Is it normal to think this arrest was unjustified?

60% Normal

Last week a girl I knew from high school was arrested. I was told it was for having child pornography, which shocked me that she would do that. But then I found out what happened is that they somehow found out she had nude pictures she took of HERSELF when she was 16 and 17 (shes 19 now). That's all. AFAIK there's no proof that she even showed them to anyone. But she has no defense because obviously they have evidence. So now she's going to spend a long time in prison and the rest of her life as a sex offender because she had pictures of herself at an age where she was physically similar to an adult. I support justice for victims of sexual abuse, but she didn't abuse anyone. Who's the victim here?

Voting Results

60% Normal

Based on 43 votes (26 yes)

Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!

[ Report Post ]

Comments ( 37 )

charli.m

11 years ago

It's pretty fucked up. I dunno where you're from, but Australia has those laws, too

All it does is detract time and resources from monitoring ACTUAL sex offenders who are DANGEROUS, and fuck up the lives of young teens who made stupid mistakes. No, it's not a good thing for them to be sending naked pictures of themselves, but declaring them sex offenders for it is ridiculous.

Comment Hidden ( show )

5

5
- [Old Memory]
  
  11 years ago
  
  It could fuck up innocent older peoples lives aswell. If she sent those pictures to an adult that didn't ask for them, their life would be ruined because she had underage nude pictures of herself.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  3
  
  3
  - charli.m
    
    11 years ago
    
    Absolutely.
    
    We had a case last year where a 19 year was arrested because he had received photos of some girl who was underage. I don't remember the full details but he had received the photos (unsolicited) when he was under 18. I don't remember if the girl or someone else sent them. He forgot they were on his phone and later got charged. His plans for being a teacher ruined.
    
    Yes, he should have deleted them but 1) whoever sent them shouldn't have 2) they shouldn't exist in the first place and 3) this sort of situation and the one that the OP mentioned shouldn't be classed as sex offenders and made to register. Unless they are actually a danger. They're stupid but they shouldn't be put in the same category as rapists, pedophiles and child pornographers.
    
    I'm in no way opposed to charges being brought against guilty offenders. It's the life sentence of having "sex offender" for this that I think is wrong.
    
    Additionally, these kids will have to be monitored as they are now "sex offenders" which stretches the resources of those in charge of monitoring such people. That is not a positive. I'd rather they focussed on keeping a watch on actual sick fucks.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    1
    
    1
    - Francophile22
      
      11 years ago
      
      And what's worse: in some jurisdictions merely for taking his willie out and peeing in public a man has to register also.
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      1
      
      1
Justsomejerk

11 years ago

She should have said it was art, or scientific evidence. I have a naked picture of myself in the bath @2yo, by the logic expressed above I should destroy it. Fuck the law and fuck political correctness.

*runs to draw pants on said photo.

Comment Hidden ( show )

2

2
TheProph

10 years ago

Another thing I just thought of, and I'm being serious here, is why can they show a naked baby on TV and nobody bats an eyelash about it? Same fucking thing. In fact, we know for a 100% fact the baby was "forced" to take the picture because babies are too dumb to comprehend anything.

Comment Hidden ( show )

1

1
TheProph

10 years ago

I was 100% certain you were lying until I actually looked it up. That is without question, the stupidest law that has ever existed.

I used to have pictures of an ex gf from when I was 18 and she was 17, and despite being 28 now, I would still have kept them. I lost them ages ago, but the point is, who cares? It was consensual, she wasn't fucking 10 years old, whats the problem?

Comment Hidden ( show )

1

1
Francophile22

11 years ago

So in other words, had she been a nudist among her family of nudists on some nude beach somewhere, that's ok, but one pic snap of her by a random person and she or the photographer is a felon? unbelievable.

What if the pics had been taken due to a medical emergency (for example emergency plastic surgery before/after pics) does that make the doc a pedophile subject to sex offender status? totally bull shit ridiculous it makes me want to kill!!!

Comment Hidden ( show )

1

1
wigsplitz

11 years ago

She must have sent it or showed it to someone....otherwise how would anyone know she had it?

It sounds unfair....BUT it does fuel a horrible 'industry', so anyone who participates in it in some manner promotes child pornography. Maybe she didn't abuse someone, but she may indirectly cause someone else to be abused.

