It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Teenager Charged with Child Abuse/Child Porn, for Photographing SELF!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Yes, if she is convicted of these charges, she will be labeled a sex offender and put into the system. She will forever have trouble finding a job. She might never get to go to college. Because the sex offense she is charged with is sex crimes against a child, if she has children they will be taken from them and she will not be allowed custody of them. If she is convicted of these crimes, her life will be ruined forever.

I am a criminal justice graduate major with a bachelor's degree in criminal justice. We have to study these things in college.




posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:20 PM
link   
This is terrible. She is 15 for christ-sake so this girl gets a new adult body and wants to show off the beauty God bestowed upon her like all the beauty of nature and these creeps are going to try and ruin her life for it?

What in the world is our nation becoming?

Where is the justice in this? What a shame. :shk:



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
And, YES, she will be on the sex offender registration.

I am really surprised by how many people on this site do not know the laws involved.

Usually, this is a very "current, informed" forum.

She will be on the registry. Sometime in the future, she MAY be able to get herself off of it. But, it will take a legal battle, and approval from Megan's Law.

People:

If you have ever found child porn on your pc, been sent some that you did not want, get routed to a child porn site by mistake, received a trojan that may have brought some to your pc, or used a shareware software that could have helped somebody store it on your pc, or God knows how many other scenarios, there is no middle ground.

Know this... You are considered, by the law, to be a Sex Offender. Period.
Because of the combination of my profession, and my knowledge of these topics, people that know me have contacted me for years, to tell me when they find things on their pc's that they cannot explain.

So, it really ticks me off when uneducated people, that know nothing of the topic, laws or current events, say that this is not happening, or that ANYBODY found with this evidence on their pc, is in fact guilty!

And, trust me, I do check to see if it is something they grabbed on purpose.
But, there are many ways to find out the origin of these images.

From my Thread:

You people NEED to see this.

Prison time for viewing Porn? (Update)

abcnews.go.com...


Watch the video the kid was cleared and it wasn't Prison time for viewing porn - he was originally suspected of having CHILD PORNOGRAPHY in his possession - which in fact he did, but they were able to prove that he did not knowingly download it. The DA in this case went to an extreme and the JUDGE overruled him.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:24 PM
link   
SHe will be a registered sex offender for being his own Pedifile (can't spell). This if friggin sad, since the only offenders are the ones that do it themselves i quess


Why was she arrested, she needs to talk to someone who has a doctorate, not a shank

[edit on 4-2-2007 by Royal76]



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
This is terrible. She is 15 for christ-sake so this girl gets a new adult body and wants to show off the beauty God bestowed upon her like all the beauty of nature and these creeps are going to try and ruin her life for it?

What in the world is our nation becoming?

Where is the justice in this? What a shame. :shk:


That's disgusting. Let me guess, love making is a beautiful thing so its alright for someone to have sex with her and her Godly bestowed beauty? Sick.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
And, YES, she will be on the sex offender registration.

I am really surprised by how many people on this site do not know the laws involved.

Usually, this is a very "current, informed" forum.

She will be on the registry. Sometime in the future, she MAY be able to get herself off of it. But, it will take a legal battle, and approval from Megan's Law.

People:

If you have ever found child porn on your pc, been sent some that you did not want, get routed to a child porn site by mistake, received a trojan that may have brought some to your pc, or used a shareware software that could have helped somebody store it on your pc, or God knows how many other scenarios, there is no middle ground.

Know this... You are considered, by the law, to be a Sex Offender. Period.
Because of the combination of my profession, and my knowledge of these topics, people that know me have contacted me for years, to tell me when they find things on their pc's that they cannot explain.

So, it really ticks me off when uneducated people, that know nothing of the topic, laws or current events, say that this is not happening, or that ANYBODY found with this evidence on their pc, is in fact guilty!

And, trust me, I do check to see if it is something they grabbed on purpose.
But, there are many ways to find out the origin of these images.

From my Thread:

You people NEED to see this.

Prison time for viewing Porn? (Update)

abcnews.go.com...


