Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

High School Phone Pics = Sex Offenders for Life? Options · View
Nikki703
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 7:56:10 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 14,400
Location: The Other Side Of The Mirror
Pretty stupid I agree! But should these kids be charged with Child Pornography and have a Sex Offender tag haunt them for rest of their lives?


‘Snapchat’ sexting scandal at NJ high school could result in child porn charges

A smartphone prank by some local high school students was actually child porn, according to prosecutors. Now, a whole town is having a collective frank discussion about personal discretion, internet use and privacy.

“I feel bad,” said a Ridgewood High School senior girl about fellow students who had exchanged naked photographs over two popular applications, Snapchat and Instagram. ”They’re like, our friends. We’re close to some of these people.”

“Everyone had the pictures. Everyone had seen the pictures,” another student, a sophomore boy, said to PIX11 News.

“It’s almost like people think, ‘This’ll never happen to me,’” said Stephanie Weston, a Ridgewood High School senior.

What happened, however, ended up being big. Now, police investigators prepare to file charges of possession of child pornography and endangering the welfare of a child against anyone who does not delete from their phones or computers the photos that some freshman girls took of themselves on the Snapchat app.


A smartphone prank by Ridgewood high school students was actually child porn, according to prosecutors.

Snapchat is a popular image sharing app because it deletes pictures almost immediately after they’re sent from one Snapchat user to another. In the case of the Ridgewood High School freshman girls, however, the images went viral.

The girls snapped the photos of themselves naked, and sent them to a boy they know via Snapchat. The girls had assumed the images would be deleted about two seconds after they had sent them.

However, the boy knew how to screen grab Snapchat images before they disappeared. He captured the naked images, and uploaded them to his Instagram photo sharing app. From that point on, the pictures were online for anybody to see.

That was last fall, near the beginning of the school year, according to some students who had seen the pictures. ”They’d been going around school for awhile,” a sophomore boy told PIX11 News. ”People had seen them for awhile.”


That was last fall, near the beginning of the school year, according to some students who had seen the pictures. “They’d been going around school for awhile,” a sophomore boy told PIX11 News. “People had seen them for awhile.”

School administrators, however, weren’t completely aware of the problem until last week. The schools superintendent sent out a letter to parents Wednesday that said the posted images were “of real or simulated sexual acts… of naked or semi-naked persons.”

The letter called for parents to “promptly speak to their children about this behavior and to ensure that if their children are in possession of this type of material that it be deleted from their phones and other electronic devices immediately.”

If the images are not deleted by Monday at 7:00 A.M., the letter warned, anyone possessing them risked being arrested on child porn charges.

One mother, Jean Muchel, told PIX11 News that she had checked her 16 year-old son’s smartphone to ensure that it was free of the pictures of the girls. It was those girls, Muchel said, that she was most concerned about.

“They must be embarrased, humiliated. These things can last a long time.”

The girls and the boy involved could face in-school disciplinary action, according to the school superintendent.

lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 8:34:43 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,577
Location: Alabama, United States
I've seen something like this happen before, and it's totally stupid. The whole sex offender thing is being watered down so much that it doesn't mean anything anymore. Just because something is about sex or has nudity doesn't make it automatically make it illegal or offensive. Fucking stupid to lump some teenager showing off her tits in the same category as a rapist. Dumb dumb dumb.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Guest
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 8:52:22 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 821,056
lafayettemister wrote:
I've seen something like this happen before, and it's totally stupid. The whole sex offender thing is being watered down so much that it doesn't mean anything anymore. Just because something is about sex or has nudity doesn't make it automatically make it illegal or offensive. Fucking stupid to lump some teenager showing off her tits in the same category as a rapist. Dumb dumb dumb.

I agree. And the whole "sex offender" issue itself is stupid. Just like all "physical" crimes are not the same, not all "moving violations" are the same, not all acts involving "sexual" things are the same. But sadly, they are lumped together as if they ARE. A person on the sex offender registry could have had NO real dangerous crime committed, and maybe even only convicted on a technicality for political purposes (DA out to make a name). What that does is make them all, as you put it, watered down.

