It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Sending a picture of your underaged penis illegal, police taking many pictures of your underaged pen

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 09:52 PM
a reply to: roadgravel
"Sending naked pictures and videos to someone of your freewill is wrong and illegal! But we should be able to take naked pictures of you against your will, because authority." It's patently absurd, and hopefully the judge is competent enough to see the absurdity of the whole situation....

edit on Wed, 09 Jul 2014 21:53:05 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:00 PM
a reply to: TKDRL

They could just consult the NSA nude selfie department.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:01 PM

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: BuzzCory

Dear BuzzCory,

Some threads and posters are very refreshing and informative, some are slogs through angry people who would rather not discuss anything.

Thanks for talking me down. I'll buy the next round, OK?

With respect,

I've always considered you to be in the former category. Trying to persuade people to reexamine what they've expressed a bit more critically is never popular unless done "just so", both on forums & in the world out there. I find that sometimes, in art as well as discussion, the hardest thing is not knowing what to do or say, it's knowing when to stop.

And thanks for taking what I posted in the spirit in which I posted it. The second round is on me.
(He said, hoping this is On-Topic enough to stay up)

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:08 PM
a reply to: roadgravel
Hmmmmmm, interesting indeed. I wonder if that could actually be an angle used to cut the head off of the beast, you know there has to be a ton of "home made CP" in their massive databases

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:09 PM
My first post in this thread was removed, I'm glad it was as when I first posted; the seriousness of this case hadn't fully sunk in.

If ever there was a reason for people to stand up and shout ENOUGH! this must surely be it.
All those involved in this case that have sought to bring these actions against this CHILD should be removed from their positions, this is utter madness!
If this was in the uk I'd be offering that kid a place to hide.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:26 PM

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
Well we didn't have cell phones back then. If we did we would have been taking pictures too. a reply to: minusinfinity

We had polaroidfilm cameras back in 1996, and teenagers got arrested. National Geographic channel had a documentary on professional photographers, and one photographer said he got his best shots from being impulsive and catching a whole series at one time and picking the best one. Suggested everyone should try this at least once. This was broadcast across the country. In some rural part of the country, a couple of teenagers did just that. Took what they thought was an empty camera, played "photoshoot" in the bedroom and forgot about it. Months later, the boyfriend took the film to be developed. Next thing he knows, he is being arrested for producing pornography. The film technician developing the film reel didn't like the pictures he saw.

It may have been a coincidence, but in that decade, the sales of photographic film declined, only to be replaced by digital cameras.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:28 PM
a reply to: windword

Dear windword,

Thanks to BuzzCory, I've regained some composure, and should be able to address you with the respect and appreciation which you have earned from me.

When I find myself in a new situation, I try to determine what type of situation it is. If it's a prayer service for a religion I'm unfamiliar with, I know to stay quiet and not poke my neighbor for explanations every other minute. If it's a formal dinner, or an arrest, I know the basics of proper behavior. Fundraisers require some actions, protest marches require others.

I think it's safe to say that this whole business is a legal situation, and falls within the subset of Criminal Law. I know a bit about Criminal Law, and even if I didn't my natural inclination would be to find out what laws apply, what has to be proved, what the defenses are, etc. It's almost as if one of those "Heads-Up Display" visors dropped down over my face. There are things to check, and I go through my checklist.

Has the kid committed the crime? We don't know, no conviction or acquittal, the State is still gathering evidence. Their next step seems to be the service of a search warrant. Is there anything legally insufficient about the warrant? Hard to tell, the police and prosecutor don't seem to think so, and the defense attorney is making the expected speeches about "offensive" and "outrageous," all the signs that make you think he is preparing for an appeal, whatever happens. Besides, it's a high profile case, and the more flamboyant he is, the more clients he'll get in the future.

OK, is the law unconstitutional? Doesn't seem to be. Weird, yes. Unconstitutional? I don't see it yet, and there's been no reasonable argument that it is.

Well, H---. Is there anything that might make a mess of this? Maybe the publicity. It seems like groups of people who are particularly interested in sex (and how many of us aren't?) are yelling about it, but there seems to be little in the way of a coherent argument yet. Really, that's about the only thing that might muck this whole thing up. If enough people go around mindlessly screaming, and Obama has Holder send the State a little "message," it might get dropped as not worth the grief.

Of course, that destroys the concept of law a little more completely, but no one seems to care anymore.
Remind me, what are they going to do to the kid?

They're going to inject him with something that will give him an erection, then photograph the erection to determine if it's his little bit of child porn that was sent over the phone.

Why go through all that? Just put him in a room with a bunch of Hustlers (or whatever the porn mag is nowadays) and a big one way mirror. Wait around a bit then take his picture when circumstances are right.

We thought of that, but the press would be horrendous. We're just going to do it the clean, hospital way.

OK, fine. What is the crowd screaming?

Oh, that it's rape.

