Sexting Teens Face Charges

snowden said:
For being barely more than a child and acting just like a child.
Click to expand...

But did you take photos of your weed and you using it and distribute it to your authority figures?

If he was distraught, he could have talked to one of these authority figures about how he felt. Instead, he decided to attempt to damage their careers.

My personal opinion is that in sending these photos to who he sent them to was he himself registering himself as an offender.

He might be upset, but he doesn't have the right to attempt to harass and damage people who have nothing to do with any of it...

Sending photos of you doing weed to authorities is sending photos of you doing weed to your future employers.

You made your bed, NOW DEAL WITH IT!

(Led Zeppelin must be proud that he's wearing their t-shirt... He obviously bought his stairway to Hell...)
 
Ockie said:
What about the victim who's pictures has been distributed to all friends and family. Of course, certainly she will be able to enjoy a regular life and would have no problems or comfortably issues meeting friends and family.

Think about the victim, not the vengeful idiot.
Click to expand...

If the same thing happened, but she was 18, it would be the same embarrassment, but it wouldn't have even made the local news.

She sent them to him in the first place, the risk is equally hers. Unless she was living in some kind of bubble or vacuum, she should have known the risks.. We're talking a 16 year old here, not a toddler.

I know it's been almost 20 years since I was a teenager myself.. Have teenagers become so socially backward since then that we have to treat high schoolers like preschoolers?
 
Tolyngee said:
Instead, he decided to attempt to damage their careers.
Click to expand...
No, he attempted to damage the reputation of his ex-girlfriend. I doubt very much that at the time he was thinking, "Oh, I'll send this to Mr. Mackey. If he doesn't report it, he'll get fired! Tee hee!"
 
Tolyngee said:
I know it hasn't been mentioned, and while legally I doubt it makes a difference, but I couldn't help but notice that the article leaves it ambiguous as to how old she was when the pictures of herself were taken by herself.

They were taken at some point in the last 2.5 years... She is 16... So, she might have been 16 in the pics... or 15... or 14... Or even 13?

If I was 18 and had pictures of someone possibly that young, I'd delete them and then WIPE THAT HARD DRIVE SPACE.

People are calling these harsh, but this story is a terrible example to try and show how laws are incorrectly prosecuting.

An 18-yr-old ADULT potentially doing this to a 13-yr-old (at the time) has some serious issues when they broadcast their stupidity to, what was it, 70 people?

You put together a list of 70 people, and I'm sure there's gotta be someone on that list that if you send them something like that, regardless of who they are, they absolutely have to report it as child porn distribution. Failure of some (if not all) of those other adults to not report it to authorities could probably land them in hot water themselves.

WAIT: he sent it to teachers. They have no option but to report it...

But this story was absolutely not an example of "sexting" teenagers, and the guy probably could use some more time behind bars if he really doesn't understand what he did...

Ugh... I still can't believe he sent this to his or her teachers... If they don't report it, they themselves are fired... He might as well have sent it the cops directly! Why is he trying to damage so many others around him because she (obviously rightfully so) doesn't like the guy...

Not sure if time served, five years probation and 25 years registered is enough...
Click to expand...

You do make some killer points, however you looked over something. If he was 18 when he got into trouble and it had been 2.5 years that those pictures "might" have been taken, then it wasn't an 18 year old trying to bang a 13 year old. He could have been as young as 15 when he got those pictures.

What he did with the pictures was dumb, really dumb. But, he shouldn't of been the only person to get in trouble over this. That dumb bitch who sent him those pictures should get in the same exact trouble as he did. She, after all was the pedo behind (lol and infront) of the camera when the pictures were taken, she was the first person to distribute those pictures.
 
Ockie said:
What about the victims lives they destroy? Are they only worth probation? I can bet $100 that if your pictures were distributed across the world, you will want some justice... probation is not going to be enough justice for you. If you want a punishment that fits the crime, how about putting this punk to work for some serious community service and post his pictures up on the web for the world to laugh at.
Click to expand...

Justice, or vengeance? Or is there any difference between the two these days. He sent out naked pictures of his ex, he didn't fuck a 5-year-old. But now when people see his name on the sex offender registry their first thought will be "I bet he fucked a 5-year-old!"