That's why it's a crime, and that's why it's harmful.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- Anonymous Post Author
  
  11 years ago
  
  How was it fueling an evil industry? Her taking a picture of herself while she looks like an adult and is already above the age of consent (16) isn't abusing anyone or turning people into pedophiles. She isn't hurting herself and she isn't even sexualising anyone it's illegal to have sex with. I'm not defending the horrible act of child pornography here but I don't think it's right to believe there's anyone being abused here besides her and the abuser is a well-intentioned but overeager establishment. The real crime here is that people are okay with what's happening to her over this. You're okay with them ruining someone's life to stop something she isn't really a part of. I bet you're also one of those people who has no problem with the Patriot Act and other excessive measures to stop terrorists because as long as it might stop the bad guys, it doesn't matter how many innocent people also get into trouble. That is a horrible way of thinking.
  
  >That's why it's a crime, and that's why it's harmful.
  Must be so nice to have the government do all your thinking for you.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  4
  
  4
  - RomeoDeMontague
    
    10 years ago
    
    You know this is really starting to piss me off. These laws were made to defend the victim and now people are using them to abuse a victim.
    
    How can we feel safe in this world when child abuse laws are being used to convict minors for having nudes of themselves, people being arrested for people breaking their legs in their yards WHEN BREAKING IN, and when they kill a dog for attacking someone trying to rob the owners home?
    
    If the judge convicts he is clearly abusing his power. This is truly a "Victemless crime". Who is she victimizing? Herself? Yes, she molested herself 2 years ago. What the fuck is wrong with people?
    
    I think they should add a "Common sense clause" somewhere because this has become too frequent and its fucking ridiculous. Do we not have a right to privacy? If those are her private pictures which she took of herself does she not have a right to have them? Since when is it illegal to take photos of yourself?
    
    Breaking your leg int someone else yard does not make it legal to rob them. Having pictures of yourself is legal and I have never found any law which says otherwise. I guess next they say if you kill your rapist while they were raping you is ok. Since of course you cant defend yourself. What a fucking crime that must be. I am disgusted at how much abuse is going on the law system. We need to fire these morons for letting it even get to court.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    1
    
    1
    - RomeoDeMontague
      
      10 years ago
      
      I think we need to maybe redo some of these laws. We need to add an "If this happens" part. Since people are too fucking retarded to use common sense. God I just hate people. Why are these morons in the court room?
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      0
      
      0
  - wigsplitz
    
    11 years ago
    
    You're not allowed to appear in pornography until you are 18, that's been the law for ages. Hello? You can't strip, be in magazines, or in films. It's not that hard to understand. Possessing or making such material is a crime. Period. As it should be.
    
    Whoever she sends this to is now a criminal.
    
    You can't see past the end of your own nose....SHE wasn't abused, but others like her are being abused. When someone looks at pictures of underage kids, there's no neon sign above the pics saying 'I was beaten or forced to do this picture', by (even just potentially) adding material to a pedophile's database, you are promoting the abuse of others.
    
    Also, the people who she sent the picture to, or ended up receiving it, what about them? They're ruined because of her, or if it was a mutual misadventure, then they should both be ruined equally.
    
    People who do this are stupid and deserve to be punished for more reasons than one. People need to make better decisions. These laws need to be harsh because if the kids could just say 'oh, I did it freely', and not get in any trouble, then what do you think is going to happen to the kids who really were abused? What's going to happen to the people who possess the image(s)? Think about it. If you can't figure it out, I'll tell you the answer, just let me know.
    
    Also, why should the person who took the picture get less punishment than a person who receives the picture? How does that make sense, whether the person was willing or not? It doesn't make sense.
    
    The punishment could change, but if it did, how would the crimes involving abuse be separated from the crimes like this one? It would be tricky, and probably end up protecting abusers more than helping the abused.
    
    I do believe (some) sex offenders can later either get it dropped or appeal to have the label dropped. She may very well be one of those people. I don't think 'sex offender' is a lifetime label in some cases. Check into that.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
    - RomeoDeMontague
      
      10 years ago
      
      You know that is a stupid ruling as well. If a minor sends you naked photos why are you a criminal? You did not choose to get sent child pornography and the child chose to send it without your consent. Unless you asked for it you did nothing wrong. By this you are too saying its a victims fault for getting raped. Meaning the rapist is no longer accountable for anything. Are we going to tell a rape victim what a whore she is? How dare she get raped. Not like she choice this but its their fault it happened right? Its always the victims fault right?
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      1
      
      1
    - Francophile22
      
      11 years ago
      
      Sorry, but if you are at a nudist beach for families, it is not illegal to have your family picture published even if you are ten or younger.
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      0
      
      0
  - Francophile22
    
    11 years ago
    
    Remind me to buy you a drink whenever you are in the Bay Area, just email me thru here.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
- VioletTrees
  
  11 years ago
  
  How can her pictures of herself possibly fuel that industry, when nobody in the industry is profiting from it?
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  1
  
  1
- Francophile22
  
  11 years ago
  
  NO, you are off-base she was not part of any industry.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
Avant-Garde

11 years ago

Where the hell do you live?! That's seriously fucked up!