It is the same as terms like "racist" and "homophobe", and other things. They should ONLY be used for serious and genuine examples, not as a blanket label or term. Same with sex offender issues.

However, we get into some muddy waters here too..... if a teenager sends naked pictures of themselves, as ADULTS ALSO DO, and they are NOT charged for doing it. What truly logical reason is there to charge an adult for having or also sharing the picture of an "underage" person? Was the ACT any different? No.

But these types of lack of common sense things are seen in a wide range of laws on the books. And frankly I think they ALL need to be looked at and amended or removed if they simply don't make any logical sense.

Another thing that is a hot button for me is when someone calls a person a pedophile because they are attracted to teenage girls/boys. Um, that is NOT what a pedophile is! Would I call them a "child molester"? In many cases, I would. But Pedophile? NOPE! If they have the body of an adult (not pre-pubescent), it is not pedophilia. We can pretty much agree that the act should not happen (or others may not agree, whatever) but the TERM used should fit the act, not some ignorant PC notion and desire to label people.

I also think in most cases of underage sex, we need to keep the Government and Law Enforcement OUT OF IT... when it is not rape (forced unwilling sex). And let PARENTS deal with it in their own way. Like they USED to do. ;)
Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 8:53:41 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
lafayettemister wrote:
I've seen something like this happen before, and it's totally stupid. The whole sex offender thing is being watered down so much that it doesn't mean anything anymore. Just because something is about sex or has nudity doesn't make it automatically make it illegal or offensive. Fucking stupid to lump some teenager showing off her tits in the same category as a rapist. Dumb dumb dumb.


Umm... Yes it does if it involves 14 and 15 year olds... The guy that spread them around did something illegal and he knows it. There should be consequences just like when kids commit other crimes that tend to go off their record once they are 18. If I had a daughter, I would want to know what this young guy has done before he hangs out with one of my kids. Just because they are kids doesn't mean laws shouldn't apply to them. The guy didn't know that posting nude pictures of underage girls on the internet was illegal? Bullshit. It's a crime of a sexual nature and he should pay the price for his stupidity.

Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 8:58:52 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
JohnC wrote:



Another thing that is a hot button for me is when someone calls a person a pedophile because they are attracted to teenage girls/boys. Um, that is NOT what a pedophile is! Would I call them a "child molester"? In many cases, I would. But Pedophile? NOPE! If they have the body of an adult (not pre-pubescent), it is not pedophilia. We can pretty much agree that the act should not happen (or others may not agree, whatever) but the TERM used should fit the act, not some ignorant PC notion and desire to label people.



Sound like the "she may have been 16 but she was all woman defense." What the fuck...

JohnC wrote:



I also think in most cases of underage sex, we need to keep the Government and Law Enforcement OUT OF IT... when it is not rape (forced unwilling sex). And let PARENTS deal with it in their own way. Like they USED to do. ;)


Kids don't make good choices. Neither do parents of kids that make a bad choice like this. Dad's tend to get really pissed off when this happens to their daughters. I know I would.

Guest
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:00:50 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 821,056
Magical_felix wrote:


Umm... Yes it does if it involves 14 and 15 year olds... The guy that spread them around did something illegal and he knows it. There should be consequences just like when kids commit other crimes that tend to go off their record once they are 18. If I had a daughter, I would want to know what this young guy has done before he hangs out with one of my kids. Just because they are kids doesn't mean laws shouldn't apply to them. The guy didn't know that posting nude pictures of underage girls on the internet was illegal? Bullshit. It's a crime of a sexual nature and he should pay the price for his stupidity.

Then so should the girl who originally sent the images. Right? She too broke the law and should suffer the consequences, right? dontknow

Being former Law Enforcement, the idea that because it is a Law makes it logical or "right" does not really work with me. The truth is that there are so many laws on the books that it is pretty easy for anyone to get locked up for breaking SOME law, no matter how good they THINK they are. d'oh! Which is why I posted what I did above. Things can get pretty crazy and common sense fly out the window now days. Sadly. The same as "mandatory sentencing".

