15 Year Old Girl Charged as Sex Offender

[Incitatus]

A fifteen year old girl in Newark, OH faces being labelled a "sex offender" for sending naked cellphone photos of herself (a minor) to other minors. If convicted, she'll spend the next ten years on public registries, classed as a producer of child pornography. No word on what compensation she (as the victim of the crime) will be able to get from herself (as the perp).
According to Ohio law, 2907.323(A)(3) states anyone possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is guilty of a fifth-degree felony. The violation also might qualify the juvenile as a Tier I sexual offender, which requires annual registration for a decade. The section of the law the girl, who is a foster child, was charged with allows parents or guardians to take photos of their unclothed children for a list of acceptable purposes but does not provide an exemption for the child themselves.

http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20081008/NEWS01/810080302

[JackDragna]

1. This is beyond sick

Sex offenders have become the new Satanists, subjects of hysteria and panic. Putting the scarlet letter around the neck of a 15-year-old is reprehensible.

[FiveGoodMen]

2. "anyone possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is guilty of a ... felony"

So all parents with picture of their babies in the tub are felons!

How dumb can legislators be?!

[aroach]

28. Should I turn myself in?

Of course, I'll also have to turn my parents in for possessing photos of my first bath.

[bobbert]

37. you missed something...

allows parents or guardians to take photos of their unclothed children for a list of acceptable purposes

[FiveGoodMen]

48. Yup. Missed that.

Still think this is ridiculous.

[orestes]

3. That seems like an inordinately high price to pay

for being a bit of a doofus, i would think.

[Cronus Protagonist]

4. Sending sexy shots from cell phones among teenagers is rampant these days

Boys and girls both do it, and I tell my nephews to make sure they delete the pics as soon as they get them because I expected something like this court case to come up.

[Jack Rabbit]

5. Is she black?

??

[TCJ70]

21. Does it matter?

[Jack Rabbit]

22. See post number 6 from BattyDem

Usually when a child is thoughtlessly thrown into the criminal justice system like this, the child is black. A white girl would be more likely to get the help she needs.

I wish it didn't matter.

[BattyDem]

6. Did anyone bother to find out why she did it?

A fifteen year old girl feels the need to expose herself to other people and instead of finding out why, instead of helping her if she needs it, they charge her with a crime. Unbelievable!

On edit: It may have been a stupid prank or it may have been a cry for help. Either way, it's absurd to label this girl as a sex offender!

[Mandate My Ass]

7. That would require common sense

and there is clearly a total void of said 'common sense' in this case.

Unbelievable is right.

[Regret My New Name]

64. 15 year old girls have hormones too...

I've even heard some have their own thoughts and what not too... Seriously, we're not talking about a 10 year old girl here.... In which case you might be on to something, but I remember when I was 15 and this doesn't seem too unusual.

Of course I agree that this is obviously absurd either way.

[mth44sc]

8. Excuse me ???

Why wouldn't she be charged as a minor - which (at least when I lived there and worked in the Juvenile Court system) would make the case a civil matter and record subject to expungementafter the child reached the age of 18.

I guess in the nearly two decades since I lived there, things have changed - and apparently not for the better.

[MindPilot]

11. Why would she be charged with anything? n/t

[mth44sc]

13. Back in my day

She might have been charged as an "unruly child"

(C) Any child who behaves in a manner as to injure or endanger the child’s own health or morals or the health or morals of others;

But I'm with you

[MisterP]

33. because only the PICTURES were of a minor, duh! *headexplode* n/t

[MisterP]

34. because only the PICTURES were of a minor, duh! *headexplode* n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Teenagers are interested in sex???? Say it ain't so!!

Why, when I was 15, we guys never, ever, even looked at girls and thought naughty things!! We just studied our bibles and thought about Jesus and baseball. Yup. Sure. No doubt. Never thought about sex at all. Uh-huh.

[anarch]

42. el-oh-el

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

10. This is just getting out of hand. It wasn't the brightest thing to do, but this

is punitive.

[FLAprogressive]

12. This is SO stupid. Why are we even wasting our time with this?

When we can go after the real creeps who harm children....as opposed to the children themselves.

[Quantess]

14. Dumbest news event of the day.

Possibly of the whole week.

[Coventina]

15. Gosh, that brings back a memory from my teenager-hood

A friend of mine got nudie pictures in her locker from a guy who wanted to date her.
He took pictures of his privates, apparently thinking that they would make her hot for him.

We laughed and thought he was a complete dork, threw them away, and forgot about it.

When did everything become such a big deal?

Now that poor guy would be a registered sex offender, we could have ruined his life!

[Quantess]

24. And I think that would be wrong.

Even if it were a teenage boy, as in your case, it's just harmless mischief behavior by teenagers. I bet hundreds of thousands of silly teenagers have done something similar, without intending any harm.

[4lbs]

16. You know how easy it is to be labelled a sex offender by the courts in today's hypersensitive times?

Take this for an example.