Rape? In the immortal words of Henry Kissinger, "Under what theory?" Are you planning on grabbing it and yanking? Getting a girl in the room to "show him a good time?" Are you even going to touch it?

No, the shot goes in the arm. He takes his pants off. We take the pictures mentioned in the warrant. We leave. He gets soft again.

So where in the whirled is the rape?

Got me boss, I don't see it either.

Are you even asking him to perform a sex act, or coercing him to, or forcing him to?

Of course not. He doesn't have to move a muscle, and after the injection no one touches him. Then everybody leaves.

Fine, so no rape under any definition. What else are they yelling?

That it's torture.

What? Is there going to be any pain involved? Are you going to rough him up a little? Tell me the truth, now.

Really, he's not going to be hurt a bit. He gets an injection, then nobody touches him or does anything to him. We take a few pictures, then he can walk away. Oh, by the way, there are complaints that we aren't able to find boundaries in the context of sexual expression.

Huh? What does that mean?

Got me. Unless maybe it means we treat sexual subjects too lightly. You know, laugh when we shouldn't.

No, that can't be it. No one would complain about our attitude, that doesn't change any of the facts. Besides, if we didn't joke now and then, this would be a terrible job. You should hear some of the Coroner's jokes.

OK, I'll ask around and try to find out what it means.


Dear windword, the whole question of age came up when a poster said that both parties were consenting. "Consensual communication," I think the phrase was. I wondered, and asked, at what age could a kid give consent to something like that. He missed my point completely.

I might be wrong, but I think you're reading into the age issue something that isn't there.

With respect,
edit on 9-7-2014 by charles1952 because: excess words from other post.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:28 PM

originally posted by: OrphanApology
a reply to: ATODASO

Why isn't the daughter being charged?

or named in the press? small town, i doubt anyone involved thought this would get national coverage. small town grudges can still set a bad legal precedent, tho.

What the hell's wrong with people?


Also, the mom's a goddamned sexual predator.

well, maybe not her, but definitely the attorney who thought pressing the kid for a dickpic was a good way to proceed with the suit.

Imagine this scenario:

Dad finds his daughter looking at pictures of her teenage lesbian lover's boobs. Files charges, charges get dropped. Dad files again. Prosecution then forces the teenage girl to have pictures taken of her boobs(or V jay, whatever).

What's wrong with the double standards?

it's an extreme example of a double-standard that doesn't usually have such ridiculous repercussions. this is a one out of a thousand scenario. small town bull#.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:33 PM
a reply to: TKDRL

My point is (and was) that it looks like the kid has two choices. Continue to fight, and accept that the warrant will be served and the photo taken, or give it up and avoid the photo. It's his call and that's what I said.

You'll also notice that I suggested that the parents advise him to plead guilty only if they thought the photo would be a life destroying event for him.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:33 PM
a reply to: thisguyrighthere

I think I came out of school not long after this kind of stupidity really started to spread. Although my experience doesn't even compare to the OP. That is true insanity.

I remember being suspended from high school for not wearing my uniform (sweater).

I had forgot my sweater at home. Because on a balmy November 1st, it's easy to forget when your late, going to a place you don't really respect or care for in the first place. Good thing they sent me home for the next few days to think about my stupidity too. In all honesty I didn't even really enjoy myself because on my time off because I WAS working hard in school and I WAS being denied an unreasonable amount or potential learning all due to an ass backwards policy. I wasn't any whizz in school, but I did try hard and I didn't do too badly (I made it through tech college and university afterwards - yeah I know high-school's 2.0 and 2.5).

Anyway, the school had to call over 300 kids parents that day to pick them up from school and send them home for day'S'm not even sure what they expected anyone to learn out of suspending 300+ high school kids...for not abiding by school uniform policy. Which any day before Nov. 1, ANYONE could wear the sweater if they chose too. Just after Nov. 1 though? OOH best have your sweater ON...or ELSE!



Needless to say, I changed schools a year later. No uniforms...

To be honest, I recently have submitted to the fact that life will be life with stupid people and all, and there isn't one thing I can really do about it other than watch insanity ensue. And the only escape from it all is quite permanent. Not exactly somewhere I want to go just yet. But it sure would be nice to take a vacation once in a while. Maybe there are some substances one could consume?

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:43 PM
How will taking a picture identify the kid?
No face, no eye colour, no eyebrows, no prints!

That kid should refuse any attempt, and then if they force it on him he should then sue them because unless he's got some obvious markings (unlikely) they will never be able to prove the pics are the same todger.
And when he sue's them I hope he also goes for rape and torture too.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:53 PM
a reply to: VoidHawk

You're overlooking the fact that it might clear him. Either it's definitely his because of something unusual, it's definitely not him for the same reason, or it's inconclusive, therefore useless and destroyed (probably, unless there is an appeal).

That kid should refuse any attempt, and then if they force it on him he should then sue them because unless he's got some obvious markings (unlikely) they will never be able to prove the pics are the same todger.
And when he sue's them I hope he also goes for rape and torture too.