And we see the same things with "no tolerance policies" given any number of issues/topics. It makes most of us just sit and shake our heads.
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:02:23 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,577
Location: Alabama, United States
Magical_felix wrote:


Umm... Yes it does if it involves 14 and 15 year olds... The guy that spread them around did something illegal and he knows it. There should be consequences just like when kids commit other crimes that tend to go off their record once they are 18. If I had a daughter, I would want to know what this young guy has done before he hangs out with one of my kids. Just because they are kids doesn't mean laws shouldn't apply to them. The guy didn't know that posting nude pictures of underage girls on the internet was illegal? Bullshit. It's a crime of a sexual nature and he should pay the price for his stupidity.


If it's a crime then give him a punishment that fits that crime. Having him register as a sex offender, ruining his entire life and any chance of future good employment doesn't help anyone. He's not, from what I read above, some predatory monster. Likewise, the girl that sent nude pictures of herself on the internet has to know there's a good chance that image is going to go further than she intended.

Not all nudity and sex crimes means a person is a pervert/rapist/pedophile/whatever. For instance, I recall some girl in Michigan (i think) sent topless pics of herself to a boyfriend. She was charged with child pornography, for possessing her own topless pics.

Do the kids deserve some sort of punishment for what happened? Yeah, probably. But now a lifelong tag that will prevent them from having any future.


edit.. according to a NY CBS affiliate....

Board of Education officials said the photos include “real or simulated sex acts,” including “naked” or “semi-naked” students — both male and female.

edit #2


14 yr old charged with child porn after posted nude pics of herself





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:04:05 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
JohnC wrote:

Then so should the girl who originally sent the images. Right? She too broke the law and should suffer the consequences, right? dontknow



She's the victim...

Guest
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:06:50 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 821,056
Magical_felix wrote:
Sound like the "she may have been 16 but she was all woman defense." What the fuck...

It indeed may sound like that. But I only posted logically, not emotionally. It comes down to a CULTURE issue, not really an age one. 16 year olds used to be married and began having children. Now? Nope, they just have all the sex they want and produce children if they want and society takes care of it.

Again, we can talk logically or emotionally. And logic dictates that if a 16 year old is having willing sex with a 17 year old, the ACT is the same as if she is having it with a 20 year old. And in fact that is why many States in the US have legal age limits of 15 and 16.

But like I said, we can agree that it is WRONG, but "legal" is another matter. And like I said, we used to let parents handle those issues.

Please do not think I am condoning anything. I simply have not. And if you go back and read what I wrote you can see that I only presented logical arguments and counter points. I didn't endorse or condone anything.

Magical_felix wrote:


Kids don't make good choices. Neither do parents of kids that make a bad choice like this. Dad's tend to get really pissed off when this happens to their daughters. I know I would.

Indeed. No arguments there. But I for one am for getting the Legal System and Government out of as many things as possible. You can't take a piss now days without having to deal with some Government regulation.
LadyX
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:07:49 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,773
lafayettemister wrote:


If it's a crime then give him a punishment that fits that crime. Having him register as a sex offender, ruining his entire life and any chance of future good employment doesn't help anyone. He's not, from what I read above, some predatory monster. Likewise, the girl that sent nude pictures of herself on the internet has to know there's a good chance that image is going to go further than she intended.

Not all nudity and sex crimes means a person is a pervert/rapist/pedophile/whatever. For instance, I recall some girl in Michigan (i think) sent topless pics of herself to a boyfriend. She was charged with child pornography, for possessing her own topless pics.

Do the kids deserve some sort of punishment for what happened? Yeah, probably. But now a lifelong tag that will prevent them from having any future.


I agree. Punishment should be a part of it, but a scarlet letter "S" for life is just too harsh.
Guest
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:08:36 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 821,056
Magical_felix wrote:


She's the victim...

If the girl willingly took the picture and sent it, she was not the victim at that point and should be charged with the same crime others are. Those who took the pictures and spread them around may have made her a victim of THAT, but not of the initial offense.
Nikki703
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:09:22 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 14,400
Location: The Other Side Of The Mirror
Magical_felix wrote:


Umm... Yes it does if it involves 14 and 15 year olds... The guy that spread them around did something illegal and he knows it. There should be consequences just like when kids commit other crimes that tend to go off their record once they are 18. If I had a daughter, I would want to know what this young guy has done before he hangs out with one of my kids. Just because they are kids doesn't mean laws shouldn't apply to them. The guy didn't know that posting nude pictures of underage girls on the internet was illegal? Bullshit. It's a crime of a sexual nature and he should pay the price for his stupidity.


