Is it right to charge this boy with child pornography?

[js207]

It looks like there are two ages of consent in Virginia? West Virginia age of consent is 16, rest 18.

West Virginia and Virginia are two different states, each with their own laws, just like North Dakota and South Dakota.

If something is sent unsolicited that's usually a defense - a possession charge would normally require intent, depending on the jurisdiction - but that would be very difficult for the boyfriend in this case.

[thir]

West Virginia and Virginia are two different states, each with their own laws, just like North Dakota and South Dakota.

Thanks

If something is sent unsolicited that's usually a defense - a possession charge would normally require intent, depending on the jurisdiction - but that would be very difficult for the boyfriend in this case.

Do you mean intent to sell on?
I do not understand the last of it, what would be difficult for the boyfriend?

In general - what I do not understand is that to my mind laws against child pornography are meant to protect children, right? Against harm, exploitation and exposure. And so they should be, obviously.

But all we have here is a situation with two teenagers fooling around with each other, as they do - lots of them! Where is the harm, or threat, in that?? I do not understand.

[js207]

Do you mean intent to sell on?
I do not understand the last of it, what would be difficult for the boyfriend?

No, intent to possess the material in question. If Customs find a package of drugs in the post to me, for example, that isn't enough to prosecute me: they'd need to show that I was actually involved in some way, for example having paid the sender or communicated with them about it.

In general - what I do not understand is that to my mind laws against child pornography are meant to protect children, right? Against harm, exploitation and exposure. And so they should be, obviously.

But all we have here is a situation with two teenagers fooling around with each other, as they do - lots of them! Where is the harm, or threat, in that?? I do not understand.

You have a point there: this isn't really what the law was intended to catch, so with luck it might be changed in future. I wouldn't hold my breath for that though.

[thir]

No, intent to possess the material in question. If Customs find a package of drugs in the post to me, for example, that isn't enough to prosecute me: they'd need to show that I was actually involved in some way, for example having paid the sender or communicated with them about it.

Ah. Thanks.

You have a point there: this isn't really what the law was intended to catch, so with luck it might be changed in future. I wouldn't hold my breath for that though.

Or they could just let them go, maybe, for that reason?

[Thorne]

Where is the harm, or threat, in that?

The harm is to the sensibilities of the girl's parents, who are trying to deny the obvious sexual explorations of their daughter. I wonder how eager they would be to prosecute the boy who sent the video of himself, if he were to have charges filed against the girl for distribution of child pornography. Would they be able to sit in a court room and have their daughter explain why she sent nude photos of herself to her boyfriend?

[thir]

The harm is to the sensibilities of the girl's parents, who are trying to deny the obvious sexual explorations of their daughter. I wonder how eager they would be to prosecute the boy who sent the video of himself, if he were to have charges filed against the girl for distribution of child pornography. Would they be able to sit in a court room and have their daughter explain why she sent nude photos of herself to her boyfriend?

Good point. And why isn't she accused as well, seeing how mad this whole thing is??