Teens Prosecuted For Racy Photos

An anonymous reader writes with a story on CNet about two teens who were prosecuted under anti-child-porn laws in Florida for having made and emailed racy photos of each other. Both were under 18 years old, so the resulting pictures are clearly illegal; but the teens' intent was not to share the pictures with anyone else. An appeals court majority opinion found that emailing the photos from one of the kids to the other was a careless act that should, it seems, bring down the full weight of the law. A minority opinion argued that the laws were intended to protect children from exploitative adults, not from other children.

Florida Age of Consent

[Catmeat]

According to the Wikipedia article on age of consent in North America - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_No rth_America [wikipedia.org] two 17 year-olds in Florida can legally have sex. It's just they can't take and send dirty pictures to each other.

Re:Think of the children!

[jandrese]

I don't know about their laws, but around here convictions for any child pornography charges of any kind will get you put on those lists. There is no judicial discretion in the matter. Since they are minors it might be possible to have their names erased at 18 like with other crimes, but since I've never heard of minors getting prosecuted for child pornography (they're usually the victim!) I'm not entirely sure. As usual, the internet is not your best source for legal advice. Take everything with a grain of salt.

Re:Strupod..

[HTH NE1]

Actually, they can post about it; doing so just undoes their moderation without a return of points.

Or they can post about it anonymously from a browser that doesn't have their cookie.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

A Judge cannot but a Jury can. See Jury Nullification [wikipedia.org]

Stupidly arresting cihldren, since 2004

[thehossman]

This certianly isn't the first time...

http://www.lies.com/wp/2004/03/30/teen-arrested-fo r-sexually-abusing-herself/ [lies.com]

Re:So then...

[squarefish]

there's a 17 yo kid in GA that recently got a mandatory 10 year sentence for receiving a blowjob from a 15 yo girl.
if he'd fucked her, it would only be a 1 year. he was having a party with friends and a girl he'd never seen before walked into their hotel room and started blowing him- he didn't ask for an id, but he did break the state's anti-sodomy law regarding teens and he will be labeled as a sex offender for the rest of his life. too many links to provide- just google Genarlow Wilson

Re:Think of the children!

[Anonymous Coward]

It was a three-person jury. 2 in favor of prosecution, 1 against.

Re:Jesus

[penix1]

It goes far beyond that. Remember, these kids not only have a criminal record but by law they must register as sex offenders and be tracked the rest of their lives. Publicly humiliated by having that tracking posted to the Internet and never get a job because of it especially if that job is anywhere near other kids...

It does raise an interesting quandary though. Now that they are sex offenders, does that mean they are restricted from going to school?

B.

Re:So then...

[dubl-u]

there's a 17 yo kid in GA that recently got a mandatory 10 year sentence for receiving a blowjob from a 15 yo girl.

I think you're talking about Genarlow Wilson [wikipedia.org]. IMHO, he got completely shafted. There's a great article about him [go.com]. Were I in the DA's district, I'd be rounding up an impeachment petition right now. It's a fucking travesty.

I don't think you fully realize the consequences.

[StarKruzr]

They violated CHILD PORN laws. Now they have to register as sex offenders.

Stop and THINK. Does this make ANY SENSE whatsoever? They have to be labeled sex offenders for the rest of their lives because they were emailing EACH OTHER dirty pictures?

Read some history if you're interested..

[Cryptnotic]

First of all, the U.S. was not founded by Puritans. If I recall correctly, the Puritans were pacifists and believed in creating a pure religious society. The founding fathers of the United States rejected the idea of official state religion (though they may have been religious themselves) and they were certainly not pacifists when they organized a military secession from England.

As for colonization, that wasn't the American way, it was the European way. The English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, and Russians all took colonies in the Americas.

Re:Jesus

[ozborn]

The teenage pregnancy problem is because of lack of sex education.
Considering that teenage sex and pregancy was the norm for most of human history I'd say the problem has more to do with society being unable to turn teenagers into financially viable and independent adults until long after they are sexually mature.

Re:Jesus

[BakaHoushi]

What's your point? The above posts, including my own, state quite clearly that doing this was a mistake. And perhaps, someday, she would be embarrassed. And all that jazz.

The question is why should they be tried for CHILD PORNOGRAPHY? I'm entirely serious. These laws are designed to prosecute people who rape children. Taking a photo of yourself and e-mailing it to someone is HARDLY comparable.

Even IF it ended up in the wrong hands (And that's nota big deal to me. Child pornographers want pre-pubescent girls. Not "just technically a minor, but barely."), shouldn't we be blaming the guy who steals these photos? Blaming the girl is like blaming a car-jacking victim for leaving a car unlocked, or a mugging victim for having her wallet out in the open.

Re:Read some history if you're interested..

[bogjobber]

If I recall correctly, the Puritans were pacifists and believed in creating a pure religious society.

You're thinking of the Quakers. The Puritans were very religious, but were in general much crazier than the Quakers (as in Salem witch trial crazy).

As for colonization, that wasn't the American way, it was the European way.

Try telling that to the Native Americans, Spanish, Mexicans, Cubans, Filipinos, native Hawaiians, Hondurans, Guatemalans, Costa Ricans, and Panamanians/Colombians. Sure it isn't colonialism in the same way or on the same scale of the Europeans, but we've definitely set up colonies (both actual and "neo-colonies").

Note that I'm not necessarily criticizing all of those situations, or agreeing with the GP poster. But you have to at least acknowledge historical fact. Just because we don't call everything outside of the original 13 states colonies does not change the fact that that is what they originally were.

Re:Strupod..

[that this is not und]

The American Kennel Association.

They don't name a 'dog' Britanny. They name a whole 'breed' of dogs Britanny.

We named him Eliot. (well, my wife did. I call him 'stupid' sometimes.)