Slashdot Mirror


6 Pennsylvania Teens Face Child Porn Charges For Pics of Selves

mikesd81 writes "MSNBC reports six Pennsylvania high school students are facing child pornography charges after three teenage girls allegedly took nude or semi-nude photos of themselves and shared them with male classmates via their cell phones. Apparently, female students at Greensburg Salem High School in Greensburg, Pa., all 14 or 15 years old, face charges of manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography while the boys, who are 16 and 17, face charges of possession. Police told the station that the photos were discovered in October, after school officials seized a cell phone from a male student who was using it in violation against school policy and the photos were discovered at that time. Police Capt. George Seranko was quoted as saying that the first photograph was 'a self portrait taken of a juvenile female taking pictures of her body, nude.' The school district issued a statement Tuesday saying that the investigation turned up 'no evidence of inappropriate activity on school grounds ... other than the violation of the electronic devices policy.'"

27 of 1,044 comments (clear)

  1. Wow. by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean, talk about punishing the victim here...

    Oh wait, I forgot Child Porn laws are no longer about the harm and damage done to the child during the creation of the material in question...

    Way to be society.

  2. Re:A great victory in the fight against child porn by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Indeed. Thankfully because we caught them early on they now won't be able to become teachers or run for office. On every job application they ever fill out for the rest of their lives they'll have to put that they're a sexual offender.

    When they move they'll have to notify the county where they live. They'll have to let their neighbors know (So they can keep their kids away from these nasty people). In certain states they'll have to turn over their e-mail addresses and passwords.

    Hurray for the war on child porn, lets see if any of them have tried marijuana (as the last 2 and current president have admitted to doing) then we can sweep them under with the War On Drugs too.

    Never mind you're more likely to be molested by your Uncle or your Mom's new boyfriend than some stranger in a van.

  3. Whats the big deal? by Durrill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In all honesty, what harm was being done? Teens will do much more than acts of nudity with each other. This generation we have cell phones, digital cameras, internet, and web cams. So things have gone from adults "knowing" that this kind of stuff is going on to "proving" that it is true. With proof they decide to nail their asses to the wall? Thats ludicrous. Kids will be kids. If this kind of behaviour did not exist, we wouldn't be able to propogate the human race. Grow up and leave those kids alone. Those of you who actually had sex in highschool would understand my view point.

    --
    If i wanted to hear bullshit, i'd go to church.
  4. Re:This is going to raise a lot of legal questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thats a misconception. They want you to think you do, however just because you enter a school doesn't give them the right to remove your rights.

  5. Re:A great victory in the fight against child porn by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    after school officials seized a cell phone from a male student who was using it in violation against school policy and the photos were discovered at that time.

    So whomever confiscated the phone didn't just turn it off and give it back after class, but the sick voyeuristic fuck actually rummaged though the phone's pictures, ran into the bathroom and beat off to it, then felt dirty and decided to call the cops to report CP?

    What is up with all of the voyeurism lately? Are peoples' lives so pathetic that they have to spend inordinate amounts of time and effort to gawk at others'?

  6. utter crap by Loki_666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its now only a small step to being done for having photos of your own kids nude. Hell, ive event sent pics of my kids nude to my mum, so guessing i could also be done for distributing child porn.

    Amazing.

    And how is this different from girls flashing boys in the woods or stripping off at parties (yes, there were such parties when i was at school).

    Its called life and growing up. Boys are interested in girls, girls are interested in boys, and sometimes even same gender likes same.

    Mobile technologies just add an extra element to this and make it a bit easier to do for the kids. Also safer. Girl can take a pic in the privacy of her room and send it to boy who can whack one off in the privacy of his room. In my day there was always the risk of getting caught with the girl in the woods and getting an ear bashing from the local bobby or parents.

  7. replacement repression by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Psychologically, I say this is the extreme conversatives who would really like to outlaw nudity, masturbation and while we're at it, even thinking about sex. Since they can't, they are looking for alternatives.

    Stripping away all the legality nonsense, what they've done is outlawing the naked human body, at least as long as it's young. That's a step in the "proper" (according to their belief) direction.

    There is no thought about "harm" because it is replaced by a strong belief that there is "irrepairable moral harm". And by "strong belief" I mean "belief that is unimpressed by proof".

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  8. Re:This is going to raise a lot of legal questions by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Their lives are ruined

    how long will it be before someone whose life is ruined like this takes matters into his/her own hands and 'snaps', seeking revenge?

    its not hard to understand the terrorist mind; when you are pushed and have NOTHING (perceived) left - you do what you feel 'needs' to be done to right a major wrong.

    suppose some kids are given criminal records and they find they can't find jobs (etc) later in life. do you REALLY think they will sit quietly and accept a ruined life?

    we are creating time bombs. count on it - its just a matter of time.

    I hope that those kids find justice before their lives truly are ruined. this is a FAIL on society that kids can have a life ruined for 'being kids'. ;(

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  9. Wrong way to stop this activity by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is definitely something that needs to be curtailed -- these are not adults making a rational decision about these pictures, these are teenagers who think it is exciting. Arresting them will not stop the behavior, it will just drive it underground. What is needed is better parenting and education.