Just him being on the list is revenge enough.
 
"Since the beginning of time, teens have flirted with each other and pushed the envelope. But 10 to 15 years ago, it didn't go global in 30 seconds."

"It's a new phenomena," Walters said. "Kids shouldn't be doing this — shouldn't be engaging in this type of behavior. But using these harsh criminal laws for child pornography is a bit of overkill."

Just last month, a 15-year-old Pennsylvania girl was charged with creating child pornography for sending images of herself via MySpace to a 27-year-old man.
Click to expand...

The laws are not adapting to technology. This is serious overkill. It was MUCH harder to distribute child porn before built in cell cameras and IPv4. Those laws were written for people hell bent on creation and distribution which was not so easy to do when a physical copy had to be made. Our laws with our technology suck ass. I do believe he should get some punishment but not the label he gets for the next 25 years.
 
this thread made me lol and rage all at the same time.


i can't believe some of you, if anything he should be in jail for being a douchebag.

(seriously, they need an anti-douchebag law)

but seriously guys, you think they're going to update and change the laws in a system that's designed to destroy people?

most likely not, which reminds me of this time i was in a classroom and this black mom was ranting about how the white man keeps black people down.

needless to say she needed a backhand into next week, maybe she hasn't been paying attention to who's being held down by who.

it's a system designed to keep everyone down, beat it like a red headed step child and make it your bitch.

oh yeah, and to stay on topic, he doesn't deserve the sexual offender title.
 
Spidey329 said:
The court really needs to take consideration before labeling people as sex offenders. Those laws were made for the purpose of keeping dangerous people away from young ones. Instead, it's being used to destroy peoples lifes for mistakes they make. Give him the 5 years probation or whatever, but don't label him as a sex offender. That's BS.
Click to expand...

Yeah, these lists should be for the worst of the worst.. of the over 10,000 people on the Megan's Law site in my state, just over 300 of them are deemed violent sex offenders likely to re-offend. It would be a hell of a lot cheaper and easier to keep the worst ones from falling through the cracks if they were the only ones on the list.

But then again, having a measly 300 or so people on a list would make it much harder for politicians to milk every vote and dime they can out of it, because they wouldn't have sex offenders listed on practically every street to generate fear and paranoia with.
 
RadCliffeX said:
You do make some killer points, however you looked over something. If he was 18 when he got into trouble and it had been 2.5 years that those pictures "might" have been taken, then it wasn't an 18 year old trying to bang a 13 year old. He could have been as young as 15 when he got those pictures.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't overlook that at all.

If he was 15 when he received the pictures, he still waited until he was an adult and knew better before distributing them.

As I said, the adult thing to do was to destroy them.

The pedophile thing he did was to distribute them.

He distributed them as an adult. Knowing what age she was in the pictures.

He understood what these were now and then. Otherwise he would have shared them earlier with someone. He had not. He understood earlier they were private and etc.

The adult thing to do was to destroy them. A pedophile distributes with intent to damage others' careers.


I'm not saying he ever had sex with her, or wanted to. I don't even care.

I am saying he kept them around 'til he was an adult, and then he distributed them.

The fact that apparently he had never shared these with anyone prior to this shows he knew what he had in his possession.
 
gamz247 said:
No, he attempted to damage the reputation of his ex-girlfriend. I doubt very much that at the time he was thinking, "Oh, I'll send this to Mr. Mackey. If he doesn't report it, he'll get fired! Tee hee!"
Click to expand...


But Mr. Mackey understands this.

Mr. Mackey's hands were tied in reporting the pedophile...
 
Shotglass01 said:
The laws are not adapting to technology. This is serious overkill. It was MUCH harder to distribute child porn before built in cell cameras and IPv4. Those laws were written for people hell bent on creation and distribution which was not so easy to do when a physical copy had to be made. Our laws with our technology suck ass. I do believe he should get some punishment but not the label he gets for the next 25 years.
Click to expand...

