[Jaded]

On this other board, there was a statement about that the classification of the porn as child porn really was very subjective. Just because the SDPD officer that looked at it and said yes, was apparently contradicted by other officers. It's all in they eye of the beholder, when the pics in question are border line NOT pre-pub children. Is it me or do others have trouble conneting the dots in this scenario?

[MizSterious]

Yes, it came from the transcript, direct from the law officers' own mouths at the hearing. See my post #8 above, where I quoted it.