Watch the video the kid was cleared and it wasn't Prison time for viewing porn - he was originally suspected of having CHILD PORNOGRAPHY in his possession - which in fact he did, but they were able to prove that he did not knowingly download it. The DA in this case went to an extreme and the JUDGE overruled him.


Right, but it is still a cautionary tale. It was an exception, not the rule. That was also the Update show. If this kid had not had a first show on ABC, it would have probably gone a different way.
The way that Prosecutor handled the situation is the norm. They don't care about innocence or guilt.
They care about winning.
Even after the kid passed a lie detector test the Prosecutor didn't care.
Totally normal for these people.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One


That's disgusting. Let me guess, love making is a beautiful thing so its alright for someone to have sex with her and her Godly bestowed beauty? Sick.


No whats disgusting is the way YOU think. I was telling something from this girls POV and you twist it into that? Whats wrong with you? Why would you mix this up with sex? You need help.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:39 PM
link   
This is crazy...for one thing, she isn't reveiling that footage to the public, and for another thing(more obvious) it is herself that she is sending...I feel that if they charged her with all that stuff, then they should charge porn stars for molestation and rape. Not only is it very stupid, but it makes me very insecure about our country and what it will be in little time.
To the law-
to the opposers of this action-



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
TThere's no reason not to protect children from predators, but if we allow ourselves to go off the deep end, it serves nobody - least of all the children.

Mr No One


She took pictures of herself, a minor, with the express intent of having them viewed in a sexual manner and distributed them to others.


I dated a girl in High School who was a budding (no pun intended) photographer. She had a handful of incredibly beautiful (and erotic) photos of herself. She was two years younger than I was, and that's some heinous crime for her to take the pictures in the first place, and then share them with me?


How is that the same as this? Do you have some FACTS to this story that no one else is privy to so far?





Do I think the pictures should be circulating on the web? Of course not! But the cat's out of the bag now, isn't it? We can't stuff Pandora's sin back in the box, we can only try to limit the damage it causes using our own common sense and good judgement.

And my common sense says that punishing the victim is just about the worst thing you can do.


Well since the cats out of the bag and what's done is done then by all means. Let's just leave the poor kid alone. Get real, she needs help. All that this original article does is serve as fuel for people to run around screaming how horrible and oppressive the government is.



In my opinion, adults who prey on children and exploit them, as well as rapists and murderers in general, should either be hung or exiled. No second chances. Society doesn't need 'em, and if they want to act like animals, they don't need society. Get rid of 'em and be done with it.


At least we agree on something then.



But I don't think the law should be cold and featureless, it should be alive, adaptable, and responsive to the needs of the citizens it ostensibly serves.

How are we, the citizens, served by the prosecution of this young girl?

We, the citizens are not served by anything that does or does not happen to this one girl. The point is to help her. By enforcing the law that it is illegal to distribute sexual pictures of minors, should help to impress upon her not to do it again. That is the point of punishment.



Yeah, she probably has some self-esteem issues, or maybe not, I don't know. The justice system doesn't help people though, never make the mistake of presuming that's its charter.

In America we no longer operate reformatories, we operate penitentiaries. Big difference.


Another part of the problem. Let's discuss that a little. She should get the help that she needs at the hands of our justice system. Everyone should. Making our laws softer isn't going to serve that purpose. Convincing our representatives to spend more on helping these people would. Convincing our fellow citizens to stop suing for absolutely everything would free up funds to spend on helping people. Our abuse of the system is part of the reason it is so flawed.



Protect her from herself? How? We can try to remove the photos, we can ensure her safety by monitoring her contact with adults who might have been clued in to her existence because of the stupid thing she did, but what more can we do?



How can you NOT want the judiciary system to try and help this poor girl?


Don't get me wrong, I would love for the justice system to help her, but it's simply not capable of doing anything of the sort. It's capable of punishing her, segregating her from the rest of society, but not much else.


Wrong. The system is capable and SHOULD help this child.



The only people who can help her now are her parents, and of course she's always capable of helping herself. Her friends can look out for her well-being as well.


Yes and those parents have done just a cracker jack job so far haven't they?



