SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Later this month, a North Carolina high school student will appear in a state court and face five child pornography-related charges for engaging in consensual sexting with his girlfriend.
What's strange is that of the five charges he faces, four of them are for taking and possessing nude photos of himself on his own phone—the final charge is for possessing one nude photo his girlfriend took for him. There is no evidence of coercion or further distribution of the images anywhere beyond the two teenagers' phones.
Similarly, the young woman was originally charged with two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor—but was listed on her warrant for arrest as both perpetrator and victim. The case illustrates a bizarre legal quandry that has resulted in state law being far behind technology and unable to distinguish between predatory child pornography and innocent (if ill-advised) behavior of teenagers.
The boy is being charged with child pornography for taking pictures of himself.
[These teens were of the age of consent in North Carolina and could legally have had sex with each other. Juvenile court jurisdiction ends at age 16 in North Carolina, however, so they are being tried as adults on felony charges of possessing child porn... of themselves. -Ed.]
(Score: 1) by kazzie on Saturday September 05 2015, @06:42PM
Meanwhile, in the UK... Sexting boy's naked selfie recorded as crime by police [bbc.co.uk] Schools have discression over whether to inform the ploice of such matters. But once the police are informed, they're duty-bound to record the matter, whether they choose to prosecute or not.
Criminal records are the subject of review when applying for jobs with vulnerable individuals and children, e.g. teachers, health workers, etc.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Sunday September 06 2015, @04:04AM
From your link: "before the image disappeared, the girl saved it on her own phone and it was then sent to other pupils at the school."
The damn wonder is that they didn't also charge the girl with distributing kiddie porn.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 1) by kazzie on Monday September 07 2015, @07:11AM
This was a key grievance of the child and his mother, when interviewed on Radio 4 about the matter.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Monday September 07 2015, @01:32PM
Do you mean she was upset because they didn't?
Regardless, the whole thing is crazy. It's like the law is being enforced by 5 year olds, who can't understand anything beyond the utterly literal. :(
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 1) by kazzie on Monday September 07 2015, @05:42PM
Yes. She was upset that her son was singled out by the police, when it was the boy's girlfriend who distributed the image amongst her peers.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Monday September 07 2015, @07:19PM
Male privilege strikes again :/
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.