I agree that the guy who posted them on the internet should face the consequences. He know what he was doing was wrong. But as far as kids sending pics to kids via text, especially on a site that claims they will automatically be deleted shortly after they are received, well to me that is not Child Pornography. but maybe its time for the kids parents to do their jobs as parents and talk to their kids about the consequences of what they did and how a "harmless" action can become serious when someone slimeball does what this other kid did.

But child porn laws are very interesting. A 14yo girl can be charged with distributing child porn if she texts a naked pic of herself to he BF. But can she be charged with possession of child porn if she takes a naked pic of herself and has it on her phone?

As for sex offender labels, are al registered sex offenders the same or are there classes of sex offenders? Is a kid who sends a naked pic to a friend rated the same as a child rapist? Or a guy who took a leak in public and was seen by a child?

Guest
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:10:51 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 821,056
LadyX wrote:


I agree. Punishment should be a part of it, but a scarlet letter "S" for life is just too harsh.
Guest
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:13:56 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 821,056
Nikki703 wrote:


I agree that the guy who posted them on the internet should face the consequences. He know what he was doing was wrong. But as far as kids sending pics to kids via text, especially on a site that claims they will automatically be deleted shortly after they are received, well to me that is not Child Pornography. but maybe its time for the kids parents to do their jobs as parents and talk to their kids about the consequences of what they did and how a "harmless" action can become serious when someone slimeball does what this other kid did.

But child porn laws are very interesting. If a 14yo girl can be charged with distributing child porn if she texts a naked pic of herself to he BF. But can she be charged with possession of child porn if she takes a naked pic of herself and has it on her phone?

As for sex offender labels, are al registered sex offenders the same or are there classes of sex offenders? Is a kid who sends a naked pic to a friend rated the same as a child rapist? Or a guy who took a leak in public and was seen by a child?


From what I have seen, when on the rolls for sex offenders, it lists the crimes convicted of. But in many cases it does not give the situation or what REALLY happened. So it LOOKS much worse than it was by virtue of legal terms used. You have to do the research yourself on each case to truly know what happened. So IMO, no, there isn't really any distinction when labeled a "sex offender".
LadyX
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:14:01 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,773
Nikki703 wrote:


As for sex offender labels, are al registered sex offenders the same or are there classes of sex offenders? Is a kid who sends a naked pic to a friend rated the same as a child rapist? Or a guy who took a leak in public and was seen by a child?



Yes. At least where I live, they're all grouped in there together. I have an app on my phone that shows me by map where every sex offender is, what he looks like, and what his crime was. The problem is, they don't get into specifics. So an 18yo kid that had sex with a 15yo girl is going to be listed as "Sexual Assault With a Child", and these high-school porn kids will be shown as "Possession and Distribution of Child Pornography." Hell of a set of black marks for somewhat (or at least possibly) innocuous acts, isn't it?

On the other hand, when you see a guy listed as "Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child", you know that motherfucker raped a kid. Not much ambiguity there.
Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:14:23 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
lafayettemister wrote:


If it's a crime then give him a punishment that fits that crime. Having him register as a sex offender, ruining his entire life and any chance of future good employment doesn't help anyone. He's not, from what I read above, some predatory monster. Likewise, the girl that sent nude pictures of herself on the internet has to know there's a good chance that image is going to go further than she intended.

Not all nudity and sex crimes means a person is a pervert/rapist/pedophile/whatever. For instance, I recall some girl in Michigan (i think) sent topless pics of herself to a boyfriend. She was charged with child pornography, for possessing her own topless pics.

Do the kids deserve some sort of punishment for what happened? Yeah, probably. But now a lifelong tag that will prevent them from having any future.


edit.. according to a NY CBS affiliate....

