AWK]

Slippery slop there token.  That's like saying you give your kid anything, and as harmless as it may be, he turns it into something deadly, should you be held liable?

[Token]

Slippery slop there token.  That's like saying you give your kid anything, and as harmless as it may be, he turns it into something deadly, should you be held liable?

Let me say, I don't believe ANY legal action should take place here.  No crime was committed.  I'm just saying that her parents shouldn't be trying to press charges when they're the ones who gave her the phone. 

[GarMan]

Slippery slop there token.  That's like saying you give your kid anything, and as harmless as it may be, he turns it into something deadly, should you be held liable?

Not really...  The difference is that the parents are providing it to their kids.  It is definitely the parent's responsibility to ensure that their brats aren't doing anything stupid or illegal with the new toy.  Think of it this way...  If those same kids go out and trash personal property, the parents are usually held liable for the damages and sometimes charged with crime. 

[Saniflush]

Not really...  The difference is that the parents are providing it to their kids.  It is definitely the parent's responsibility to ensure that their brats aren't doing anything stupid or illegal with the new toy.  Think of it this way...  If those same kids go out and trash personal property, the parents are usually held liable for the damages and sometimes charged with crime. 

But do they get to do it nekid?