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.

 

Girl, 15, charged with child porn rap after posting of herself

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Hey when i was younger (14/15) i used to chat with chicks my age (14/15) and exchange pics with them... sometimes they would send me pics of themselves nude or in sexual positions... (i know some may have been false but i did hook up with some of these chicks in person and i know at least some of the nudes were legit)...

Now i rarely kept these pics coz i was paranoid my folks would find them, and the ones i did keep are now long gone... but is it wrong if its two teens same age exchanging pics?... i hope not... i just happened to be active young in life




posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by outsider
This just highlights the stupidity of using age as a gauge in our laws to begin with, but it is the law and she did break it. Personally I have no respect for the person who took the time to turn her in. The reality of it is she was doing nothing wrong. The idea that laws are going to stop human beings from seeking out sex is a joke and has always been.

If I possesed a picture of her then yes I could be prosecuted, it doesn't matter if I'd been ignorant to the fact that she's underage.

This reminds me of a story where there was some popular porn star a few years back and when her true age was found out years later and they did the math & figured out she'd been doing videos since her early teens. Of course the videos disappeared off the store shelves immediately, but I wonder how many didn't make it to the trash bin. I remember something in the media telling people to get rid of those videos if they had any.

[Edited on 7-4-2004 by outsider]


The female you are referring to is Traci Lords (her porn name). She started making them at the age of 15. If I recall, she only made one porn video when she turned 18 - that is the only one you can legally have, lol. She has become a relatively successful hollywood actress and musician. I find it funny how she blaims the porn industry for this and that, yet she continues to use her porn name. If she hadn't of done porn, I highly doubt she would have any type of career like the one she has now.

Traci made some 80-100 X-rated movies (some are footage from previous shoots) between 1984 and 1986. In '86 it was discovered she was underage and the word got out that any films with her in them were illegal to rent or buy and video stores around the country rushed to remove them. Meanwhile on her 18th birthday Traci made the only legal footage of herself in a porn movie. She controlled distribution rights and many people believed she orchestrated the revelation herself so she could be the only one to profit from her x-rated films. [She is far from stupid. I think, no, I know she knew what she was doing, its too obvious.] Many people within the adult film industry made a tacit agreement to never promote Traci or talk about her since they felt betrayed. The government tried to prosecute the producers of the movie "Those Young Girls" for child pornography. The case fell mostly apart when the government admitted they too had been duped when Lords traveled to Europe on a fake passport. After her exile from adult films Traci began to resur[r]ect her life.

www.imdb.com...

Traci chose to do what she did (although she will claim otherwise, for the "sympathy" factor - I don't buy it, neither do other porn actors/actresses, especially with her still using her porn name to this day), just as this 15 year old being prosecuted did. And if you don't think you'd be fooled by a 15 year old telling you they're over 18, look no further then the millions fooled by Traci Lords.


[Edited on 4-7-2004 by EmbryonicEssence]



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 01:51 AM
link   
Thanks for filling in the blank spot in my memory & doing the research EmbryonicEssence.

I think the real problem is that the laws were made to protect people who cannot protect themselves, but the laws are abused by idiots who use them regardless of the original intent. Kind of like the school gun laws where some administrations kick out kids for having a minature GI joe gun on their key chain.


Common sense doesn't seem to exist with these people.

Almost everyone I know have had some kind of sexual experiences when they were young, with todays technology it's almost too easy to store images & most kids have a better grasp of the technology than their parents.

I can imagine if I had a digital camera in my childhood when the neighbor girls would say I'll show you mine if you show me yours I might have taken the picture.


[Edited on 7-4-2004 by outsider]



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Well, still don't get how you can take her to court. Can I take my self to court if I beat myself with a hammer? I assaulted myself, I want to sue and get thrown in jail for assault with a deadly weapon.

Guy tried to commit suicide, thats attempted murder, throw him in jail.

Doesn't make sense.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I hope she doesn't masturbate.
That's molestation.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 04:32 PM
link   
lol, Ace.

This doesn't really make much sense to me. Yes, she was in the posession of what is considered child porn, but it's not as if they were photos of other minors. How many people would have thought this could have happened prior to reading about this?

It's just silly.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I'm wondering, if she sent the pics to a 15 year old boy, would he be charged as a pedophile?
Obviously this is a half-assed attempt by the state to make a point about child porn. The proper course of action would have been to inform the girl's parents and allow them to handle the issue. The girl needs to understand why this is considered dangerous, not be charged with the possession and distribution of child pornography or the sexual abuse of herself. That is just moronic!
The child porn laws are meant to protect kids from being victimized by adults. Unless your a split personality, or the like, you can't really victimized yourself.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jezebel
The child porn laws are meant to protect kids from being victimized by adults.


