Child Pornographer Faced Charges for Sending Naughty Pictures of Herself
 

I always wondered what happens when a minor photographs themselves and distributes the material. Now I know.

Source: Wired News

A 15-year-old Ohio girl was arrested [in early October 2008] for sending nude photos of herself to other minors and was facing felony criminal charges for illegally using a minor in nudity-oriented material and for possession of criminal tools. If convicted, the teen could have been forced to register as a sexual offender annually for ten years.

This week the girl, a student at Licking Valley High School in Newark, Ohio, reached an undisclosed agreement with prosecutors to resolve the case. Details were not released, but the teen won't have to register as a sex offender.

The teen allegedly sent the photos to friends via her cell phone after a Licking County prosecutor visited her school to discuss the legal repercussions of possessing or sending pornographic images of minors to others. Another student notified school authorities after she sent the image to friends.

According to Ohio law, possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is a fifth-degree felony. The law provides an exemption for parents or guardians to photograph their unclothed children for certain purposes, but doesn't allow a child to photograph nude pictures of himself.
The statute governing this issue is part of Ohio's version of Megan's Law, which was enacted in 2002.

[snip]

Happy ending for her, I suppose, since she won't have to register as an offender who needs to be protected from people like herself. While she was undoubtedly asking for it by doing it after a lecture by a Licking (lol) county prosecutor warned them against it, I still find it funny they're basically treating her as a child victim and an adult culprit at the same time.

:tpg:

I bet she thought she was being sooooo clever. Silly bint. Never thought this would become a case if she was doing it herself...

Just curious, under what context would it be legal from any parent to photograph their nude child?

I'm just wondering how they worded the law because I'm sure people can find loopholes in such a exemption.

Pictures of naked babies doing cute things, I imagine. Like that godawful woman that dresses babies up in various outfits and takes pictures of them.

YouTube Video

lol licked by justice.

What the heck does that guy keep on looking at to his side, brady? Also, lol at the giant puff at 1:45.

Also, why do you have all these dingbat videos at the ready.

He keeps looking to make sure his mom isn't coming

I wouldn't be surprised. Taking a glance at his other videos it seems like all he does is sit around making videos criticizing society.

Alternative theory: he can't keep eye contact with the camera because he knows how fucking wrong he is.

I know certain cases where a family doctor was over seas for a period of time and he kept in touch with some of his patients through e-mail. A family friend had to send him pictures of their sons development of the chickenpox because they were afraid it was getting too bad (worry wart mothers). AKA... medical purposes.

But do you really need a picture of a kid's penis to show chicken pox symptoms?

I get the idea of medical purposes, but I can think of very few illnesses that require any snapshot of a kid's privates.

So what? I thought you only asked what legal purposes would allow for it.

Licking Valley High School? Well there's your problem. Logic would dictate that, as a 15 year-old female, you want everyone to see you own "licking valley." Perfectly justifiable.

So, adult sending naked pics to others = OK, kid sending naked pics to others = sex offender. I get that this scenario opens up a world of legal pain, but to me, it just seems odd that the penalty for a minor doing something grants a harsher sentence than an adult doing the same thing. Peculiar.

That would be because an adult is, you know, at that whole "age of consent" malarkey whereas a child or teenager are just... oh nevermind.

You're trying to explain something to Kaleb.G

Why, man? WHY?

Because I'm of the opinion that everyone deserves the right to the benefit of the doubt. If they choose to carry it after an explanation, that's their business.

Okay, since you're part of Airplane Week, I don't know who the hell you are exactly - but its safe to say you've been around long enough to know that Kaleb.G is about as much of a lost cause as trying to sell cars in Amish country.

Look at his profile for two seconds and you'd find out. GOD YOU'RE SO STUPID, LEHAH.

Sorry LeHah I'm gonna do this anyways postcount +1

Kaleb.G the reason minors sending pornographic material of each other to each other is a crime is because that's distribution of child pornography. Since she sent it to a similarly underaged peer that could also constitute corruption of a minor.

babies corruptin babies lordy lord