Board of Education officials said the photos include “real or simulated sex acts,” including “naked” or “semi-naked” students — both male and female.

edit #2


14 yr old charged with child porn after posted nude pics of herself


Yeah I know. That's why I said until they are 18 like other crimes. I don't think there is a crime committed when two underage people do things of a sexual nature. But I do think that there was a crime committed when they guy betrayed her trust and posted them on the internet and everyone in the school had them. That will probably affect that girl for some time. Probably affect her in a similar way as abuse affects people in a life long way.

Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:15:43 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
JohnC wrote:

If the girl willingly took the picture and sent it, she was not the victim at that point and should be charged with the same crime others are. Those who took the pictures and spread them around may have made her a victim of THAT, but not of the initial offense.


That's what I said.

TexasSon
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:18:11 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/23/2010
Posts: 149
Location: In Beautiful
Magical_felix wrote:


She's the victim...


Victim? What VICTIM? SHE, actually THEY took the pics themselves and willingly sent them to the boy, who also sounds as if he was underage at the time. So, there's even an argument for the GIRLS to be the "abusive" ones for exposing such a fragile, young, and innocent underage boy to such pornographic images!

The only thing the girls are a victim of is being naive/retarded about their pics being "safe" to send and never seen again.

Do I sound ridiculous yet? GOOD! the whole thing is!

I actually understand the THREAT the Law Enforcement Agency gave. It gave a deadline for the images to be deleted, as the girls originally thought they would have been, and then that's the end of it. I don't think the kids should be prosecuted for Child Porn, but yeah... NOW if they keep the images, after being informed of the law and the consequences, then definitely move forward with the charges.



lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:20:16 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,577
Location: Alabama, United States
Nikki703 wrote:




As for sex offender labels, are al registered sex offenders the same or are there classes of sex offenders? Is a kid who sends a naked pic to a friend rated the same as a child rapist? Or a guy who took a leak in public and was seen by a child?



There are classes of sex offender. For instance I recall a woman that had been caught selling blowjobs around here. She was put as like a Class C or D sex offender. Which also is used to categorize a few other things, like unlawful carnal knowledge of a minor or something. So it was out of whack.

I think that any Sex Offender list should be the predatory type people. Rapist and child molesters, people that we need to know about. Some chick selling head doesn't worry me or bother me in the slightest.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Nikki703
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:21:57 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 14,400
Location: The Other Side Of The Mirror
LadyX wrote:


Yes. At least where I live, they're all grouped in there together. I have an app on my phone that shows me by map where every sex offender is, what he looks like, and what his crime was. The problem is, they don't get into specifics. So an 18yo kid that had sex with a 15yo girl is going to be listed as "Sexual Assault With a Child", and these high-school porn kids will be shown as "Possession and Distribution of Child Pornography." Hell of a set of black marks for somewhat (or at least possibly) innocuous acts, isn't it?

On the other hand, when you see a guy listed as "Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child", you know that motherfucker raped a kid. Not much ambiguity there.


Yes, not much ambiguity there. But most people just hear Sex Offender and never get past that. Its like once a person is accused of molesting a child. Even if he is found innocent beyond a shadow of a doubt, that stigma will plague him/her for the rest of their life! Honestly, would you trust that person to babysit w your child? I know I wouldnt. I know its wrong to feel that way, but perception is reality!

That is why I believe an accused sex offender's name should be kept confidential just like the victim's is until they are convicted.
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:22:27 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,577
Location: Alabama, United States
By the way, the pictures sent around were of of nude and semi-nude pictures of both girls AND boys.


Pics include boys and girls..





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:26:04 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
Nikki703 wrote:


I agree that the guy who posted them on the internet should face the consequences. He know what he was doing was wrong. But as far as kids sending pics to kids via text, especially on a site that claims they will automatically be deleted shortly after they are received, well to me that is not Child Pornography. but maybe its time for the kids parents to do their jobs as parents and talk to their kids about the consequences of what they did and how a "harmless" action can become serious when someone slimeball does what this other kid did.

But child porn laws are very interesting. A 14yo girl can be charged with distributing child porn if she texts a naked pic of herself to he BF. But can she be charged with possession of child porn if she takes a naked pic of herself and has it on her phone?

