Posted on 07/05/2018 3:25:28 PM PDT by Forgotten Amendments
...FBI agents later interviewed Marrero's ex-girlfriend, who confirmed that she was 17 at the time the pictures were taken. A conviction will force Marrero to register as a sex offender and could land him in prison for up to 30 years. According to the U.S. Department of Justice's guide to federal child pornography law, "a first time offender convicted of producing child pornography...face fines and a statutory minimum of 15 years to 30 years maximum in prison." Under Ohio law, which also sets the cutoff for child pornography at 18, Marrero would have faced between six months and eight years. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Sorry , I don’t buy into your “perverted ‘tards are above the law” philosophy.
Sex with other people comes with obligations and responsibilities, and distribution of underage pornography is not an unalienable right.
The guy fully earned what he got.
Not dude. I meant it is believable that he had no idea it was illegal to TAKE THE PHOTO I did write that selling, trading, giving or otherwise sharing the photo to ANYONE without the poser’s consent is rightly a crime. I do think that the taking of the photo based on the age of the poser and her consent should not be classified as child pornography.
First in this day and age that anyone still believes “No one else will see it, I promise” is jaw dropping to me. If my then 17 year old daughter’s photo had been shared without her consent I would seek legal remedy against the person in possession of the photo. But I would make clear to her that it was her own foolishness that got her into the mess in the first place.
The article makes no mention of her being exploited because of any disability or other limitation. That would be very prominently mentioned had that been the case. There would also be discussion of additional charges against the ex boyfriend depending on the statute of limitations. AFAIK every state has laws that address such a situation. That is because there are circumstances that make giving consent to sex is not possible no matter the age of the people involved.
I am not grabbing a pitchfork and joining your lynch mob. The real perversion here is our justice system. Too many people have served too much time for crimes they did not commit, and for crimes that do not warrant the draconian punishments handed out under mandatory sentencing. President Trump has recognized this issue and is beginning to address it. I would rather let a few marginally guilty people go than to continue affirming the power of the police state that the US has unfortunately become.
If you do a search on the one that was originally on trial you will find a long record of charges, convictions and appeals. He is without doubt a serial sex offender. Why he was out in the first place is to be pondered. This is a person who knows the system and has used it to his advantage before.
What is not clear in the article is why the man who took the photo was testifying for the defense. And why he was told he could plead the 5th Amendment. Would that usually be a necessary warning to a witness?
Again my only contention is that a twenty year old taking a sexually explicit photo of his seventeen year old girlfriend with her consent should not be classified as child pornography and result in prosecution based on that charge. And that will do.
.
Save your stupid Phariseeism for fools like yourself.
I was speaking of the Torah that your pharisees demolish with the takanot that you and the adversary embrace.
.
“Again my only contention is that a twenty year old taking a sexually explicit photo of his seventeen year old girlfriend with her consent should not be classified as child pornography and result in prosecution based on that charge. And that will do.”
When the photos show up in the kiddie porn collection of a convicted child molester and possibly distributed around the world you are a child porn trafficker.
“The article makes no mention ...”
Even in the article they say they don’t know squat about the details and didn’t bother to do any research before posting their click-bait outrage.
” I did write that selling, trading, giving or otherwise sharing the photo to ANYONE without the poser’s consent is rightly a crime. “
Then we both agree that the dude should be charged!
” I did write that selling, trading, giving or otherwise sharing the photo to ANYONE without the poser’s consent is rightly a crime. “
Probably the tip of the iceberg for him.
Apparently you are not familiar with ancient Jewish text.
Why does a dog lick his balls?
Because the underaged porn collection of the roommate was being shared on the internet. That takes it world-wide.
See #174 before making another stupid post.
Don’t have a daughter. I’d probably ground her for a decade and beat the snot out of him - and likely gone to jail for doing so. That should and would have happened right at the start of them getting together. So I see your point. Does seem like overkill though to ship him for up to 30 years though unless there is more to the story.
Ok. Did some digging. There is more to the story. Hope they ship him for the full 30 years. IOW, I was wrong and you helped change my mind.
” Does seem like overkill though to ship him for up to 30 years though unless there is more to the story.”
He won’t get 30. Just the click-bait site seeking to jerk people around.
Most likely he will turn on his roommate and get probation along with a sex offender tag.
Thank you for the kind response.
Welcome. It was deserved.
Two of the many things I really love about Free Republic: (1) massive knowledge, and (2) a willingness of many Freepers to admit when they are/were wrong. I do my best to contribute to both.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.