All of these responses and not one joke about the penal system? You’re slipping.
1 Like
Only if you’re also under 18. If you’re over 18, it’s statutory rape.
http://www.vdh.virginia.gov/ofhs/prevention/dsvp/varapelaws/laws_rape.html
They’ve put no age limit on offenders for child pornography, and have defined any identifiable, sexually explicit photos used in sexting as “child pornography”.
2 Likes
the moral horror of this aside, an interesting question is whether it violates the 5th amendment.
also, since even fingerprints are questionable, i seriously doubt that their magical cock-identification technology (wtf?) can get anything near conclusive certainty, and i’m practically certain that they haven’t done the statistical trials to prove it.
seriously, there just isn’t that much information in an erect penis that isn’t there in a flaccid penis: length, breadth, and “lean”. this doesn’t even come close to identifiability.
which leads me to another question, have they already forensically examined him flaccid? that’s horrible enough already, afaic.
3 Likes
I was thinking about “there’s no way this will stand up in court” but then I remembered that it’s probably best not to joke about something so horrible.
7 Likes
As I already noted, it shouldn’t be the penis, but any identifying marks that they’re trying to match. They’re trying to get a photo of a mole, birthmark, scar or other mark that will clearly identify this as his penis. Something must show up in the sexted photos, and they failed to catch it in the original flaccid shots they nabbed when they arrested him.
The law states that the photos must contain a face or identifying marks.
1 Like
so can they examine him flaccid? why don’t they just do that?
i suspect that that’s not allowed, so they’re trying to do a run-around by making it even worse (tantamount to rape, imho)! even Kafka couldn’t come up with this.
3 Likes
Ah, yes. The “statutes”…special toys for career-advancing prosecutors gaming the system for personal gain and aggrandizement. They don’t pay much attention unless it has to do with <gasp!>…SEX!. If the arc of the universe does indeed bend toward justice, these DA douchebags will have a very special place in Hell reserved for them. In these cases the “law” is the true evil.
1 Like
Again, as I already noted, they did examine him, and photo him flaccid when he was arrested. This is a totally effing outrageous attempt by the prosecutor to make the case. They need their photos to take to court because of the way the law is written. You may want to look back a few posts where I quoted it.
I can’t help but suspect that the prosecutor is trying to coerce a plea-bargain.
Christ, what an asshole!
3 Likes
well, yeah, i can see why they ‘need’ the photos to make the statute stick, geez, no need to be passive-aggressive. i’m just wondering why they’re insisting on an erect picture.
i’m still just baffled. seriously, the shape of a penis is not sufficient for identification. it just gets weirder. unless this is just pure sadism (quite possible), the dickpic must have a mole on the underside of the foreskin or something.
1 Like
Skin stretches and changes shape when an erection happens – they need to show a comparative match of something: color, location, and size. It absolutely isn’t the penis, but something on it that they want to get a photo of, and they’re determined to get it.
The whole thing just ticks me off. They aren’t prosecuting the girl, and even though she was the initiator, she hasn’t spoken up.
2 Likes
So according to the Washington Post, the prosecutor was using the threat of subjecting this kid to a forced erection and photography session in order to coerce a guilty plea. So the state is using rape as a weapon now, on its own admission. Profoundly evil. If I was on a jury and the prosecutor, police, and judge who approved the warrant were on trial I would vote for the death penalty. And as a rule I don’t support the death penalty
4 Likes
FTFY heheh
1 Like
It’s called PenisShop CC 2014… It’s monthly subscription is a bit pricy though… for science!
My that’s a sick thing to do to that boy. They wouldn’t dream of violating the girl like this. I hope there will be some kind of fund available to support the kid and protect him from that twisted voyeur of a prosecutor. He seems Way too interested in the boy’s penis. None of this would have created a problem if the so-called adults had kept out of this. I hope the boys parents can and will make every effort to stop this.
Does anyone know if race is involved in this nasty mess?
2 Likes
“They wouldn’t dream of violating the girl like this.”
well, no, not quite like this, because she probably doesn’t have a penis. but e.g.: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/roadside-body-cavity-search-texas-women-sue-state-troopers-for-humiliating-body-search_n_2333302.html
yay, equality!
5 Likes
My best guess is that her photos didn’t show any identifying marks. Since it’s the boy they’d want anyway (he’s 17 she’s 15), they wouldn’t push to get her.
The sad thing is that extortion to settle cases happens all the time.
5 Likes
yeah, i agree. i just caught a whiff of off-topic MRA talking points here and thought i’d squelch it.
though why do they want the boy and not her, anyway? that might be a reasonable question, but we don’t really have any basis to speculate on, so meh. (oh, maybe it’s because her picture wasn’t technically porn. again, meh.)
I would think the 5th Amendment would preclude this kind of thing. And, if not, it should.
1 Like
