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: 2) by sjwt on Sunday September 06 2015, @07:31AM
"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"
No, what is strange is they have allowed the girl to have a plea bargain, but are prosecuting the male fully for the whole crime.
(Score: 2) by juggs on Monday September 07 2015, @12:23AM
Do you have any sources that indicate that the male was either a. not offered a plea agreement at all or b. offered such a deal and chose not to accept it ?
All I have read is that the female took a plea deal and that the male is going to trial - no mention of plea deals one way or the other as regards him. For all I know, it may not be allowed to even discuss / publicise such things prior to a trial by jury.