With that in mind, the adults are now victimizing her by charging the girl, essentially, against herself, lol.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Yes nowadays you can get in some serious sh*t if your caught with child pornography. But sometimes I think the 18+ look a little young.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeffrey
Yes nowadays you can get in some serious sh*t if your caught with child pornography. But sometimes I think the 18+ look a little young.


There's a porn star named Melissa Ashley (AKA Anne Howe) who had to fly to another country to testify on behalf of someone being charged with possession of child pornography because she looked too young.

I think she was 25 or 26.

You can find out more on her Yahoo group.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 08:00 PM
link   
omg thats wrong
.

I sure hope that they make idots out of them selvs when this gets to cort, if she dose get convected that would be like past retarted...



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 08:03 PM
link   
So if she is convicted, will masterbation be a punishable offense? Or how about photo-copying your butt. Pornography with intent to distribute?...



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeffrey
Yes nowadays you can get in some serious sh*t if your caught with child pornography. But sometimes I think the 18+ look a little young.


I suppose I had better alert my mother to the fact that the pictures she has of me taking a bath when I was a baby could land her in jail. Some of those pictures are even in frames and hung up in the hallway along with the about a hundred other pictures taken throughout the years. Here I thought they were a cute and funny way of showing me when I was a little baby. (This is sarcasm BTW)


by AceOfBase,
I hope she doesn't masturbate.
That's molestation.


Let's hope that isn't true. If it is, I'm in SERIOUS Trouble!! I'd get a Life Sentence for sure!!



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 08:14 PM
link   
mOjOm,

Its funny that you bring that up because people have been charged for having nude pictures of children, their own children! Of course it has only happened in recent years because of the crackheads we have running the government. If someone brings in film to develop (if that person is one of the few to have not switched to digital, of which there are many) and the person developing the photo finds a nude picture of a child in the stack, they now usually alert the authorities. And in almost every case, the photo happens to be a picture of their own child. Still, charges are brought up against them.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 08:40 PM
link   
She is old enough to be charged, but not to post pictures of herself!



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 09:25 PM
link   
I think the whole point of this is that, "she is sending pictures of a minor, herself, to others" If an adult is found with nude pictures of a child, of sexual nature, that adult will be prosecuted for pediphile, and this girl was sending pics to people. What she was doing could have sent people to jail.

It is almost the same as a teen sending a virus to people over the net. The purpose of a virus is to harm other people's properties or get information from them. This girl's actions would have brought harm to other people also, in the form of "jail time."



[Edited on 7-4-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
I think the whole point of this is that, "she is sending pictures of a minor, herself, to others" If an adult is found with nude pictures of a child, of sexual nature, that adult will be prosecuted for pediphile, and this girl was sending pics to people. What she was doing could have sent people to jail.

It is almost the same as a teen sending a virus to people over the net. The purpose of a virus is to harm other people's properties or get information from them. This girl's actions would have brought harm to other people also, in the form of "jail time."
[Edited on 7-4-2004 by Muaddib]

This still doesn't justify the sexual abuse of a minor charge though.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 10:13 PM
link   
She "has been charged," meaning she has not been found guilty in a court of law yet. My guess is that those charges were given by "the police," and not by a state prosecutor, as it says in the link, because the police didn't know exactly what to charge her for. When the case goes to court then the charges will probably change. She is breaking the law, but the thing is that i have never heard of a case like this, so it might be the first time they are doing this. i could be wrong thou.

And please do not start with "oh...so now the police can charge people for anything..." What she did could have sent people to jail, and that's wrong, she is no innocent little girl.

[Edited on 7-4-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Apr, 8 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Muaddib, of course she isn't innocent, she took nude pics of herself. But the charges are so freaking stupid! Yes in distrubiting child porn, but they have her somehow molesting herself and abusing herself because of those pictures. Have her for child porn period, not just distrubiting. They are of her, by her! WTF!!!!!??????!!!!!! This is so stupid, can't wait for trial.


jhh

posted on Apr, 8 2004 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Unless the judge refuses to try her as an adult, she is going to prison. And I am sure with her being naive and not waiting for legal counsel to be present when she talked to the police, she probably doesn't have much of a case. Unless somehow they get a jury with enough sense to realize all but the distribution charge is bs.

Also, masturbation, along with anal sex, is illegal, regardless where it takes place.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join