Another reason not to live in Virginia

[drscott]

Two Northside High School girls who took nude pictures of themselves and e-mailed them to their boyfriends last year said they only did it to be flirtatious. It wasn't long before they realized the consequences: loss of friends, no more school activities, seeing themselves on Internet sites and felony charges. Both 16-year-olds were charged with production and dissemination of child pornography.

The law appears to be... flawed.

Link: http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/8201.html

Comments

[orange-groves.livejournal.com]

The young children of today are so adventurous.

[greatbearmd.livejournal.com]

Given the current political climate and governance in VA, it appears more like the law worked exactly as they intended.

[excessor.livejournal.com]

Once again, the state equates nudity with pornography, especially if minors are involved. Sometimes I think I live on a different planet.

[bruinwi.livejournal.com]

Kinda makes you wonder what's "safe" to post on either your web site or in LJ, doesn't it?

The law may be flawed, but it would seem that people's common sense is even more flawed.

Observation: Once posted, a .jpg has a life of its own and will end up anywhere, more likely where it will do you the most damage (See opening comment).

Bitch slaps all around

[ciddyguy.livejournal.com]

First of all, the law is probably flawed in it's intent and in it's potential interpretation.

Secondly, I'd have given the girls the bitch slap and a good talking to.

The judge for his interpration and good talking down to, but the major slap and berating go to the boys who sent the pics out in the first place. What they did was hurt the girls and ultimately hurt themselves. If they can't be trusted by these two girls, then how can others trust them with pictures?

And the one parent of the one girl, she needs to just get over it and move on.

Besides, what constitute pronography to one person isn't necessary pornagraphy to another.

'nuf said.

It's a troubling situation to hear about from all parties.

[dr-scott.livejournal.com]

Certainly the girls were foolish on several levels. But charging them with felony child pornography charges for taking pictures of themselves is roughly similar to charging a teenage boy with statutory rape for jerking himself off.

[bruinwi.livejournal.com]

The courts were obligated, under law, to charge the girls (The girls' crime was not in taking the pics, but for transmitting them. In your analogy, a teenage boy may masterbate without penalty; if he does so in the presence of others, it becomes a crime). Clear head prevailed by not sentencing the girls under that same law.

Justice CAN be done, even if the law is flawed.

[dr-scott.livejournal.com]

The charge was "production and dissemination," so I assume the taking and storage of the pictures alone was sufficient to be considered a felony.

The fact that this judge and these prosecutors were merciful in punishment does not make the law any less silly.

Note also that the girls have already been punished far more than the act deserved by being isolated by their school and probably damaged for life by the publicity. No involvement of the legal system at all was required. In more reasonable jurisdictions this case would never have been brought -- prosecutors do not have to conduct show trials if they don't want to.