As for sex offender labels, are al registered sex offenders the same or are there classes of sex offenders? Is a kid who sends a naked pic to a friend rated the same as a child rapist? Or a guy who took a leak in public and was seen by a child?



I think the laws are harsh because not every parent or every child thinks about the consequences of doing stupid shit. You know that a 15 year old boy WILL show those pics to friends. Would you want a 14 year old daughter of yours sending pics like that to her 15 year old BF no matter how mature you think he is? You know he will eventually use them against her in some way. Kids don't listen to parents, the law either really but it is there to protect them. Sometimes the law will scare a kid more than parents will. If my parents caught me stealing... Big whoop, I'll take my punishment, whatever... Getting arrested tends to scare your ass straight. Letting this kid get away with what he did could give him the balls to keep doing it, to maybe do something worse in the future and leave more victims behind.

In Nevada the punishment for weed is really ridiculous too. Like years in prison I think. Or that's what it was. Guess what, I DO NOT fuck around with weed in nevada. The punishment doesn't fit the crime but it sure makes me not want to test my luck.

Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:27:28 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
TexasSon wrote:


Victim? What VICTIM? SHE, actually THEY took the pics themselves and willingly sent them to the boy, who also sounds as if he was underage at the time. So, there's even an argument for the GIRLS to be the "abusive" ones for exposing such a fragile, young, and innocent underage boy to such pornographic images!

The only thing the girls are a victim of is being naive/retarded about their pics being "safe" to send and never seen again.

Do I sound ridiculous yet? GOOD! the whole thing is!

I actually understand the THREAT the Law Enforcement Agency gave. It gave a deadline for the images to be deleted, as the girls originally thought they would have been, and then that's the end of it. I don't think the kids should be prosecuted for Child Porn, but yeah... NOW if they keep the images, after being informed of the law and the consequences, then definitely move forward with the charges.


You don't think the boy victimized her when he spread the pics around to her classmates? Yeah okay... I guess since she was dumb enough to send them it's her fault huh?

LadyX
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:30:14 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,773
Nikki703 wrote:


Yes, not much ambiguity there. But most people just hear Sex Offender and never get past that. Its like once a person is accused of molesting a child. Even if he is found innocent beyond a shadow of a doubt, that stigma will plague him/her for the rest of their life! Honestly, would you trust that person to babysit w your child? I know I wouldnt. I know its wrong to feel that way, but perception is reality!

That is why I believe an accused sex offender's name should be kept confidential just like the victim's is until they are convicted.


Agreed. I'll do whatever it takes to not live within two blocks of anyone on those lists, regardless of the crime listed. Granted, I don't know whether a child molester lives next door to me anyway and has simply never been caught, but why not use the information I'm given?
Nikki703
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:35:23 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 14,400
Location: The Other Side Of The Mirror
Magical_felix wrote:


I think the laws are harsh because not every parent or every child thinks about the consequences of doing stupid shit. You know that a 15 year old boy WILL show those pics to friends. Would you want a 14 year old daughter of yours sending pics like that to her 15 year old BF no matter how mature you think he is? You know he will eventually use them against her in some way. Kids don't listen to parents, the law either really but it is there to protect them. Sometimes the law will scare a kid more than parents will. If my parents caught me stealing... Big whoop, I'll take my punishment, whatever... Getting arrested tends to scare your ass straight. Letting this kid get away with what he did could give him the balls to keep doing it, to maybe do something worse in the future and leave more victims behind.

In Nevada the punishment for weed is really ridiculous too. Like years in prison I think. Or that's what it was. Guess what, I DO NOT fuck around with weed in nevada. The punishment doesn't fit the crime but it sure makes me not want to test my luck.


I agree with what you are saying and the BF who shows his friends and uses them against her should be punished. But should the girl be labled a sex offender. Because if they are or should be, HS will be filled with sex offenders because a lot of this is happening in schools today. Im not condoning it, just asking is it a reason to ruin some kids life because they are stupid?

