Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Yaelle

“You are right. Kids are kids and should not be charged with child porn.”

Had Corey simply had a picture of himself naked, it would be technically child porn, but not necessarily actionable.

However, the image of the girl on his phone makes it a big problem.


185 posted on 05/24/2017 7:24:23 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies ]


To: Timpanagos1
Had Corey simply had a picture of himself naked, it would be technically child porn, but not necessarily actionable.

It would legally be child porn and it would definitely be actionable.

TigersEye to Timpanagos1
No, I'm not saying that. Illinois law says that.

Child pornography.

In Illinois, a person commits the offense of child pornography by videotaping or photographing anyone he or she should know is under the age of 18 and who is engaged in any sexual act or in any pose involving lewd exhibition of unclothed or transparently clothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast.15 There is no exception for taking pictures of oneself.16 Thus, a 17-year-old who snaps his or her own revealing picture has technically created child pornography, a Class 1 felony with a mandatory fine of between $2,000 and $100,000 and at least four years in prison.17 It would not be a crime if the teen were 18.18


190 posted on 05/24/2017 7:34:33 PM PDT by TigersEye (Make up my mind, NBC,CBS,CNN,ABC. What are the "facts" today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson