Teen Boy Arrested for Nude MMS of Ex-Girlfriend

[fulle]

[citation][nom]crbriand[/nom]probably "respected" instead of "expected"...not sure either makes sense though[/citation]

Accepted?

 

[tipmen]

[citation][nom]Marcus Yam[/nom]Maybe you should check the source article for the original quote before someone accuses you of not being able to even read correctly.[/citation]

Marcus FTW!

 

[Guest]

thats right, and we should emulate the parts of the world that beat women for wearing risque clothing and cut off the hands of thieves....this is getting better all the time dontcha think? whos for public flogging of 13 and 14yo olds for encouraging sexual immorality? i say 30 lashes with a cat o' nine tails. I can't wait until we shed our pretentious and completely contrived self concepts of being civilized and advanced realize we are just brutish animals and we have blood lust that needs to be satisfied. Like Carlin said, we need to bring back beheadings, crucifixions and all kinds of humiliating, violent and lifelong punishments for these unforgivable and detrimental behaviors.

 

[anarchy4sale]

[citation][nom]TommySch[/nom]Its about time some little spoiled brats are sent behind bars for child porn, the girl should also be prosecuted for producing child porn. Its the only way to stop this phenomenon.[/citation]
Yeah just like making the drinking age 21, sure stopped kids from drinking huh?

 

[wayneepalmer]

Mom, can I have a cell phone?

Does it have a camera?

Yes.

No - when you have a good adult life that isn't interrupted by your coworkers or members of our family sharing the sex video you might have made with it - you'll thank me..

 

[mp562]

I bet she was fat, it's always the fat ones complaining.

 

[megamanx00]

They want to register them as sex offenders? Sure they should get the month of juvi detention, but putting dumb kids in the same category as sickos is not the right thing to do.

 

[Vampyrbyte]

Putting these kids on a sex offenders register only helps to camoflague the real offenders on the list..

I'm gunna prosecute my mum for showing my girlfriend those baby photos, shes a sex offender too!

 

[thackstonns]

I think that if you are going to charge the boys, it would have to be for distribution. I think you have to arrest the girl for the manufacturing and distribution of child porn. She made it and sent it. All the boys did was forward it. If you are going to overlook one crime then you overlook the the boys too. If you are going to be stupid and convict them or even bring up charges than the girl should get it to, and longer for manufacturing it and distributing it.

 

[Guest]

So in this case, is "child pornography" an act, or a material possession?

 

[dingumf]

Post pic tits or gtfo

 

[Guest]

The girl should be prosecuted for producing and distributing (in the form of an act/action) "child pornography" (a material possession). She is not a victim. It's self incrimination. (Not sure if the terminology is proper, but you get the point)
The boy should also be prosecuted for this case. He may have received unsolicited "child pornography" (material possession), but he went ahead and sent the picture to all his friends.
To sum it all up, "child pornography" is an act. If you participate in producing and/or distributing it as a material possession, you are liable and should be prosecuted. There should be no gray area for man, women, and/or children.

 

[adipose]

[citation][nom]Marcus Yam[/nom]Maybe you should check the source article for the original quote before someone accuses you of not being able to even read correctly.[/citation]

Marcus, you did not go to the source. Your link sends you to an alternate location (mynorthwest.com).

If you actually went to kirotv.com, they have the correct wording ("accepted").

But that is mostly irrelevant. It is obviously a transcription, since the article indicates it was spoken by the mother. Therefore, even if the transcription is wrong, it doesn't make it accurate. Again, here you could go to kirotv.com, listen to the actual video, and you would see, that she says, "accepted."

Obviously it's a small error and it wasn't yours...you just copied what mynorthwest.com had, which may have copied someone else's error. However, in the case of such an obvious mis-wording, the correct thing to do would be to put some note such as "sic." or "accepted?" to indicate this discrepancy.

Instead you snidely insult the person who correctly pointed out the error for not reading the source article to discover that it had the same error. Next time, you could do a little research first to find out, or simply state, "yes, that seemed strange to me too, but on the site that I copied the article from, it had the same thing."

 

[BoxBabaX]

[citation][nom]Maxor127[/nom]Eh, I have no problems with punk kids getting arrested and treated like criminals. He tried to destroy her life, so I think it's fair if his life is destroyed. And I think it's fair to say he's distributing child pornography if he sends pics of a 13 year old girl to all of his friends, regardless of if he's around the same age.[/citation]

You seem rather clueless.

 

[buckinbottoms]

[citation][nom]bowtie[/nom]So in this case, is "child pornography" an act, or a material possession?[/citation]
its the part where the ex-boyfriend started to distribute the photos to all his buddies and even different school systems that is the pornography aspect of this. a lot of the geniuses here are stuck on the photos being on the phone but haven't put two and two together and realized that law enforcement isn't focusing on the photos themselves, but the distribution with the intent to cause harm. but thats how kids on forums think, jump to conclusions first, then read the story.

 

[bboysil]

can we at least see the picture? LOL

 

[Guest]

OMG, poor girl(not). Yes it's embarrassing, but FFS, are we going to make embarrassing someone illegal? It's her fault for sending it to him, nobody told her she had to do it... She was the originator, they just distributed, if you're going to arrest them, arrest her too..

Kiddie pr0n sort of implies some 40-y/o fat bald guy getting his jollies from it, that is not the case here.

 

[mlopinto2k1]

[citation][nom]Tedders[/nom]She wanted to be expected?[/citation]"accepted"

 

[mlopinto2k1]

[citation][nom]bboysil[/nom]can we at least see the picture? LOL[/citation]Authorities... please seize bboysil's computer at once.

 

[lilwillis]

[citation][nom]John_Holmes_Jr[/nom]OMG, poor girl(not). Yes it's embarrassing, but FFS, are we going to make embarrassing someone illegal? It's her fault for sending it to him, nobody told her she had to do it... She was the originator, they just distributed, if you're going to arrest them, arrest her too..[/citation]
I've read the story on a number of places and nowhere has it said that she was the originator. Maybe she did, and maybe he took it of her. I don't see that defined anywhere in any story.

And by your logic, if a woman is raped on camera, the guy doing the raping is going to jail but the camera man is free to distribute because you feel like distributing something illegal isn't wrong? what?

the bigger part of the story is coming out now. there were at least 4 people distributing this, some of them girls who were likely intentionally trying to harm the girl.