ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 16 – Sacramento, Dec 14 – Phone | details (2020 Dates added)

Emotional Support Group Meetings (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

National

NH: Police Investigate 20 Kids for Sexting, Charge No One (Thankfully)

[reason.com – 6/26/18]

Let’s hear it for an unusually sensible police response to a case of high school sexting.

The Nashua, New Hampshire, police received word in May that 10 or 20 students at Bishop Guertin High School had been snapping and swapping sexts.

But then, rather than arresting these kids for making child porn, or threatening to register them as sex offenders, the police did something outrageously reasonable.

They opted not to charge any of them.

As Nashua’s Lieutenant Robert Page told WMUR TV:

“To begin with, the laws of child pornography were developed to target and prosecute child predators, not students and juveniles who make bad decisions,” Page said.

Police said they have spoken to all the students who were involved and their parents. They also wiped the photos off the phones.

The police went on to tell the students that what they put on social media never completely disappears, so from now on, lay off the inappropriate photos. That’s precisely the response I think most of us would want from the cops if our own kids ever sent or received a sext. (Which, if they’re under 23, they probably did, by the way.)

Now compare the perspective and compassion of those Nashua, NH, police to the actions in any number of other teen sexting cases. For instance:

The 2014 Virginia case where cops sought and obtained a warrant to give a teen boy an erection so they could compare it to a sext they had gotten their hands on (as it were).

Read more

 

 

Join the discussion

  1. Agamemnon

    I cannot begin to express how calming and reassuring this story was.

    The police in the article handled this incident EXACTLY how all these cases should: A discussion with the kids, their families, and erasing the contraband for the protection of the kids.

    And that’s it. No waste of taxpayer money in criminal courts. No traumatic trial. And defintiely no lifelong public shaming to compromise any sort of livelihood these kids would want to work for when they grow up.

    • AO

      One has to wonder about the cops, DA, and judge who push it to the max in cases like this because technically they can given the way the laws are written. People who follow the laws that blindly, should not be in charge of administering them.

  2. Laura

    Finally…intelligent reasoning. Hopefully, it will last and spread throughout the country.

  3. Ali

    Police are huge influence on kids. Now if only minors and adults are taught not to lie about their age online causing long term harm to people.

  4. David

    The article gives credit to the police… but isn’t it prosecutors who decide whether or not charges are filed?? 🤔

  5. David

    😈 I suppose I would be branded one of the Devil’s own minions if I were to disagree and suggest that all of those youths should have been prosecuted. If the parents of tens/hundreds/thousands of Zack Andersons were to kick up a huge fuss and fight against the SORs, change may start to happen. What if that entire community were up in arms and fought against the Registries?? 😈

    • cool CA RC

      I would like to agree with you David. The more people on the Registry list the more likely the Registry will be removed. The sooner the better. so if they did charge them ALL then we have at least 200 people affected by the RSO laws. Then those people can join us fighting those laws. Now they aren’t on our side because the cops decided not to help put them on the list. The parents have no idea how bad this is.
      Oh well next time.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

.