See Part I
7-25-2009 National:
Does Pennsylvania's child pornography laws prohibit sexting?
There is currently no Pennsylvania law which prohibits sexting. When District Attorney George Skumanick charged the Wyoming County teens, he did so under a Pennsylvania criminal law dealing with child pornography. The statute, 18 Pa. C. S. Section 6312 states, among other things, "anyone who knowingly photographs, videotapes or depicts on a computer or films a child under the age of 18 engaging in a prohibited sexual act ... is guilty of a felony of the second degree."
An adult convicted under this statute could face up to ten years imprisonment and registration as a sexual offender under Pennsylvania's Megan's Law. As the female teenagers involved in the Wyoming County case were under 18 years of age, if convicted of this law they would have been subjected to juvenile court jurisdiction and whatever form of supervision, from completely secure confinement to any lesser degree like probation, and treatment, such as sex offender counseling, until, if the court deemed necessary they reached the age of 21.
The minor girls and their parents refused to acquiesce to the District Attorney's offer to withdraw the charges if they submitted to a "re-education program" because they did not believe the child pornography law had been violated by the girls actions. To back up their beliefs, they filed a suit in federal court asking that the DA be enjoined from prosecuting the teens.
US District Court Judge James Munley sided with the teenagers and their families and granted their request for a restraining order prohibiting the criminal prosecution. In doing so, the judge stated that the teens argument that the pictures in question did not show sexual activity and therefore not prohibited by the PA statute was reasonable.Posing in the nude for photos in a manner that was not "provocative" was not a violation of the Pennsylvania law and was a protected act under the First Amendment. ..Source.. by Rosanne O'Malley
July 25, 2009
Should "sexting" be a criminal act? Part II
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
more terrible law derived from ingrained religious dogma/beliefs... that the human body is obscene [ridiculous considering the same people spout they are made in the image of god.. so they must be calling god obscene too!!]. prosecutors like this one should be removed. they are only making themselves look good, instead of refusing to prosecute [a choice they can make] normal humans sharing pix. the prevailing veiw that sex is perverted has been codified into laws to the extent that we are starting to choke on them.. how many more victims of terrible law and prosecutors do we need to see before we demand and get sensible changes that serve humanity and not politicos?
Post a Comment