The worst part is, when it comes to child pornography, they seem to be more gung ho about going after anybody that views it, than actually going after the producers of it. The only time they really go after somebody who made child porn is if they are dumb enough to take pics of them doing something to a kid without bothering to hide their face. They might as well be trying to fight a flood using a teacup with a hole in it. The sentencing is a joke too.. A person can get anywhere from probation to 1100 years just for getting caught fapping to it, depending on what mood the judge is in.
 
Tolyngee said:
No, I didn't overlook that at all.

If he was 15 when he received the pictures, he still waited until he was an adult and knew better before distributing them.

As I said, the adult thing to do was to destroy them.

The pedophile thing he did was to distribute them.

He distributed them as an adult. Knowing what age she was in the pictures.

He understood what these were now and then. Otherwise he would have shared them earlier with someone. He had not. He understood earlier they were private and etc.

The adult thing to do was to destroy them. A pedophile distributes with intent to damage others' careers.


I'm not saying he ever had sex with her, or wanted to. I don't even care.

I am saying he kept them around 'til he was an adult, and then he distributed them.

The fact that apparently he had never shared these with anyone prior to this shows he knew what he had in his possession.
Click to expand...

I don't think the word pedophile means what you think it means.
 
Tolyngee said:
No, I didn't overlook that at all.

If he was 15 when he received the pictures, he still waited until he was an adult and knew better before distributing them.

As I said, the adult thing to do was to destroy them.

The pedophile thing he did was to distribute them.

He distributed them as an adult. Knowing what age she was in the pictures.

He understood what these were now and then. Otherwise he would have shared them earlier with someone. He had not. He understood earlier they were private and etc.

The adult thing to do was to destroy them. A pedophile distributes with intent to damage others' careers.


I'm not saying he ever had sex with her, or wanted to. I don't even care.

I am saying he kept them around 'til he was an adult, and then he distributed them.

The fact that apparently he had never shared these with anyone prior to this shows he knew what he had in his possession.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like he specifically waited untill he was legal to distribute the pictures. I never thought about how old anyone was in high school. Then again, I didn't have a cell phone, or take naked pictures of my self and distribute them on the internet.
 
Tolyngee said:
If he was 15 when he received the pictures, he still waited until he was an adult and knew better before distributing them.
Click to expand...
He distributed them when he was 18 because that's how old he was when they broke up. It's not as if the girl waited until he was 18 to break up with him so that he would be charged as an adult if he distributed her pictures in a fit of rage.

Tolyngee said:
As I said, the adult thing to do was to destroy them.

The pedophile thing he did was to distribute them.
Click to expand...
This act has nothing to do with pedophilia. Nothing.

Tolyngee said:
The fact that apparently he had never shared these with anyone prior to this shows he knew what he had in his possession.
Click to expand...
He knew he had naked pictures of his then girlfriend. Why would he want to show anyone else pictures of that?
 
Mavvok said:
it obviously means someone who's out to ruin someone's reputation.

ha, i'm just kidding, you can't ruin a whore's reputation. :D
Click to expand...

Wow spoken like a true virgin. Having an intimate relationships doesn't make a person a whore.
 
vengence said:
You make it sound like he specifically waited untill he was legal to distribute the pictures. I never thought about how old anyone was in high school. Then again, I didn't have a cell phone, or take naked pictures of my self and distribute them on the internet.
Click to expand...

Specifically or not, he did it anyways. What's the difference?
 
UrielDagda said:
I don't think the word pedophile means what you think it means.
Click to expand...


Okay, since the age is the issue:

If he and this girl had married, and had a happy 20-yr marriage...

Now, at age 36, she wants a divorce...

He decided to take those pics of her at 13 and send them to to co-workers, his boss, etc etc...

I don't think you'd have a problem with the label now.

How long was he going to keep these pics?

He obviously didn't want to destroy them. He wanted them to live on forever.

I understand what you mean. But you have to understand what I mean, too.

He wanted those images of her at (potentially) 13 to never die.

He got his wish, no?

Well, anyway, I was smarted than this at 18. And so were the people around me at that time.

For me personally it would not be easy to come up with a list of 70 contacts to send something like that. Not at my current age, and not at 18.