But what's the court got to do with it? Could she benefit from some counseling? Probably, no harm in that at least.

But the charges brought against her are very, very serious. I don't see how criminalizing her is going to help her.


The court can mandate that she get counselling. Same as is done for suicide patients. Same as is done for others who need mental help. Unfortunately, if it weren't for the law that you are so dead set against the kid wouldn't even be in a position to get help in the first place.

Let's not even get into the concept that you have taken a story with little to no facts and turned it into the most heinous act commited by local government. Let's not get into the idea that you and I are both just making assumptions about the details of the case. We've gotten into a debate with no real basis on either side. I'm just astounded by the people who can only see the negatives of this case.

And, pardon me for saying so, but the whole idea that this is first step towards Thought Police borders on paranoid.

[edit on 5-2-2007 by Mr No One]



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DTOX X
This is crazy...for one thing, she isn't reveiling that footage to the public, and for another thing(more obvious) it is herself that she is sending...

Depending on how she let her pictures out, she was indeed releasing them to a public audience, via the internet. Anyone could have saved that video and forwarded it on as child pornography.


I feel that if they charged her with all that stuff, then they should charge porn stars for molestation and rape.

No, because legal pornography requires that all actors be 18 or over in the US, due to TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 > § 2257.


Not only is it very stupid, but it makes me very insecure about our country and what it will be in little time.
To the law-
to the opposers of this action-


That is very generalized, and though in this particular case I agree. How would the law have worked differently and better, imo, if this was a homeless teen on the streets, using her pictures for money on the web, basically being her virtual e-pimp?



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Right, but it is still a cautionary tale. It was an exception, not the rule. That was also the Update show. If this kid had not had a first show on ABC, it would have probably gone a different way.
The way that Prosecutor handled the situation is the norm. They don't care about innocence or guilt.
They care about winning.
Even after the kid passed a lie detector test the Prosecutor didn't care.
Totally normal for these people.


Why is this the exception and not the norm? Why does that one DA represent every DA in the country? What does it matter that ABC aired the show or not? It was a JUDGE in the SYSTEM that recommended the appeal AND pointed out to the DA that he was over the line.

I don't get it. When the system's flawed its flawed. When it works, its flawed. Where's the end?



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   
What! in the hell is this.

Is are society completely disfunctional? There is no logic at all to this situation.

I thought the story about the women in Florida getting her arms cut off, right after birth was insane but this one is in the same category.

This one is going to take some time to digest.

Thanks for posting this one.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Mr No One


How is that the same as this? Do you have some FACTS to this story that no one else is privy to so far?


What are you talking about? It's the same exact situation! An underage girl has photos of herself, and shows them to someone else - same EXACT situation. The only difference: my former girlfriend never got caught, and never got charged with anything like this poor girl.



Well since the catws out of the bag and what's done is done then by all means. Let's just leave the poor kid alone. Get real, she needs help.


How is criminalizing her going to help her?



Another part of the problem. Let's discuss that a little. She should get the help that she needs at the hands of our justice system. Everyone should. Making our laws softer isn't going to serve that purpose. Convincing our representatives to spend more on helping these people would. Convincing our fellow citizens to stop suing for absolutely everything would free up funds to spend on helping people. Our abuse of the system is part of the reason it is so flawed.


Why should the prison system try to help her, when it's probably the entity least capable of producing a meaningful change in her behavior? Why not her parents, or her community, or her pastor, or her friends, or her extended family, or a private therapist?

Charging her with a sex crime is going to cause more problems than it could ever hope to solve.

Making our laws softer? Who's saying anything about making our laws softer? Making the laws SMARTER would be a better bet.

Lawsuits have less to do with the problem than corporate malfeasance and corrupt officials squeezing money out of the system by exploiting the revolving door. I'm not saying that litigiousness is good, but it's not the primary cause.



Wrong. The system is capable and SHOULD help this child.


Have you had a look at recidivism rates lately? Have you had a look, specifically, at recidivism for juvenile offenders who enter the system at such a young age (I'll give you a hint, it's ~70%)?

