Court Says Parents Can Block PA "Sexting" Prosecutions
mikesd81 writes "In the first federal appeals court opinion dealing with 'sexting,' a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled Wednesday that parents could block the prosecution of their children on child pornography charges for appearing in photographs found on some classmates' cellphones. Miller vs. Mitchell (PDF) began in 2008 when school officials in Tunkhannock, Pa., discovered seminude and nude photographs of some female students on other student's phones. George Skumanick Jr., the DA at the time, said the students and their parents could be prosecuted if they did not participate in an after-school 'education program.'
The unanimous ruling of the judges, Thomas L. Ambro, Michael A. Chagares and Walter K. Stapleton, criticized the district attorney's reliance on the girls' presence in the photographs as a basis for the potential charges. 'Appearing in a photograph provides no evidence as to whether that person possessed or transmitted the photo,' said the opinion, by Judge Ambro."
foolish ninja, schoolchildren don't have the same rights as real people, something I railed against when I was one
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
Sure, but do you educate, or forbid? The USA seems to focus on the latter, but when it comes to teen pregnancies, they sure seem to have a hell of a lot more of them than more liberal* countries.
(* liberal meaning "free", not "leftie" though for some those two meanings are the same).
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
By "interfere" you mean "buy them condoms", right?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Underage sex photos should be restricted (because someone was raped)
Not all under age sex is rape. Even if you accept the legal fiction that people under a certain age are incapable of consent, the age of consent differs from the age of majority in many places. In fact, people have been prosecuted for child pornography after taking pictures of perfectly legal sex acts. Hell, in my state a few years ago a man was sent to prison for having sex with his wife who he legally married in another state.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
That's Jewish though Christians say it too. However they add you can only multiply when granted a church license called marriage. Muslims along with some Christian sects also allow males to have more than one spouse, but females can only have one. Which is called polygyny not polygamy. Now if they allowed females to have more than one spouse as well as males then it would be polygamy.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
A healthy understanding of sex includes an understanding of the risks, and the necessary precautions. What it does not involve, in any way whatsoever, is guilt. That's what you seem to be arguing for though. Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Except in OrwellWorld(TM), "obey or be prosecuted" is not "voluntary".
Not noted in the article was that Judge Ambro specifically credited Captain Obvious, Esq. for his amicus brief on this subject.
You presume that you will always make better choices than your children will?
Spoken like a true teenager.
How old are you? In almost all cases, an adult WILL make better choices than a teenager will.
I've been a teenager, and I'm the father of two former teenagers. I think I know what I'm talking about here.
Free Martian Whores!
The judges are asserting that there is a likelihood that the prosecutor was retaliating by threatening to prosecute because the Does were seeking to exercise their rights under the law. Isn't this barratry?
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."