HE SERIOUSLY HAD TO HAVE KNOWN WHAT HE WAS DOING.

Anyway, the guy's gotten his 15 minutes. Best to not spend more time on him.

Oh: don't be shocked when he breaks his probation at some point in the next five years. The 25 years registered isn't what should be concerning him, because it won't matter...


Maybe things are different today. But I know I had some pretty serious personal/business-type relationships with some of my teachers from back then. Some I still have their contact info today. I actually live just a few blocks from one at the moment. And I do know had I done this NONE of them would have ever given me the time of day again.

Sorry, no pity for this story. Dunno how this kid got his 15 minutes...
 
Azhar said:
Specifically or not, he did it anyways. What's the difference?
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a few questions:
Does it matter if he sent them when he was 17 years, 364 days old or if he was 18 years and 0 days old. Should it matter? Legally, the answer to the first question is no. They would try him as an adult in both cases.

Frankly, all this KID has proven is he isn't an adult. Unfortunantly, it looks like he is going to be punished for being immature. And imho, it's probably not his fault. It is most likely a result of his parrents having little or not contact and letting the TV raise him. Of course I have nothing to back this up, other than he acts like the TVs and movies say you should act.
 
Tolyngee said:
Okay, since the age is the issue:

If he and this girl had married, and had a happy 20-yr marriage...

Now, at age 36, she wants a divorce...

He decided to take those pics of her at 13 and send them to to co-workers, his boss, etc etc...

I don't think you'd have a problem with the label now.

How long was he going to keep these pics?

He obviously didn't want to destroy them. He wanted them to live on forever.

I understand what you mean. But you have to understand what I mean, too.

He wanted those images of her at (potentially) 13 to never die.

He got his wish, no?

Well, anyway, I was smarted than this at 18. And so were the people around me at that time.

For me personally it would not be easy to come up with a list of 70 contacts to send something like that. Not at my current age, and not at 18.

HE SERIOUSLY HAD TO HAVE KNOWN WHAT HE WAS DOING.

Anyway, the guy's gotten his 15 minutes. Best to not spend more time on him.

Oh: don't be shocked when he breaks his probation at some point in the next five years. The 25 years registered isn't what should be concerning him, because it won't matter...

Maybe things are different today. But I know I had some pretty serious personal/business-type relationships with some of my teachers from back then. Some I still have their contact info today. I actually live just a few blocks from one at the moment. And I do know had I done this NONE of them would have ever given me the time of day again.

Sorry, no pity for this story. Dunno how this kid got his 15 minutes...
Click to expand...

Damn you are stupid. Let's create as many strawmen as we can stuff into one idiotic paragraph-less "post" and see if we gets attention.

What if she was 15 but was pretending to be 13 but was really 18 and had to pretend to be 15 pretending to be 13?

What if she was 15 when the pictures were taken and then never married her boyfriend but he kept the naked pictures she took and she sent to him AND then he blackmailed her with them fifty years later? HUUUHHHH???

YOU SERIOUSLY ARE A MORON.

Also I'M VERY SERIOUS, SEE MY ALL CAPS.

twat.
 
Tolyngee said:
Okay, since the age is the issue:

If he and this girl had married, and had a happy 20-yr marriage...

Now, at age 36, she wants a divorce...

He decided to take those pics of her at 13 and send them to to co-workers, his boss, etc etc...

I don't think you'd have a problem with the label now.
Click to expand...
That's quite a herring you've got there. Reddest one I've ever seen.

Tolyngee said:
Oh: don't be shocked when he breaks his probation at some point in the next five years. The 25 years registered isn't what should be concerning him, because it won't matter...
Click to expand...
Are you kidding me? This guy's going to have his name on a list somewhere for 25 years. If he moves to a different area, he'll probably have to inform the police about it. It'll show up any time he gets a background check done for a job. This isn't something that's just going to be glanced over.
 
Folks, distribution of underage anybody naked is considered distributing child porn.

I see noone bitching that peeing in the street can also get you brought up on sex offender charges, placed on the same list etc...

If the guy got into a fight and beat someone to death. It's still murder. Why should the interpretation of the law change for this situation?

