Love In The Age Of Texting
A 17 year-old Virginia teenager who is under investigation for sending a consensual sext to his 15-year-old girlfriend may be forced to have an erection in front of police as evidence in the case.
- Teen boy (17) and teen girl (15) send each other explicit text messages (sexts)
- Teen boy is arrested for possession of child porn (his 15-year old girlfriend)
- Teen boy also is charged with making child porn (his sext back to his girlfriend)
- Police take explicit pictures of teen boy’s unit
- Police seek court order to get a picture of the teen boy’s erect unit
- Teen boy faces time in prison as well as permanent placement on a sex offender registry
So wait, what? The Police want to create some kiddie porn of their own to prosecute a child for making kiddie porn?
I had a friend in high school who streaked a football game, was caught, and ended up on the sex offenders registry. To this day he has to explain to potential employers what happened. He says that it doesn’t matter how long ago or how silly it was; mostly he says that he just doesn’t get interviewed. He’s stayed with the same crappy job for years because he knows no one else will take him.
“The prosecutor’s job is to seek justice,” [One of the teen’s lawyers, Jessica Harbeson Foster] said. “What is just about this? How does this advance the interest of the Commonwealth? This is a 17-year-old who goes to school every day, plays football, has never been in trouble with the law before. Now he’s saddled with two felonies and the implication that he’s a sexual predator. I don’t mind trying the case. My goal is to stop the search warrant. I don’t want him to go through that. Taking him down to the hospital so he can get an erection in front of all those cops, that’s traumatizing.”
OK, I see no heroes here, I refuse to defend child porn at any level, but isn’t this kind of teen sexuality panic sort of ridiculous? And none of the articles I read mention anything about what legal troubles the girlfriend is facing. Now imagine if his 18th birthday had been celebrated, and what a difference a day would make.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Tengrain
Fully caffeinated with twice the sugar, unabashedly liberal. Award-winning Americans United blogger, blogs at Mock Paper Scissors, and sometimes at Crooks and Liars.
You can follow @Tengrain on Twitter, or you might see him enjoying coffee somewhere in Seattle at any given moment of the day.
30 responses to Love In The Age Of Texting
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Rusty Shackleford July 9th, 2014 at 15:29
Since you expressed concern about the age difference if one of them is over 18, you should know that some states have what are sometimes known as “Juliet Laws.” Essentially it means that relations are fine if they’re close enough in age, even if one of them is under the age of majority.
R.J. Carter July 9th, 2014 at 15:31
Because that makes sane sense!
Rusty Shackleford July 9th, 2014 at 15:29
Since you expressed concern about the age difference if one of them is over 18, you should know that some states have what are sometimes known as “Juliet Laws.” Essentially it means that relations are fine if they’re close enough in age, even if one of them is under the age of majority.
R.J. Carter July 9th, 2014 at 15:31
Because that makes sane sense!
R.J. Carter July 9th, 2014 at 15:31
I’m so glad I didn’t have Internet or cell phones when I was in high school.
ChrisVosburg July 9th, 2014 at 17:13
Me too. Thankfully, there are no pictures of me in my hippie beads and too-short flares and well, let’s don’t even talk about the hair.
R.J. Carter July 9th, 2014 at 17:20
All I’ll say is, those Polaroids were burned a long time ago!
tiredoftea July 9th, 2014 at 18:29
You hope!
R.J. Carter July 9th, 2014 at 15:31
I’m so glad I didn’t have Internet or cell phones when I was in high school.
ChrisVosburg July 9th, 2014 at 17:13
Me too. Thankfully, there are no pictures of me in my hippie beads and too-short flares and well, let’s don’t even talk about the hair.
R.J. Carter July 9th, 2014 at 17:20
All I’ll say is, those Polaroids were burned a long time ago!
tiredoftea July 9th, 2014 at 18:29
You hope!
Anomaly 100 July 9th, 2014 at 15:42
That hurts my brain.
Suzanne McFly July 9th, 2014 at 15:58
Who does this make sense too?
Anomaly 100 July 9th, 2014 at 16:08
I hope no one. I really do.
mea_mark July 9th, 2014 at 16:47
The lawyers probably love it. Look at all the money they get to make. The people that own private prisons probably love it too. He may be in out of jail for the rest of his life now for small infractions because he is treated differently and more harshly as a sex offender weather he really is one or not. This is clearly not justice. This is capitalism run amok, making a buck off of what isn’t really a tragedy but something turned into one by the legal system and those that want to make money at any cost.
