BF2S Forums Child Porn Charge for MySpace Revenge Pics

mikkel wrote:

I think a more interesting issue to discuss regarding this case is whether or not the distribution of pictures merits the application of laws against child pornography, considering the spirit in which these laws are enacted. As far as I can tell, the almost universally applied, legally acceptable argument for limiting the constitutionally granted freedom of expression in cases of child pornography rests on the concept of exploitation of minors.

This girl was clearly not exploited or coerced during the production of the images in question, so I cannot see why, in the spirit in which enacted, the laws defining the crimes of which this boy is charged are applicable. Seen strictly in light of the letter of the law, and what this article reports, it seems to be a case of a manufacturer of child pornography going free because she's an underaged girl, and a distributor of child pornography being charged as an adult despite being an underaged boy.

I know the opinions on this subject are many, and often very passionate, but the significant departure from the argument justifying the limitation to constitutionally granted rights, and the unjustifiable disparity between the accused and the purported victim makes this seem like nothing more than a moral witch hunt. I hope that the courts see reason and refuse to take part in that kind of charade.

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

She was clearly exploited when her ex distributed private pictures. I can live without the child pornography issue. This asshole violated a clearly private and intimate understanding between him and her, and he knew it. He set out to do exactly what he did. Harm her.

I disagree (surprise). In my understanding exploitation carries with it the idea that someon benefits through using someone else unfairly. How did he benefit from putting the pictures on the internet? He didn't make any money at least.

And can't you discuss this without calling him an asshole all the time, since that is just an emotive and totally subjective term.

tazz. wrote:

TL FUCKING DR, Get a woman your own age.

yeesh.

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

I think a more interesting issue to discuss regarding this case is whether or not the distribution of pictures merits the application of laws against child pornography, considering the spirit in which these laws are enacted. As far as I can tell, the almost universally applied, legally acceptable argument for limiting the constitutionally granted freedom of expression in cases of child pornography rests on the concept of exploitation of minors.

This girl was clearly not exploited or coerced during the production of the images in question, so I cannot see why, in the spirit in which enacted, the laws defining the crimes of which this boy is charged are applicable. Seen strictly in light of the letter of the law, and what this article reports, it seems to be a case of a manufacturer of child pornography going free because she's an underaged girl, and a distributor of child pornography being charged as an adult despite being an underaged boy.

I know the opinions on this subject are many, and often very passionate, but the significant departure from the argument justifying the limitation to constitutionally granted rights, and the unjustifiable disparity between the accused and the purported victim makes this seem like nothing more than a moral witch hunt. I hope that the courts see reason and refuse to take part in that kind of charade.

She was clearly exploited when her ex distributed private pictures. I can live without the child pornography issue. This asshole violated a clearly private and intimate understanding between him and her, and he knew it. He set out to do exactly what he did. Harm her.

I agree completely that she was emotionally exploited when he distributed the pictures, and if there is any basis for criminal charges based on that, then those would clearly be appropriately applied in this case. A civil suit for damages is also absolutely warranted. The child pornography charges are preposterous, I feel. Doubly so as the girl isn't facing charges for production.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

I think the Civil Suit would be more then enough for this case. No need to throw this guy in jail and have the tax payers pay for him..

His intent was to do harm, it was. She broke up with him, he got hurt and did something against her, we could call this a crime of passion. It doesn't mean that he's a horrible human being, he's young and did something stupid. This is a private matter between the girl, her family and him and should NOT be a state vs. Court case.

For fuck sake, she fucked up by sending him the picture. He fucked up by uploading and being a dick. WE as the tax payer are going to be forced to pay for him if he goes to jail, then he'll get out not have a future and probably become more of a criminal? It's crazy, maybe they should make him join the Army which would be way more productive then sending him to jail.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

lowing wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

I think the Civil Suit would be more then enough for this case. No need to throw this guy in jail and have the tax payers pay for him..

His intent was to do harm, it was. She broke up with him, he got hurt and did something against her, we could call this a crime of passion. It doesn't mean that he's a horrible human being, he's young and did something stupid. This is a private matter between the girl, her family and him and should NOT be a state vs. Court case.

For fuck sake, she fucked up by sending him the picture. He fucked up by uploading and being a dick. WE as the tax payer are going to be forced to pay for him if he goes to jail, then he'll get out not have a future and probably become more of a criminal? It's crazy, maybe they should make him join the Army which would be way more productive then sending him to jail.

I would buy this, execpt whene approached by the police to take it down or face charges. He unremorsefully refused. Fuck him.

Well then do a "Failure to comply" ticket. No jail time and no Megan's law(which is a good law but it really doesn't work the way it should). I think the law should be there to punish who needs to be punished, NOT ruin peoples lives.

Also I would like to say that if this kid gets jail time and gets his life ruined due to it, that it's going to really empower the Girl. She's going to think that her actions don't have consequences, sorry but you take nude pictures the chance of people seeing them are high. Even if I took nudes developed and put them someplace safe in my house, there is the chance that someone could find them and distribute them.  You learn from your mistakes and this girl isn't the Virgin Mary.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

How has she paid for her mistakes?

I bet ya in the future she'll have an alleged rape charge on someone because she decided after the fact that she didn't want to have sex with the person.

Cybargs wrote:

Upload naked pics of him on myspace. Lowing likes laws that are "fair and balanced."

lowing wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Upload naked pics of him on myspace. Lowing likes laws that are "fair and balanced."

Actually I don't. I like laws that fuck the ever livin' shit out of the criminal.

lowing wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

lowing wrote:

Actually I don't. I like laws that fuck the ever livin' shit out of the criminal.

The kid is a dumbass not a criminal. Prison is the best place to make better criminals. It's like a criminal convention, where they teach each other the best shit. I bet the kid will join the Aryan Brotherhood just to survive. Great, now we've turned a dumbass into a neo-nazi.

Not we..............you.

the kid is not a kid. He is old enough to serve in the military. and sorry, if you don't like it, what he did was a criminal act. Kinda sorta the reason they arrested his dumb ass and are gunna try him in court.

lowing wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

lowing wrote:

Not we..............you.

the kid is not a kid. He is old enough to serve in the military. and sorry, if you don't like it, what he did was a criminal act. Kinda sorta the reason they arrested his dumb ass and are gunna try him in court.

He's still a stupid fucking kid if he did dumb shit such as, uploading naked pics on myspace. He should be tried in a civil court, not a criminal court. Don't put him in the big boy bars for stupid shit like this. Being a fiscal conservative like yourself lowing, wouldn't you think it'd be a waste of tax dollars putting dumbass' like him in prison?

As I have said, I couldn't care less about him or what they do to him, as long as it hurts.

and please stop pretending like you give sa shit about how much it cost to house a prisoner.