It's simple. He should have thought about possible consequences of his actions before he acted in anger.
 
gamz247 said:
Are you kidding me? This guy's going to have his name on a list somewhere for 25 years. If he moves to a different area, he'll probably have to inform the police about it. It'll show up any time he gets a background check done for a job. This isn't something that's just going to be glanced over.
Click to expand...

Not to mention it being very hard to find anywhere to live in a lot of places. And the rules are getting more strict all the time.
 
Wrench said:
Folks, distribution of underage anybody naked is considered distributing child porn.

I see noone bitching that peeing in the street can also get you brought up on sex offender charges, placed on the same list etc...

If the guy got into a fight and beat someone to death. It's still murder. Why should the interpretation of the law change for this situation?

It's simple. He should have thought about possible consequences of his actions before he acted in anger.
Click to expand...

The disturbing part is some people here are defending him BECAUSE he was angry. As if criminals commit crime with a smile in the first place.
 
Wrench said:
It's simple. He should have thought about possible consequences of his actions before he acted in anger.
Click to expand...

I guess some people only understand black & white lines. By your 'logic' if he was 5 minutes younger than 18 years old then he is not a sex offender, but wait those 5 minutes and suddenly it's up to him to think of and know about the consequences to all of his actions. As if there is something magic about being alive for 18 years. Damn shame he didn't get in before the fucking deadline.
 
Azhar said:
The disturbing part is some people here are defending him BECAUSE he was angry. As if criminals commit crime with a smile in the first place.
Click to expand...

No wonder we've hit such a sore spot. No one is defending him, we are outraged by the ridiculous sentence he has received. Get it now?
 
Thread_useless_wo_pics.gif
 
Wrench said:
Folks, distribution of underage anybody naked is considered distributing child porn.

I see noone bitching that peeing in the street can also get you brought up on sex offender charges, placed on the same list etc...

If the guy got into a fight and beat someone to death. It's still murder. Why should the interpretation of the law change for this situation?

It's simple. He should have thought about possible consequences of his actions before he acted in anger.
Click to expand...

*ahem* wrong *ahem*

if this was a thread about indecent exposure (which is what would get you thrown on that list for pissing in the street, i know someone it almost happened to) then we'd be talking about pissing in the street not some little whore sending nudes of herself to her boyfriend and getting upset when they find their way all over the net.

long story short, he shouldn't be a registered sex offender because he wasn't preying on her innocence, he was getting revenge, just like it's different if someone comes at you with a knife trying to kill you and you turn it on them killing them, it's self defense, however with nutjobs like yourself running around, we're in a position where if someone breaks into my house and i blow their leg off with my 12 gauge it's assault.


*ahem*bullshit*ahem*
 
Azhar said:
The disturbing part is some people here are defending him BECAUSE he was angry. As if criminals commit crime with a smile in the first place.
Click to expand...

You've never seen a happy criminal? Shit, the last one who stole my TV smiled at me as he was walking out... I called him back and offered him a beer and helped load my tv on his truck.... such nice people!

haha
 
Wow he got fucked baaaad. Pretty much made an example of him.

So much for the days of the dad and/or brother finding the offender and laying out an asswhupping.
 
snowden said:
No wonder we've hit such a sore spot. No one is defending him, we are outraged by the ridiculous sentence he has received. Get it now?
Click to expand...

No, I got that too. But outrageous or no, everyone knows what will happen if you distribute pictures of children under the age of 18.

If we keep making exceptions, we might as well be a monarchy and decree judgments as seem fit.

Sad but true.
 
Wrench said:
Folks, distribution of underage anybody naked is considered distributing child porn.

I see noone bitching that peeing in the street can also get you brought up on sex offender charges, placed on the same list etc...

If the guy got into a fight and beat someone to death. It's still murder. Why should the interpretation of the law change for this situation?

It's simple. He should have thought about possible consequences of his actions before he acted in anger.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately these laws are so broad that they can be interpreted in any way anybody sees fit. Since the girl created and transmitted these images first, there is clearly selective prosecution here.
 