You get caught stealing and pay the consequences. As a minor, maybe community service and its gone when your 18.Not pleasent but like you said, Big Whoop!! But a Sex Offender tag for life? Little extreme for being sending a pic of YOURSELF!!
TexasSon
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:35:32 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/23/2010
Posts: 149
Location: In Beautiful
Magical_felix wrote:


Yeah I know. That's why I said until they are 18 like other crimes. I don't think there is a crime committed when two underage people do things of a sexual nature. But I do think that there was a crime committed when they guy betrayed her trust and posted them on the internet and everyone in the school had them. That will probably affect that girl for some time. Probably affect her in a similar way as abuse affects people in a life long way.


Sorry, I'm just not buying the "innocent little girl" routine here. No, I don't kn ow all the facts of this particular case, but as we're discussing this in somewhat of a general application & act - the girls just aren't the maligned anymore. I'm NOT condoning it at all, or even remotely saying "well, they asked for it!", but to rank it up there along with an actual act of physically sexual abuse?

Hell. No.

Lookit the way kids flaunt themselves now! Social media makes them ALL little mini superstars in there own minds. I would agree to an argument that proposed that yeah, they may have thicker skin nowadays, but still fragile minds.



TexasSon
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:38:40 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/23/2010
Posts: 149
Location: In Beautiful
Magical_felix wrote:


You don't think the boy victimized her when he spread the pics around to her classmates? Yeah okay... I guess since she was dumb enough to send them it's her fault huh?


Actually... yeah. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Kids make stupid choices, and sometimes those idiot decisions have HUGE backlashing consequences. It does suck that technology has made it so much easier for kids to fuck themselves, but at the same time - they're growing up with that technology. It's not like they're completely ignorant of the capabilities of their phones and internet. They've kinda been around a while.



TexasSon
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:43:46 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/23/2010
Posts: 149
Location: In Beautiful
...and Felix, I believe you said you are a father with a daughter. I respect that, and absolutely agreed with a lot of your SENTIMENTS about this in regards to the girls.

...so now imagine that boy was your SON. Do you really blame an idiot 15-17 year old boy for getting giddy and immediately taking advantage of the surprise, unsolicited pics some girls took and sent to you as a joke (which is how the incident has been described), and then making the bonehead move to post 'em on your Instagram account to show off whatta badass player you are since hotties are showing you tits?

I'd slap my son upside the head for being a fucknut, but I would label him as abusive, predatory, or even particularly deceitful.

He was just an idiot kid for a moment and -SHOCKER!- let his cock do the thinking.



Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:50:52 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 7,927
Location: California
Nikki703 wrote:


I agree with what you are saying and the BF who shows his friends and uses them against her should be punished. But should the girl be labled a sex offender. Because if they are or should be, HS will be filled with sex offenders because a lot of this is happening in schools today. Im not condoning it, just asking is it a reason to ruin some kids life because they are stupid?

You get caught stealing and pay the consequences. As a minor, maybe community service and its gone when your 18.Not pleasent but like you said, Big Whoop!! But a Sex Offender tag for life? Little extreme for being sending a pic of YOURSELF!!


I dont think the girl should be punished at all. Just the guy. In my mind she is a victim in the same way a 15 year being groped against her will by a 17 year old would be. The girl shouldn't be punished but the guy most certainly should be. He crossed over when he mentally abused her, possibly affecting her for life when he exposed her body to her peers. I also think the guy should carry that label until he is 18 just like other crimes committed by teens. That is all I'm saying. Not for life.

TexasSon
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 9:56:49 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/23/2010
Posts: 149
Location: In Beautiful
Magical_felix wrote:


I dont think the girl should be punished at all. Just the guy. In my mind she is a victim in the same way a 15 year being groped against her will by a 17 year old would be. The girl shouldn't be punished but the guy most certainly should be. He crossed over when he mentally abused her, possibly affecting her for life when he exposed her body to her peers. I also think the guy should carry that label until he is 18 just like other crimes committed by teens. That is all I'm saying. Not for life.


WHAT?!

Let's review: Who FIRST made the wrong move? Who FIRST took illicit pictures of a minor? Who FIRST then sent those illegal images out? Who even (potentially... do we know if the boy was also a minor?) FIRST knowingly, willingly, purposefully ILLEGALLY exposed a minor to illicit and illegal images?



Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.