If he sues them, several bad things happen. There will be a ton of publicity. Does he want even more publicity? I'm not certain what happens to the photos in that case, I'm not up on Virginia Civil Rules of Procedure (no, I don't care enough to look).

Secondly, who does he sue? The police who were acting under a valid warrant issued by a judge? LOOOOSER.

Does he sue the Judge for issuing a warrant in good faith? LOOOOOSER.

Does he sue the County attorney for abusing prosecutorial discretion? LOOOOOOSER.

And after all of that he still has to pay the costs and fees of a civil lawsuit? Well, you know what I'm going to say here.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 10:54 PM
How in the hell is forcing someone via drugs to have an erection not sexual abuse/rape?? Effing how? I just, this is, I mean, how is that kind of thing justifiable in any manner? Sexual abusers, the whole damn lot of them pushing for this. I was under the impression that when it comes to genitalia, "No" means "NO", and is straight-up assault when ignored. Evidently, I was mistaken if someone has an axe to grind.

< stomps off in a disgusted huff, with a certain finger aimed in this town's general direction >

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:11 PM
a reply to: charles1952
So one one hand he can not fight the ludicrous charges, and be forced to say he is guilty, so he can have the privilege of becoming a criminal. On the other hand he might be forced to be taken and aroused against his will, so the police can commit the same crime he is being charged with. Hell of a great choice there Charles.

Someone in another forum made an interesting comment. He or she said the boy was probably a black football player, and the girls was probably white, and the only reason her parents went after these bogus charges is racism. I wonder if that turns out to be true, if the general public who is mostly "Meh" about this now, will react any differently.

edit on Wed, 09 Jul 2014 23:45:25 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:11 PM

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: VoidHawk

You're overlooking the fact that it might clear him.

Unless he has a glaringly obvious marking or deformity it can neither prove nor disprove anything.
And yes he CAN sue all those involved, and I sincerely hope he does!

You've mentioned in several posts that you think its silly to say this is torture. Well, what about mental torture? I can think of few worse things for a kid of his age than to have to stand there while a bunch of unknown people force him into an erection and then take pictures of that erection! Please tell me that you can understand this?

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:27 PM
a reply to: TKDRL

I am not petitioning ATS as that is against T&C, but just informing you all that I submitted a "concern" using the Manassas City web page...
I simply stated my concern that their police department may be crossing into the bounds of child exploitation and molestation..
I doubt it will do anything to sway their decision, but I felt obligated to tell them how I felt..

edit on 9-7-2014 by defuntion because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:40 PM
a reply to: Nyiah

How in the hell is forcing someone via drugs to have an erection not sexual abuse/rape?? Effing how?
I'm sorry, but I have to reverse your question. Do you happen to have a definition of rape available? If not, use mine:

Virginia rape law as of 2013

§ 18.2-61. Rape.

A. If any person has sexual intercourse with a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in sexual intercourse with any other person and such act is accomplished (i) against the complaining witness's will, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person; or (ii) through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness; or (iii) with a child under age 13 as the victim, he or she shall be guilty of rape.

Whether we agree or not, we're not looking at rape, sorry. But what about sexual abuse? There, you might have something. By looking at the statute with just a little squint, sexual abuse seems possible. I know I could make out a case for it, and probably win, BUT (There's always that *?&^*% BUT, isn't there?)

The first "But" is who would you go after. Your best case would be if the doctor administering the injection, also told him to take his pants off. In that case, of course the doctor is the person to go after. I bet an infinite amount of money no one would prosecute the doctor for following the instructions of a judge.

The other "But" is Virginia's law on search warrants, which is what we're dealing with.

§ 19.2-53. What may be searched and seized.

Search warrants may be issued for the search of or for specified places, things or persons, and seizure therefrom of the following things as specified in the warrant:

(1) Weapons or other objects used in the commission of crime;

(2) Articles or things the sale or possession of which is unlawful;

(3) Stolen property or the fruits of any crime;

(4) Any object, thing, or person, including without limitation, documents, books, papers, records or body fluids, constituting evidence of the commission of crime. Notwithstanding any other provision in this chapter to the contrary, no search warrant may be issued as a substitute for a witness subpoena.

Sub section (4) seems to make a pretty good case for searching the kid in very intimate ways. Here, they're taking a photograph. They could have been asking for semen (yuck).

So, sorry. No rape, no sexual abuse. We may not like it, but that's what they've got to work with.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:47 PM

originally posted by: TKDRL

I see this as a serious problem. Again and again, stupid laws, passed to "protect the children", are being used as weapons against the very children they are supposedly meant to protect.

Such is the liberal legacy.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:48 PM
a reply to: defuntion
Yeah, they also have a facebook page as well, for those that use that social media site.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 11:59 PM

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: defuntion
Yeah, they also have a facebook page as well, for those that use that social media site.

Good to know, but I did like the anonymity of their web page submission form..


new topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in