I suggest you inform yourself as to the nature of our justice system before decide to champion it.

Moreover, you should look into alternative programs, and the success they've had in turning kids around. Most states have had great successes with kids when they take pains to keep them out of the system.



Yes and those parents have done just a cracker jack job so far haven't they?


So why isn't DCFS involved, instead of the cops?



The court can mandate that she get counselling. Same as is done for suicide patients. Same as is done for others who need mental help. Unfortunately, if it weren't for the law that you are so dead set against the kid wouldn't even be in a position to get help in the first place.


DON'T twist my argument. I'm not against the law prohibiting child pornography, I'm against its foolhardy application in this case. Her crime does not merit such persecution.

She's not guilty of exploiting children, she's guilty of bad taste and a lack of wisdom.

:shk:



And, pardon me for saying so, but the whole idea that this is first step towards Thought Police borders on paranoid.


Who said thought police?

And who said 'first step' - try 412th step, or thereabouts.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Concerning the post where I gave a link about the teenage boy that was accused of possession of child pornography. He was only vindicated after going through hell, and even then, it practically took an act of God to help him.


Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Right, but it is still a cautionary tale. It was an exception, not the rule. That was also the Update show. If this kid had not had a first show on ABC, it would have probably gone a different way.
The way that Prosecutor handled the situation is the norm. They don't care about innocence or guilt.
They care about winning.
Even after the kid passed a lie detector test the Prosecutor didn't care.
Totally normal for these people.


Why is this the exception and not the norm? Why does that one DA represent every DA in the country? What does it matter that ABC aired the show or not? It was a JUDGE in the SYSTEM that recommended the appeal AND pointed out to the DA that he was over the line.

I don't get it. When the system's flawed its flawed. When it works, its flawed. Where's the end?

This prosecutor did NOT turn the situation around, and help this kid out of the goodness of his heart.
It took a combination of media pressure, outside investigators, pressure from his own judge and lot's of money to get this done.
Are you serious? Do you really not see this?
This did not get fixed by the actions of the justice system. They had to get squeezed and pressured into fixing what they did, but they would have left it as it was if they could have.
This almost NEVER happens in every day life. Look at all the convicted rapists that have been released since DNA has been used as evidence. Finally. But, at the time of their trials, EVERYBODY was sure they were
guilty.
These laws are knee jerk reactions. They don't work. They are destroying waaay more lives than they are helping.
For every one person that is being convicted of sex offenses, without actually being a sex offender, you have to figure their entire families are also being negatively effected, ruined. Think how many lives that is.
This is not working.
If you don't realize that, there's a problem.

[edit on 4-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Simply amazing. That seems like free speech, especially if she wanted people to see them. That seems like me writing poetry, posting it on Myspace, and then some government agency saying it's illegal because it's making the government look bad; just horrible.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Mr No One


How is that the same as this? Do you have some FACTS to this story that no one else is privy to so far?


What are you talking about? It's the same exact situation! An underage girl has photos of herself, and shows them to someone else - same EXACT situation. The only difference: my former girlfriend never got caught, and never got charged with anything like this poor girl.



from the article in question
PITTSBURGH (AP) — A 15-year-old girl has been arrested for taking nude photographs of her self and posting them on the Internet, police said.


Hmmm same EXACT situation? I think not. Unless you left out the part where your former girlfirend posted her nudies on the internet - for EVERYONE to see.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Concerning the post where I gave a link about the teenage boy that was accused of possession of child pornography. He was only vindicated after going through hell, and even then, it practically took an act of God to help him.


Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Right, but it is still a cautionary tale. It was an exception, not the rule. That was also the Update show. If this kid had not had a first show on ABC, it would have probably gone a different way.
The way that Prosecutor handled the situation is the norm. They don't care about innocence or guilt.
They care about winning.
Even after the kid passed a lie detector test the Prosecutor didn't care.
Totally normal for these people.


Why is this the exception and not the norm? Why does that one DA represent every DA in the country? What does it matter that ABC aired the show or not? It was a JUDGE in the SYSTEM that recommended the appeal AND pointed out to the DA that he was over the line.