Mavvok said:
*ahem* wrong *ahem*

if this was a thread about indecent exposure (which is what would get you thrown on that list for pissing in the street, i know someone it almost happened to) then we'd be talking about pissing in the street not some little whore sending nudes of herself to her boyfriend and getting upset when they find their way all over the net.

long story short, he shouldn't be a registered sex offender because he wasn't preying on her innocence, he was getting revenge, just like it's different if someone comes at you with a knife trying to kill you and you turn it on them killing them, it's self defense, however with nutjobs like yourself running around, we're in a position where if someone breaks into my house and i blow their leg off with my 12 gauge it's assault.


*ahem*bullshit*ahem*
Click to expand...
NERD RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OMG TEH NUBZ disagree with my view point must be a nutjob!!!!!

Nut job? I'm all for conceal and carry rights, ownership rights and self defense rights. Can't see youtube from work so :p stop making assumptions.

Self defense and revenge are two different things. I said murder in a generic form as a reference one extreme to the other. I agree entirely that death resulting as defense against an attacker with a weapon, or intruder to your home is fine.

Damn what's the phrase....ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law....

No what forget it. You feel THAT strongly about it. Write a letter petition the govt. and call your state representative. Get the law changed. Otherwise stfu and accept thats the way it is.
 
Azhar said:
No, I got that too. But outrageous or no, everyone knows what will happen if you distribute pictures of children under the age of 18.

If we keep making exceptions, we might as well be a monarchy and decree judgments as seem fit.

Sad but true.
Click to expand...

They also say that 20% of teens admit to doing this.. So apparently you can accept, if they equally applied to law to each and every one of them rigidly, 20% of the future adult population being on the sex offender list just for this reason alone, plus for all of the other reasons people wind up on sex offender registries..

As it is the sex offender registry is so watered down its nearly useless in actually keeping track of real predators.. So our solution will be to completely fuck it up (while continuing bitch and moan while real predators fall through the cracks.)
 
Wrench said:
Damn what's the phrase....ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law....
Click to expand...

Yeah, that might have made more sense in the days before the laws became so complex that no single human could start reading them from page one, and still be sifting through them 50 years later.

Or maybe that's precisely why somebody came up with that phrase... And it's irony has been lost over time. :D
 
Steve said:
If you are a teenager thinking about sending “teh nekkid pixtorz” to your girlfriend via e-mail or cell phone you should probably think twice about that. Jail time and being registered as a sex offender for the next 25 years would kinda suck.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't with teen sexting. It's with teen asstards using those photos as ammunition to destroy the reputation of a person they're having issues with. I have no sympathy for the dolt who spread that picture around. Knowing that he was going to do some kind of legal penance may be all that saved him from pissed-off relatives' retribution.
 
NoEcho said:
The problem isn't with teen sexting. It's with teen asstards using those photos as ammunition to destroy the reputation of a person they're having issues with. I have no sympathy for the dolt who spread that picture around. Knowing that he was going to do some kind of legal penance may be all that saved him from pissed-off relatives' retribution.
Click to expand...

I'd take the well-deserved beating before having my entire future permanently destroyed.
 
Wrench said:
NERD RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OMG TEH NUBZ disagree with my view point must be a nutjob!!!!!

Nut job? I'm all for conceal and carry rights, ownership rights and self defense rights. Can't see youtube from work so :p stop making assumptions.

Self defense and revenge are two different things. I said murder in a generic form as a reference one extreme to the other. I agree entirely that death resulting as defense against an attacker with a weapon, or intruder to your home is fine.

Damn what's the phrase....ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law....

No what forget it. You feel THAT strongly about it. Write a letter petition the govt. and call your state representative. Get the law changed. Otherwise stfu and accept thats the way it is.
Click to expand...

the example you provided was getting into a fight, i don't know what state you live in, but in california you can be ticketed (and possibly arrested, i don't know first hand) for saying something to someone that can incite a fight.

the point is, if it's one sided, it's murder, if it's two people fighting and one dies, it's a fight and is no different from survival of the fittest.

petitioning would be a sweet idea, too bad i live in the one state that votes democrat every time around and yet passed prop 8 (you know what i'm talking about, yep, i live in california)

unfortunately in american society, majority rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top