A guy is walking along the street, and has to urinate really bad. He can't seem to find a restroom anywhere, there's no gas station or restaurant that has one available. So, he decides to go into a little area and go on a tree or wall, somewhere supposedly private. Believe me it happens to us guys quite frequently.

Let's say a group of junior high school age girls walks by while he's doing this. They are 12 or 13 years old. They begin giggling and looking at him. He doesn't notice.

Let's also say a police car drives by and sees these little girls watching this adult male urinate. He stops, questions the guy, and then arrests him for urinating in public and exposing himself to minors.

The DA drops the urinating in public charge because it's a misdemeanor, but deals to give this guy no jail time if he pleads guilty to the exposing himself to minors part. The catch is that he must now register as a sex offender.

In Massachusetts, men can be charged with "lewd and lascivious behavior" for public urination. That would make them eligible to be registered as a sex offender.

Registered as a sex offender for urinating on a tree or wall, not even intending lewd behavior!


Then there is Maine, where they recently passed a law that states if a person stares at a child, s/he can be arrested as a pedophile. So, watch a bunch of kids play in the park or on a playground, get arrested for being a pedophile. It's considered "visual sexual aggression".

[MindPilot]

35. Happened to a San Diego city council candidate

He was out knocking on doors and went back to his vehicle to pee. Couple of women came out of their house looked inside the truck's window, watched him and had him arrested. Political career over, teaching job gone, life pretty much wrecked.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080328-1555-bn28council.html

[Ilsa]

17. "Sex Offender" doesn't mean shit any more.

It's probably some 17 year old boy who got caught feeling up a 15 year old girl who looks 19.

[Greyhound]

18. My parents are/were felonius perverts by this law. Mom used to relish

showing the new GF pics of a naked baby Greyhound.

If only I'd known I could have had her locked up and saved myself much embarrassment.

Man, this is a sick society.

[dkofos]

19. She should send a picture to the judge and have him arrested for

possession of child porn.

[xchrom]

20. it's the new 'mooning' -- so now we send them to jail. nt

[conspirator]

23. children have sexuality too. There is no point denying it nt

[KamaAina]

25. PSA: Ohio DUers, please lay off the baby pictures!

According to Ohio law, 2907.323(A)(3) states anyone possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is guilty of a fifth-degree felony.

[rucky]

53. I've always wondered at what age it stops being cute & starts being creepy.

2?

[lpbk2713]

26. She's 15 and she did something stupid.

If the rest of us had to answer in court for the stupid things we did when we were that age

some of us would never get out of prison, judges included.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. This is why I support the death penalty for sex offenders.

We need to keep perverts like this off the street.

[LSK]

69. you forgot your sarcasm tag n/t

[LisaL]

29. Hah. They are considering whether to charge the minors

who got the photos. That truly is scary. Somebody sends you a photo, and you can be labeled as a sex offender?
Boggles the mind.

[readmoreoften]

30. Why stop at child pornography? I suspect she has also molested that very same 15 year old girl.

She has looked at herself naked in the mirror--probably even before she reached puberty. She has probably molested herself. I think it's safe to assume that she has touched her breast-area and nether-genital region with a bar of soap at some point. She has possibly been penetrated by herself with a tampon.

This monster must be stopped. Someone must protect the state's property.

[readmoreoften]

31. There is a perverted naked cat prowling my neighborhood. Everyone thinks it wants "food".

Oh it's "hungry" all right... Naked sicko lounges all over my porch. She even puts on scatological performances for the neighbors. The little monster thrives on attention, always winding through everyone's legs hoping for some "heavy petting".

[ManiacJoe]

32. Clearly a case of unforeseen circumstances.

The Ohio law contains repeated exemptions for parents to take and possess pics of their naked kids, but no exemptions for the kids to take and possess the same pictures. Welcome to the world of idiots with cell phone cameras....

This would be a perfect opportunity for jury nullification.

[Johonny]

36. We must regulate what we do with our own bodies

or else we might accidentally enjoy our life.

[Jed Dilligan]

38. The cops, DA, and judge in the case

then proceeded to have a long, sweaty circle-jerk as they leered over the evidence and contemplated their sadistic little achievement.

[bobbert]

39. We have to have some kind of punishment for this, though

Otherwise, pedophiles would have kids take pictures of themselves, and that would make it OK? We don't want a loophole in the legal system, but I doubt the punishment will be that bad for her.

[EOTE]

41. Then punish the pedophiles AND NOT THE KIDS.

What's so difficult about that?

[Dr. Strange]

44. So you'd punish someone for looking at the pics...

but not the person who made AND distributed the pics?

bobbert's right, it's a tricky situation.

[EOTE]

47. If it's someone taking pictures of themselves, I wouldn't punish them period.

If someone knowingly kept those pictures, I would have less of an issue with them being punished.

[Dr. Strange]

49. Well, she didn't just take them.

She sent them out, right?
I wonder if that's what government officials, politicians, law enforcement officers, etc, are trying to stop. Because once those pics are sent out (especially digitally), you've got a potentially big can of worms.
If the pics are sent to 15-year-old boys, do the boys get punished?
If they keep the pics, do they get punished?
If they still have the pics when they're 30, do they get punished?
If they post them on the web, do they get punished?
If someone else downloads the pics, not knowing anything about the girl's age, is the downloader committing a crime?