Anomaly 100 July 9th, 2014 at 15:42
That hurts my brain.
Suzanne McFly July 9th, 2014 at 15:58
Who does this make sense too?
Anomaly 100 July 9th, 2014 at 16:08
I hope no one. I really do.
mea_mark July 9th, 2014 at 16:47
The lawyers probably love it. Look at all the money they get to make. The people that own private prisons probably love it too. He may be in out of jail for the rest of his life now for small infractions because he is treated differently and more harshly as a sex offender weather he really is one or not. This is clearly not justice. This is capitalism run amok, making a buck off of what isn’t really a tragedy but something turned into one by the legal system and those that want to make money at any cost.
Dwendt44 July 9th, 2014 at 16:52
It’s the South, what do you expect?
Dwendt44 July 9th, 2014 at 16:52
It’s the South, what do you expect?
Tommy6860 July 9th, 2014 at 17:06
WTF! I hope there’s latitude into judging this case as long as the ruling doesn’t go beyond the possible maximum punishment. While sexting is not a good thing, there’s also a privacy issue as well as the capacity to consent to these activities. I get that the girl is 15 years old, but she wasn’t coerced or forced into sharing her physical self digitally, she did her part of her own volition. Harnessing this teen with a legal stigma that could ruin much of his future should be the biggest consideration here.
Forcing the boy to get an erection so his teen-hood can be photographed as evidence is just plain creepy!
ChrisVosburg July 9th, 2014 at 17:36
Forcing the boy to get an erection so his teen-hood can be photographed as evidence is just plain creepy!
In doing so, they are essentially soliciting a repetition of the same act of child pornography they wish to charge him with, what the hell’s that all about?
Tommy6860 July 9th, 2014 at 17:06
WTF! I hope there’s latitude into judging this case as long as the ruling doesn’t go beyond the possible maximum punishment. While sexting is not a good thing, there’s also a privacy issue as well as the capacity to consent to these activities. I get that the girl is 15 years old, but she wasn’t coerced or forced into sharing her physical self digitally, she did her part of her own volition. Harnessing this teen with a legal stigma that could ruin much of his future should be the biggest consideration here.
Forcing the boy to get an erection so his teen-hood can be photographed as evidence is just plain creepy!
ChrisVosburg July 9th, 2014 at 17:36
Forcing the boy to get an erection so his teen-hood can be photographed as evidence is just plain creepy!
In doing so, they are essentially soliciting a repetition of the same act of child pornography they wish to charge him with, what the hell’s that all about?
Tengrain July 9th, 2014 at 18:33
I think we also should not forget that SCOTUS recently said that you have to have a search warrant to search anyone’s phone, and I think that would include juveniles, but I don’t know that for sure.
Even back in the ancient days of my wretched and wanton youth, it was not uncommon for lads and lasses to show their goodies upon request, and I can think of at least one Poloroid I was given that I had to hide from my parents, if you know what I mean and I think you do.
The only thing that has changed is the technology.
Rgds,
Tengrain
Tengrain July 9th, 2014 at 18:33
I think we also should not forget that SCOTUS recently said that you have to have a search warrant to search anyone’s phone, and I think that would include juveniles, but I don’t know that for sure.
Even back in the ancient days of my wretched and wanton youth, it was not uncommon for lads and lasses to show their goodies upon request, and I can think of at least one Poloroid I was given that I had to hide from my parents, if you know what I mean and I think you do.
The only thing that has changed is the technology.
Rgds,
Tengrain
Roctuna July 9th, 2014 at 19:38
Maybe someone in Virginia can explain please? The story says the prosecution is by “The Commonwealth”. Does that mean it’s a state effort to produce child porn, oops, prosecute this case? If it is, that’s Ken Cuccinelli’s territory.
Roctuna July 9th, 2014 at 19:38
Maybe someone in Virginia can explain please? The story says the prosecution is by “The Commonwealth”. Does that mean it’s a state effort to produce child porn, oops, prosecute this case? If it is, that’s Ken Cuccinelli’s territory.