I don't get it. When the system's flawed its flawed. When it works, its flawed. Where's the end?

This prosecutor did NOT turn the situation around, and help this kid out of the goodness of his heart.
It took a combination of media pressure, outside investigators, pressure from his own judge and lot's of money to get this done.
Are you serious? Do you really not see this?
This did not get fixed by the actions of the justice system. They had to get squeezed and pressured into fixing what they did, but they would have left it as it was if they could have.
This almost NEVER happens in every day life. Look at all the convicted rapists that have been released since DNA has been used as evidence. Finally. But, at the time of their trials, EVERYBODY was sure they were
guilty.
These laws are knee jerk reactions. They don't work. They are destroying waaay more lives than they are helping.
For every one person that is being convicted of sex offenses, without actually being a sex offender, you have to figure their entire families are also being negatively effected, ruined. Think how many lives that is.
This is not working.
If you don't realize that, there's a problem.

[edit on 4-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]


Never said the prosecutor turned it around. The JUDGE recommended the appeal. The plea bargain was thrown out by another JUDGE. Hopefully that DA was punished for how he handled that case. You keep trying to get these laws overturned by convincing everyone that they're next.

The laws do work. They do help. Hell sometimes you gotta break a few eggs to make an omlet and sometimes the ends DO justify the means. As far as REAL sex offenders if 1 innocent person goes to jail for every 10 guilty, I'm good with that.

Knee jerk reactions are what you people had to this article. An article with no facts in it. And very little of any story besides. This article does not exist to inform and educate the public, it exists to insight unrest in people who are fearful. Glad to see it worked.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Mr No One


Hmmm same EXACT situation? I think not. Unless you left out the part where your former girlfirend posted her nudies on the internet - for EVERYONE to see.


Dissemination is dissemination, is it not? I doubt the law cares whether one person or one hundred see the material - they care that you're engaged in the act of making it available. Putting it on the internet doesn't carry any more weight, in terms of criminal penalties, than having actual hard copies, or printing magazines, or making VHS tapes - child porn is child porn.

Moreover, they care that you're producing the material in the first place, and exposing others to it, and normally I agree that there's no excuse.

But this case is special.

They're charging the girl for exploiting herself, which is a total logical disconnect.

They're not even telling us what sort of people she sent the pictures to in the first place. Were they boyfriends, random strangers (doubtful) or paying 'customers' - it wouldn't be the first time some stupid young person exploited the perversion of others to get money or gifts, using the internet, right? Maybe something like that is going on? If the latter is true, why no solicitation charges?

I do agree with what you said earlier, that we don't know all that much about the circumstances surrounding the case. Maybe we'll know more in the future...

In any case, please don't mistake my passionate argumentative manner for animosity directed at you personally - I always appreciate the chance to argue/discuss the issues with people who see things differently (that's why I'm here). The fact that we don't agree just makes it more interesting, and opens up additional perspectives that might not have been apparent otherwise.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Concerning the post where I gave a link about the teenage boy that was accused of possession of child pornography. He was only vindicated after going through hell, and even then, it practically took an act of God to help him.


Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Right, but it is still a cautionary tale. It was an exception, not the rule. That was also the Update show. If this kid had not had a first show on ABC, it would have probably gone a different way.
The way that Prosecutor handled the situation is the norm. They don't care about innocence or guilt.
They care about winning.
Even after the kid passed a lie detector test the Prosecutor didn't care.
Totally normal for these people.


Why is this the exception and not the norm? Why does that one DA represent every DA in the country? What does it matter that ABC aired the show or not? It was a JUDGE in the SYSTEM that recommended the appeal AND pointed out to the DA that he was over the line.

I don't get it. When the system's flawed its flawed. When it works, its flawed. Where's the end?

