ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (09/17 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

ACSOL Conference Oct 1, 2022 

Janice's Journal

Janice’s Journal: Child Pornography Laws Should Protect, Not Prosecute Children

The highest state court in Maryland ruled yesterday that a teenage girl could be prosecuted for distributing “child pornography” because she shared a one-minute video in which she was engaged in a consensual sexual act.
Has the world gone crazy?
“Child pornography” laws have been passed in every state in the nation. And in each of those states the purpose of the laws is to protect children from abuse and exploitation.
Protecting children from abuse and exploitation is a noble cause. However, it is not noble to prosecute children who are neither abused nor exploited.
In this case, one of the state government’s arguments is that the teenage girl should be prosecuted because “there is a potential for the image to fall into the hands of adults who traffic in child pornography.” While that may be true in the abstract, the Court cited no evidence that an adult had distributed the teenager’s one-minute video.
Instead, the Court cited evidence that the video was initially sent to two close friends, both teenagers. Unfortunately, one of those friends ultimately shared the video with a school official who was an adult who subsequently shared it with many other adults, including members of law enforcement.
Given these facts, who is the actual distributor of the “child pornography” in this case? And is the school official, the first adult to view the video, a trafficker of “child pornography” because he showed that video to other adults?
It appears that the most rational person in this case was the accused teenager who argued that the state’s “child pornography” law was intended to protect, not prosecute minors victimized and exploited in the production of sexually explicit videos. Unfortunately, the Court disagreed with the accused’s position and ruled instead that she could be prosecuted for distributing the video in question.
In its decision, the Court blames the Maryland State Legislature for existing law that allows for the prosecution of teenagers for sexting. The Court then notes that 21 states currently have laws that allow such prosecutions – Alabama, Alaska, California, Delaware, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
If the Court’s statement is correct, it also means that 29 states do not allow teenagers to be prosecuted for sexting. It is therefore incumbent upon the 21 states to immediately begin revisions to their “child pornography” laws so that those laws fulfill their stated purpose of protecting children and do not instead prosecute children.

CP Case – Maryland – Aug 2019

Related

https://slate.com/technology/2019/08/maryland-sk-court-case-teen-sexting-child-pornography.html

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email 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.  
 
Subscribe
Notify of

27 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
27
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.