Nasty possibilities.

[EOTE]

52. If they still have the pics when they're 30, yes they get punished.

If the person who posted them is not a minor, no, they should not get punished. If someone downloads the pics and it could reasonably be assumed they thought she was of legal age, then they should not get punished. There is no reason that minors should get punished for this stuff period unless the pics were sent out for malicious reasons without consent.

[bobbert]

60. But that creates a loophole.

If a 30-year old was present when that 15-year old took pictures of herself, is it ok because she was taking pictures of herself?

How about, did some 30-year old suggest that she take pictures of herself and send it to him and her classmates?

There's a lot of things that could happen in the future. I think that if they just drop the case, then they would have to do the same thing under those circumstances. If it does go to trial, she could come out innocent, but the judge needs to be very clear with his statement that it is special circumstances. I think she should be found guilty with a light charge, that would keep my two examples from happening again because the young person would not have a reason to cover up for an adult. Anybody can say that they took pictures of themselves, but you don't know if there was an adult behind the motivation to take pictures or not. Also, as easy as cell phone cameras are to come by nowadays, we need to keep all teens/preteens from taking photos of themselves and passing them around before it becomes popular.

We have to set the laws now, before it becomes an issue later on, and I believe that this is the right move.

[EOTE]

62. You can still go after the 30 year old.

Get him on corruption of a minor or something similar. And if the 30 year old had the 15 year old send the picture to him, he should be charged for possession. There are so many valid ways of dealing with these things without having all this ridiculous harm come to young people who were just playing around.

[fishbulb703]

43. No, teenagers sending nude pics to other teenagers.

That is what this case is about, not pedophilia.

This really should not be punished, all of the attention this girl is getting for trying to make her boyfriend horny (presumably) is more than punishment enough.

[RedCappedBandit]

55. You thought that one through, didn't cha? nt

[tuckessee]

40. Mindless draconian enforcement of laws is an American hallmark.

It's all about just "following orders".

[ieoeja]

63. And yet it was *the* leading cause of the American Revolution.

The full Declaration of Independance should be required reading for Rightwingers on a quarterly basis. They need the reminder that taxes are mentioned exactly once, while abusive law enforcement is mentioned a couple dozen times.

For that matter a full 5 of the 10 Bill Of Rights are concerned mostly with the rights of people who are suspected, accused, arrested or convicted of crimes. A fact I like to point out every time some Rightwinger says, "once you commit a crime, you forfeit your rights."

[Eric J in MN]

45. The police shouldn't have arrested her.

They should have said they are too busy with more serious crimes than teens sending each others nude photos.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

46. Any of the minors involved need a psych eval and counseling,

not a record. Anyone, of majority age, involved needs to charged as the law allows.

[noonwitch]

50. I don't know about a psych eval, but counseling is in order

Unless they think the kid or kids has a serious disorder, a full psych eval is not necessary. It costs the court a lot of money if they have to pay for a full psych eval, money that comes out of out pockets.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

51. well, in a perfect world,,,

I think the girl sending the pictures but, it is not my call. so be it.

[RedCappedBandit]

56. A psych eval for being a horny teenager...

k.

[Regret My New Name]

65. REPENT MOAR!

[gollygee]

68. Kids send naked or near-naked pictures of themselves out all the time these days

Look at the Miley Cyrus stuff. It's very common and, while troubling IMO, is not something that requires counseling. More supervision around the computer, sure. A cell phone that doesn't take pictures, sure. A psych evaluation? No.

[originalpckelly]

54. Why doesn't the law forbade her from seeing herself in the mirror?

I mean, if you think about this, it's really just about the most insane prosecution in history. What harm is there in the girl photographing herself for her own viewing (which is what she's being charged with)?

Although she did send it around, that's not what's illegal in that law. An absolutely insane law.

[RedCappedBandit]

57. She's being charged with possessing pictures of herself?

What the fuck is wrong with people?

[BalancedGoat]

58. A similar case.

In this case it's a 13 year old boy facing child pornography charges because a female classmate sent him an explicit photo. I have a feeling that we're going to be seeing a lot more cases like these.

[treestar]

59. If society is OK with 15 year olds being sexually active

Then this is no worse than an adult doing the same thing.

Maybe we need a set of middle ground rules for teenagers.

[bobbert]

61. I don't trust 15-year-olds to use a condom every time.

Hell, 20-year-olds can't even handle that. At 15 the situation would be much worse. I wouldn't want my kid having sex until they knew the possible consequences.

not safe.

[treestar]

66. Problem is kids are more and more unsupervised

And now they all have cell phones. The best way seems to be to educate them and make it easy to get birth control and accept the fact they are doing it. That's the ambivalence of our culture.

[sarcasmo]

67. Just as bad as someone being drunk and getting caught peeing in public and they get

put on the sex registry, that damn thing needs to be changed.