This prosecutor did NOT turn the situation around, and help this kid out of the goodness of his heart.
It took a combination of media pressure, outside investigators, pressure from his own judge and lot's of money to get this done.
Are you serious? Do you really not see this?
This did not get fixed by the actions of the justice system. They had to get squeezed and pressured into fixing what they did, but they would have left it as it was if they could have.
This almost NEVER happens in every day life. Look at all the convicted rapists that have been released since DNA has been used as evidence. Finally. But, at the time of their trials, EVERYBODY was sure they were
guilty.
These laws are knee jerk reactions. They don't work. They are destroying waaay more lives than they are helping.
For every one person that is being convicted of sex offenses, without actually being a sex offender, you have to figure their entire families are also being negatively effected, ruined. Think how many lives that is.
This is not working.
If you don't realize that, there's a problem.

[edit on 4-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]


Never said the prosecutor turned it around. The JUDGE recommended the appeal. The plea bargain was thrown out by another JUDGE. Hopefully that DA was punished for how he handled that case. You keep trying to get these laws overturned by convincing everyone that they're next.

The laws do work. They do help. Hell sometimes you gotta break a few eggs to make an omlet and sometimes the ends DO justify the means. As far as REAL sex offenders if 1 innocent person goes to jail for every 10 guilty, I'm good with that.

Knee jerk reactions are what you people had to this article. An article with no facts in it. And very little of any story besides. This article does not exist to inform and educate the public, it exists to insight unrest in people who are fearful. Glad to see it worked.


I'm sorry man, but if you or somebody you loved, became one of those "Eggs", if you were the one innocent person, you would suddenly sing a different tune.

And, there is a lot of evidence that has started to pour in, showing that, for all the horror and stress these laws have caused, they have improved nothing. Just more misery.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Mr No One


Hmmm same EXACT situation? I think not. Unless you left out the part where your former girlfirend posted her nudies on the internet - for EVERYONE to see.


Dissemination is dissemination, is it not? I doubt the law cares whether one person or one hundred see the material - they care that you're engaged in the act of making it available. Putting it on the internet doesn't carry any more weight, in terms of criminal penalties, than having actual hard copies, or printing magazines, or making VHS tapes - child porn is child porn.

Moreover, they care that you're producing the material in the first place, and exposing others to it, and normally I agree that there's no excuse.

But this case is special.

They're charging the girl for exploiting herself, which is a total logical disconnect.

They're not even telling us what sort of people she sent the pictures to in the first place. Were they boyfriends, random strangers (doubtful) or paying 'customers' - it wouldn't be the first time some stupid young person exploited the perversion of others to get money or gifts, using the internet, right? Maybe something like that is going on? If the latter is true, why no solicitation charges?

I do agree with what you said earlier, that we don't know all that much about the circumstances surrounding the case. Maybe we'll know more in the future...

In any case, please don't mistake my passionate argumentative manner for animosity directed at you personally - I always appreciate the chance to argue/discuss the issues with people who see things differently (that's why I'm here). The fact that we don't agree just makes it more interesting, and opens up additional perspectives that might not have been apparent otherwise.


Ahh didn't take it personally. I'm just very deep into this subject and quite worried that people can't see the good in these laws because of the limits they might impose on the general populace.

I think the fact that the girl put these pictures on the internet is at the core of why I think its good that she be punished. Sets an example for others who might do it. As you said, its not the first time its happened.

Those pictures your former girlfriend took of herself for you, there's nothing wrong with that. This girl taking pictures of herself for whatever reason, there's nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately in this day and age what happens next is the REAL problem.

You're correct in your assumption that the law doesn't care how many people see it or what medium it is in. And that IS good.

Actually I agree with you that this girl doesn't deserve to be a registered sex offender, if all she did was send some pictures of herself to her boyfriend. But if she was selling them to perverts? Yeah maybe she does. If she cares so little about herself, what would she care about someone elses child. It really all goes back to the fact that she should get help.

I posted in another thread this idea. People do these "wrong" things becuase


  1. you don't know right from wrong (and need to be educated) - most probable in this case
  2. choose to ignore what is right (and need to be punished) - least probable in this case IMO
  3. can't control yourself physically or pyschologically (and need to be helped) - next most probable in this case


And my choices of probability are based purely on my NEED for it to be this way. I can only pray that its not option 3. And I hope to hell that its not option 2, the sadest of all in this case.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join