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.
Related
https://slate.com/technology/2019/08/maryland-sk-court-case-teen-sexting-child-pornography.html
It’s exactly the same as the prostitution laws I’m afraid. The way they’re set up if a prostitute is raped by a client she can’t tell the cops because she’ll be arrested. This way if a teenager is coerced into something similar by an adult they won’t tell anybody for the exact same reason.
Maryland and all States should realize that teens now have digital access to others (not to mention to the world). IF there is a crime here, it’s on the parents (or whoever) who allow this access. Teenagers will be teenagers, somewhere along the long the line they experiment, kiss, touch, have sex, etc., there is no magical age line. Why prosecute them? We did it, so will they.
Indeed…the world has gone Topsy. So, if the teenager (in this case) can be charged then what about the 1000s of “Other” illegal image convictions where teens shared and those on the receiving end were the only ones convicted and the teen that sent it were not charged with anything? Remind me again how this is rational?
“In its decision, the Court blames the Maryland State Legislature for existing law that allows for the prosecution of teenagers for sexting.”
——————————————————————————————————————————-
This is one of the worst arguments a judge can make as to why they’re ruling against the defendant when they know it’s wrong. Grow a damn pair and do the right thing! Let the bastard DA’s be the ones who have to file for an appeal. Let it be on their direct record that they want to prosecute a minor BECAUSE THEY CAN.
If DA’s can drop cases of CP because the defendant requested to look at the program code that was used by LE to catch them on the internet, and they don’t want to reveal said code, they sure as hell can drop exactly this kind of case. It takes a really messed up person to push for something like this.
And even more shame on any politician that doesn’t want to correct this. I truly hope their children and grandchildren get caught up in their quest for points.
The use of the database like SOR never was really about ” protection of vulnerable persons” and far more about ” assisting law enforcement” with their use. SCOTUS stated ” Dangerousness ” was not the reason for inclusion rather it was the fact of conviction that triggered states duty to ” inform” the public via www broadcasts.
Time has proven the regime ineffective in lessening recidivism, but still informs. That is the nature of the machine driven regime it will continue to broaden its scope to include children precisely because the motives for promulgation were political in nature.
So let me get this straight.
According to the law, she’d too stupid to make decisions for herself regarding sex, yet she’s prosecuted as an adult because she’s old enough to know right from wrong and appreciate potential consequences from her actions despite her age.
Got it.
Occurred to me that the generation in most legislatures now were in high school when someone decided it would be a good idea to distribute condoms in school, with their enthusiastic support I’m sure. Funny how they now expect children nowadays to be watching Sesame Street and playing with Barbies and GI Joes until they turn 18.
One thing that may be noteworthy about the impact of the charge, would be the potential for the teen to be subject to the registry should she move to another state eventually. As many of us can attest, criminal conduct that does not trigger registration in one state may trigger it in another. While some people may think this case is of little consequence because she does not carry the sex offender label presently, one day she may find herself in a legal mess elsewhere due to this charge. She is right to vigorously pursue any legal remedies available to her to have it completely removed.
The world has indeed “gone crazy.”
The child pornography story seems to have made the big time. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/teens-child-pornography-sexting_n_5d6ff6d1e4b09bbc9ef8f108?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaHVmZnBvc3QuY29tLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAADBLikyHup47BB-YTD5eMHWYSIc2vEr3HNjcuiaJspUURowvM4q1tZ9jfb8ipsy6FYuv-FIt4d2gTHRDTZ7YdlUAfLYz9cb2oW6Z2Vo9oVLBQTjoPe4o6AUxh7DOuEcl1hfVFXm4mmIS8JrYlSn7anPSgz3-a58Q8i2D9fpI__-k
I am gonna disagree…. current and valid law:
A visual depiction of a minor (a person one second under the age of 18) engaged in sexual conduct or in a state of nudity IS Child Pornography.
When a person, any person, has in their possession a visual depiction of a minor (a person one second under the age of 18) engaged in sexual conduct or in a state of nudity they ARE in possession of Child Pornography.
When a person, any person, creates (and shares) a visual depiction of a minor (a person one second under the age of 18) engaged in sexual conduct or in a state of nudity they ARE a Child Pornographer.
That is the law. The law should protect society as a whole. Not just children. Or adults. Or fat people. Or skinny people. Society as a whole. Breaking a law should apply to all people. When they are below a certain age, they are dealt with in an age appropriate system. But they do not get absolved of breaking the law.
That the imagery is of the person themselves is completely immaterial. If the child pornographer is a minor they may be dealt with in juvenile court. If the state’s laws allow for it they may be spared sex offender registration. If such registration is mandatory – even for juveniles, on the list they go. Let’s remember that such registration is not a punishment.
That is the law. Why it is illegal to film completely legal conduct – who knows. If this is child pornography then 30 states allow sex with CHILDREN. Gross. But okay.
But until such time that this is addressed the age of the subject is critical, not the age of the photo/videographer or owner of the phone. That this girls should get off scot-free but a 19 year old who receives her recording has his life destroyed makes no sense.
That this guy below should get 15 years in federal prison (no parole) for having in his possession the images taken by the 16/17 year old (without subsequent sharing) and that this girl should get a complete pass for distributing! the same kind of imagery I do no understand. I understand one is state and one is federal, but come on!
https://ethicsalarms.com/2011/03/01/outrageous-prosecution-the-eric-rinehart-story/
So yes, this girl IS a Child Pornographer and should be prosecuted as one, as she was. Yes, this girl IS a minor and should be adjuticated in juvenile court, as she was. I could have seen the need for discretionary sex offender registration, but the presiding judge did not. All is good….
Seriously? Convict her of a sex crime? A possible lifetime on the sex offender registry? Everyone as a child has done something stupid or had a lapse in judgment. This certainly is not criminal behavior but poor judgment. If the law is to protect children then why prosecute her? Obviously she as a minor is not legally capable of making adult decisions so why treat her as such? Its the same laws that would prosecute an adult for having sex with her because she is not at the age of consent, but then the law prosecutes her for making a poor decision.
It just floors me how ridiculous, hypocritical and counter-productive this is. Prosecuting a child for distribution of child pornogrophy of themself? Yes the world is going crazy. So if we catch a child mastubating, that child is technically molesting him/herself. That child should be prosecuted, obviously tried as an adult, and sent to adult prison for a very long time. Then put on the SOR for life because we need to protect this child from him/herself! If this child commits suicide (because obviously their life will be ruined by this whole ordeal), no one will care.
“If all the sex offenders killed themself, the world will be a better place!”
That’s what most people will think. I hope this world gets a hold of itself soon. Stories like this one is why I sometimes feel hopeful when the news reports that an asteroid will probably very soon hit the earth and wipe us all out.