    Of course, that is always the case...

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  10. Re:Think of the children by haystor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure they're going with the idea that every student consents to a search when they attend school.

    Of course, they are required to be a school and failure to attend can result in charges in some states. Thus, they are required to consent to searches.

    --
    t
  11. Seriously...WTF?! by thesolo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article (emphasis mine):

    Saranko indicated that authorities decided to file the child pornography charges to send a strong message to other minors who might consider sending such photos to friends.

    "It's very dangerous," he said. "Once it's on a cell phone, that cell phone can be put on the Internet where everyone in the world can get access to that juvenile picture. You don't realize what you are doing until it's already done."

    Wait, what? First of all, no, the cell phone isn't put on the internet, the photos might be, but whatever, that's nit-picking. The real issue is that first statement. They're going to make these kids register as sex offenders to "send a strong message to other minors"?!

    These kids didn't do anything wrong. They're teens, they're full of hormones, and they're going to have sex with each other. And it's not the state or federal government's place to stop them. This has gotten far out of hand when 15 year olds willfully showing their bodies to 16 year olds can be prosecuted as child porn.

  12. Re:This is going to raise a lot of legal questions by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder if the school administrator who turned them in realized the damage that would be done to these kids. Their lives are ruined. They will fight for a long long time to get this off their record.

    Probably didn't even think of it. I work for a large school district, and the one thing I've noticed is that it's not just the cream that floats to the top. A depressingly large fraction of school admin people are complete idiots--- and not just the regular street-variety dodo, but the worst kind of idiot, the kind that has a degree and subsequently thinks they're brighter than everyone else. The kind of self-righteous twit that makes a stupid decision and then defends it to the death, even when faced with prima facie evidence that they totally screwed the pooch.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  13. Re:Think of the children by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Teacher who confiscates a nude photo that a teenager took of herself, becomes the first adult in possession of the image. Where is the specific guarantee of immunity to charges?

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  14. Re:Not good enough. by Technician · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On a more serious note, when did mere nudity = porn? There are nude beaches, nudist colonies, clothing optional hotels, cruises, etc. I think someone may have crossed nudity with porn. Was there a sex act or adult involved?

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  15. Re:A great victory in the fight against child porn by TheMeuge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Troll"

    WTF? Someone certainly must be on crack here. Children who did nothing, other than violate school rules, and experiment with their sexuality get to have their entire lives ruined... and nobody along the way says "hold on..." ... and I get marked "Troll". You guys have a twisted view of the world...

  16. 20% of all tenagers in jail? by GbrDead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reported last month that a survey of 1,280 teens and young adults found that 20 percent of the teens said they had sent or posted nude or semi nude photos or videos of themselves. That number was slightly higher for teenage girls - 22 percent - vs. boys - 18 percent.

    So Mr. Seranko wants to put 20% of all teenagers in jail? Yay for him and the twisted "justice" system.

  17. Re:Think of the children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

    Think of the negative body image that results from thinking your body is some evil thing that must be hidden from the world.

    Think of how they're going to think they are "disgusting" because nobody should be allowed to see them.

    Think about how, oddly, sex between these minors would have been legal, but a private photo is supposedly not.

    There was no abuse. There was no child molester. There were just 6 teens, doing completely natural things. What they were doing was ok, it was healthy, and telling them it was bad is not healthy. Like I said, think of the children v.v

  18. Re:Not good enough. by Forge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nudity is an objective measure (Is that a clitoris or acne at one end of a dimple?) while Porn is a subjective measure (Isn't double fisting really art?)

    What should be done is to simply extend what already exists in common law (Jamaican, not US) for statutory rape to pornography. Specifically consent is a valid defense if the victim is the same age or older than the accused. Not only that when the accused is older the age gap in cases where consent is admitted is used to mitigate the sentence.
    I.e. a 25 year old guy will spend years in prison for screwing his 15 year old "girlfriend". A 18 year old guy gets probation.

    Apply that principle to child porn and you won't waste time prosecuting kids for pictures of themselves or their classmates.

    --
    --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
  19. Re:Not good enough. by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I"m a little shocked too at the leap the level to trigger a crime has come to.

    So now...simple nudity == porn? In this case a nude person under 18 is now considered child porn?

    Ok..so, now, parents that take pics of their nude kids, not in sexual situations, are not manufacturers of child porn?

    Hell, what about people that are nudists? I can't imagine they have many pictures of themselves, friends or family that have clothes on. Will we throw the book at them too?

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  20. Re:Think of the children by Chyeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't, in my wildest imagination, imagine a stupider response to the idea that three children are being charged with the offense of child porngraphy, for pictures of themselves and three others for receiving them, then "Maybe they shouldn't have been using their cell phones in class."

    Do you have any fucking idea what just the fact that they've been charged will do to their lives? How many jobs are now barred to them just because this charge will be on their records? Much less the complete ruination of their life if they are found guilty?