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
ebonysky

11 years ago

They are doing that everywhere. If she showed anyone and they reported she goes to jail for having child porn. Regardless of if it's her or not. I'm sorry about that girl. Her life is ruined.

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- [Old Memory]
  
  11 years ago
  
  She shouldn't of had it. Just think of how someone elses life could of been ruined if she sent those pictures to someone. She could of gotten others charged due to her sending the pictures. What she had could of gotten another person charged as a sex offender, so now she pays the price for having such material.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
zchristian

11 years ago

Nude pictures are a bad idea in general espesially since some people might get a hold of them and if they get on the internet they will stay there its is extremly hard to get it off if not impossible... well unless you like putting them on the internet...

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- VioletTrees
  
  11 years ago
  
  Some people are ok with that risk.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
[Old Memory]

11 years ago

I slept with a 17 year old this year. I don't get it. You can fuck them but you can't have pictures? And pictures of yourself lol? That arrest seems retarded, not to mention stressful for the poor girl.

Now if you'll excuse me i've got some stuff to burn.......

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
NotFloydzie

11 years ago

Wow. Where in the world do you live?

Comment Hidden ( show )

0

0
- VioletTrees
  
  11 years ago
  
  There've been cases like this in the US.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  2
  
  2
[Old Memory]

11 years ago

Well, why did she have those pictures to begin with? It is a tricky situation, but obviously she had those pictures for a reason, and if she sent it to someone that person could of been arrested.

I agree completely with what Wigsplitz said, the content of her pictures could of got someone else in trouble that got those pictures sent to them regardless of them not even asking for them.

There are a lot of children engaging in these things, and some people get charged as a sex offender for it even though they done nothing wrong all because someone wanted to take some pictures, then keep them when the pictures were of a younger self. In order to stop this from happening, anyone involved in child pornography should be punished, even if the person has pictures of their younger selves...Who would keep younger naked pictures of yourself anyway?

Either way, thumbs up to you Wigsplitz.

Comment Hidden ( show )

-1

-1
- VioletTrees
  
  11 years ago
  
  No, I disagree. She might've just not thought about deleting them, and she might only have sent them to people her own age at the time that they were taken. It's not ok that people can get charged with possession of child pornography for pictures of themselves, and it's also not ok for people to get convicted of possession of child pornography for pictures they didn't ask for. The burden shouldn't be on 16 year old kids to not experiment with their sexuality.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  1
  
  1
  - [Old Memory]
    
    11 years ago
    
    So we risk men being branded as pedophiles on "maybes"?
    What child is supposed to send such pictures to others anyway?
    
    Well, how would you feel if you were branded a "kiddy fiddler" as a consequence to a child just expressing their sexuality?
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
    - VioletTrees
      
      11 years ago
      
      I just said "it's also not ok for people to get convicted of possession of child pornography for pictures they didn't ask for."
      
      Comment Hidden ( show )
      
      0
      
      0
- Francophile22
  
  11 years ago
  
  I say they should have the right to photograph their own body at any age.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
  - [Old Memory]
    
    11 years ago
    
    Even if it can, and most likely would get a man branded as a pedophile if someone decided to send him them unwantingly?
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0
KeddersPrincess

11 years ago

It doesn't matter, though. Child pornagraphy is illegal. She shouldn't be sending pics like that around. She had pictures of an underage child, and regardless of whether it was herself or not, she broke the law. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Comment Hidden ( show )

-3

-3
- VioletTrees
  
  11 years ago
  
  So by that logic, all laws are justified? There've been loads of unjust laws.
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  2
  
  2
- vagisil
  
  10 years ago
  
  You're a real dick
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
- Anonymous200
  
  9 years ago
  
  By that logic, I should be convicted of child molestation because I masturbated when I was twelve. After all, touching an underage child is against the law, so even if its you, you're a criminal, right? You see how ridiculous you sound?
  
  Comment Hidden ( show )
  
  0
  
  0
  - KeddersPrincess
    
    9 years ago
    
    God-damn! This post still exist? Nah, my opinions have changed over the years and I don't agree with my comment anymore, but good reply.
    
    Comment Hidden ( show )
    
    0
    
    0

Are You Normal?

Is it normal to think this arrest was unjustified?