Girl, 16 texts friends video of herself engaging in sex act. She's a child pornographer, Maryland high court rules

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/08/29/girl-16-texts-friends-video-o.html

1 Like

What’s next? Charging kids with statutory rape for masturbating?

44 Likes

Trying to see were this might be coming from (I agree with the ACLU that it is nonsense to prosecute someone as both victim and abuser at the same time), the only angle that makes sense to me is the court not wanting to have to determine intent when these cases come before them.

Sure it looks like the teenager was doing this consensually, but proving so is messy. Worse, even if it was created by an innocent the person they send it to is put in great legal jeopardy. Possession of child pornography is one of those things that nobody gives leniency for in this country. In the most extreme example it could be used as a weapon, although this is probably unlikely in the real world.

5 Likes

The tangible effects of Trump and McConnell stacking the courts with idiots.

3 Likes

This is a state case, not federal.

9 Likes

There is no possible scenario, though, no matter what justification you use, for prosecuting the child depicted in the video. Whatever harm the law was intended to prevent, prosecuting the child is harming the child.

50 Likes

That assumes the purpose of the law is to minimize harm. The court may not see it that way.

5 Likes

I can’t rule out that the judge is just a sadist, in any case that’s an explanation rather than a justification.

12 Likes

Don’t give the GOP any ideas

6 Likes

I stand corrected, good sir.

2 Likes

The case was argued before 7 judges. 6 of them ruled against the teen.

11 Likes

At least she wasn’t charged as an adult.

14 Likes

Also, this nonsense far predates Trump.

If you want to blame someone, blame spineless legislators.

8 Likes

Unnecessary. The judge may simply have determined that this was within the purpose of the law as written. Judges are commonly reluctant to rule against unjust laws for fear of “making law from the bench”. Mind you, I disagree and in this case consider it abrogation of their higher moral obligation as human beings to not harm children. While there is a very real danger of the judiciary usurping the role of the legislature, this cannot in itself be a justification for supporting injustice any more than the need for civilian oversight of the military can be a justification for “just following orders” that are unconscionable. In short cowardice is the more likely explanation.

That said, legislatures also should not be able to abrogate their responsibility not to make bad law by punting the responsibility for the harm visited onto the courts. Non-specific laws made from moral panic are one of the banes of democracy and idiots. A lawmaker who opposes an overly general law on a third-rail type issue risks having unethical opponents cynically misrepresent the reason for the opposition, and there are always unethical people who seek power through malice. So, again, the system favors moral cowards and cynics because most voters stop listening to reason as soon as someone frames a debate by appealing to emotion, especially fear.

Fox News built a media juggernaut out of that simple principle. The harm done to this child is not only on the judge and the lawmakers who wrote the harmful law, but on the hands of the idiots who vote for people who write bad laws, and opportunistic malicious prosecutors willing actively work to harm a child for career advancement.

24 Likes

Kids, don’t be sharing nudes etc.

Law makers, you have to make changes. Clearly there needs to be a difference between illegally gotten porn of minors, and minors making their own porn.

The penalties should probably be less. I mean the reality is, someone is going to get nudes at 16, and they might keep those nudes for decades. Who knows. Should there be a grey area for that sort of content? Or maybe have a grace period for owner ship as young adults/teens. I mean my gf took nudes at 19 back when you have to get film developed. I have zero doubt this is happening a lot with the advent of camera phones. I wouldn’t say it is a GOOD thing, but let’s not ruin lives over it, especially young adult and teens.

7 Likes

I blame Nancy Pelosi. Trump committed a high crime on tape at the G-7, and she hasn’t said a word.

1 Like

My sense, from reading about this in the WaPo the other day, is that this is exactly what happened. Apparently the judges explicitly said that the lawmakers should revisit their laws because of cases like this.

11 Likes

At the end of the year, the three friends had a falling out, and S.K.’s video was distributed to other students at the school.

I’d like to know if anyone else was charged, or if they singled her out.

14 Likes

Not surprised. Courts love to punt whenever possible. In this case their doing so caused harm to a child and the judges should have that thrown back in their faces at every possible opportunity. There is simply no excuse for harming a child just because the law tells you to.

19 Likes

I agree, although I’d hate to be put into the position of judging the Maryland pedo who gets caught with such under-aged, selfie, consensual sex vids and passes it around to his pedo buddies. And how would Maryland attorneys on both sides frame the case if the hypothetical trial took place? Not to mention, if such a vid ended up out of state, how would feds handle it? I’m not inferring any conclusions on my part here. Any lawyers on BB?

3 Likes