    This is BARELY above Taliban 'bury a girl in the sand and throw stones at her head till she's dead because she was raped by someone' level stupidity.

  21. Re:Think of the children by dk90406 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The girls can get even by messaging the pictures to prosecutors and the ratting teacher. Pedophile teachers have a hard time getting another teaching job.

  22. Re:Not good enough. by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "This was not mom and pop taking photos of their 3 year old in the bath tub. This was Teenage girls taking nude pictures for thier boyfrieds.male friends. The pictures they took would obviously fall under pornographic. They were sexual in nature."

    Not really, the law treats all child porn as ANYONE imaged in a sexual way under the age or 18...that is the 3yr just as it is the 16 yr old. There are no layers of child porn.

    That being said...and of course I've not seen the pics, but, if it was a simple nude self portrait, no in the past, that was not considered porn. The test used to be if it was in an overt sexual nature...like getting fucked, or even maybe a masturbatory pose, but, a simple nude pic of even under age of 18 kids was not in the past considered child porn. Only in recent years has this started to change, and yes, the same law that can prosecute these kids can indeed prosecute parents of 3 yr olds. It IS the very same law...and it is being applied possibly to simple nudes. Hell, there are art magazines in your local library with nudes of people well under age of 18, that in the past have not been labeled as child porn. Heck, until recently, album covers by Blind Faith and the Scorpions were not considered child porn...until recently with this mindset that we have to 'think of the children'.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  23. Re:Not good enough. by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If only there were some way to force all girls and women to wear some kind of head-to-toe covering that conceals any hint of shape or form. Even catching sight of a female face might induce men to think impure thoughts, so it's probably best if only the eyes are visible through some sort of slit in a veil.

    Enforcement of this dress code might be a problem though ... so perhaps there is some way to make it a religious requirement that women be completely covered this way ... maybe by proclaiming that it is the will of God.

    Naaaahhhh ... that would probably never work ...

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
  24. Re:Child Molestors by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know I have far more fear that my child will be arrested and excommunicated (what else can we call it) from society for doing nothing wrong than I have of any 'terrorist' blowing him up. The US/state/local governments are definitely more of a threat to him than the 'terrorist' and the 'internet pedophiles' by a wide margin.

  25. Re:Not good enough. by gregbot9000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a tough problem,

    No it isn't. It is a very simple one, charge based on harm. child porn=abuse, abuse=harm, harm=jail.

    Yes it's bad to have those sorts of pictures made and distributed,

    Again, no it isn't. That's your opinion. It isn't the job of the state to enforce your moral opinion. These were pictures made by individuals of their own volition. Prosecuting them in anyway is a gross violation of their most basic liberties.

    I'm not really sure that this is the sort of crime that the lawmakers writing the legislation had in mind when they passed it

    This is exactly the kind of prosecution they hoped for. The goal of laws like this is to control human behavior that certain groups dislike, namely pornography and sexuality. it has very little to actually do with CP. They just come through the back door riding the CP train and started bending the law as they always wanted to. They don't feel that people can make decisions for themselves.

    You shouldn't look at the law as a means to enforce what is "right" and "wrong" from a moral stance, but as a means of protecting peoples rights. If you don't, more laws like this will come out of the woodwork.

  26. Re:Not good enough. by jeffasselin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok..so, now, parents that take pics of their nude kids, not in sexual situations, are not manufacturers of child porn?

    Yes, at least according to some people. You haven't heard of heard of such cases of parents being accused of child pornography because they had sent pictures of themselves with their naked children in the bathtub to be developed?

    The charges were dropped after some outcry, but the accusations were raised nevertheless.

    The child pornography FUD is just a new campaign to give more power to those who would exploit us. After the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism, now comes the War on Child Pornography. When everyone is a criminal, there is no need to fabricate evidence to imprison you because they don't like what you're saying or doing.

    --
    If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
  27. Re:Refrence to example by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I really don't know how it snowballed this far without any public outcry whatsoever.

    Well, user kaos07 summed it up nicely in this comment: "I think only one group of people defend those who watch child porn with such a stupid argument and I bet you know who they are."

    Everyone who speaks against "think of the children" crowd must be a pedophile, everyone who speaks against gun control laws must be a violent nutcase, everyone who speaks for them must be a fascist, everyone who speaks for abortion must be a bloodthirsty babykiller who wants to eat the aborted foetuses and everyone who speaks against it must want women chained to the stove. Everyone who speaks against Israel must be a Nazi, and everyone who speaks for it must be a supporter of Palestinian genocide. Everyone who speaks against death penalty wants murderers on the streets and everyone who speaks for it wants to execute jaywalkers. Everyone who is religious wants to brainwash our children to perform human sacrifices in a new Dark Age while all atheists are actually secretly worshipping the Devil and trying to get us all sent to Hell. In short, everyone who opposes me in any way is either evil, stupid or both and rapes baby squirrels besides.

    This is the cancer that's killing anything resembling rational thought in politics.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.