Virginia cops hoping to bust teen for child pornography by, er, taking photos of his erect penis

posted at 8:01 pm on July 9, 2014 by Allahpundit

The kid’s 17, his girlfriend’s 15, and allegedly they ended up doing what horny teens in the age of ubiquitous smartphone cameras tend to do. Then, somehow, her mother found out. Potential result: Juvenile detention until he’s 21 and inclusion on the state’s sex-offender registry if the prosecution can prove that the video on his girlfriend’s phone is of him. Which shouldn’t be a problem, once the police forcibly induce an erection in him and take photos of it.

In related news, I think I just endorsed Rand Paul for president.

“The prosecutor’s job is to seek justice,” said the teen’s defense lawyer, Jessica Harbeson Foster. “What is just about this? How does this advance the interest of the Commonwealth? This is a 17-year-old who goes to school every day, plays football, has never been in trouble with the law before. Now he’s saddled with two felonies and the implication that he’s a sexual predator. I don’t mind trying the case. My goal is to stop the search warrant. I don’t want him to go through that. Taking him down to the hospital so he can get an erection in front of all those cops, that’s traumatizing.”…

The case was set for trial on July 1, where Foster said Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Claiborne Richardson told her that her client must either plead guilty or police would obtain another search warrant “for pictures of his erect penis,” for comparison to the evidence from the teen’s cell phone. Foster asked how that would be accomplished and was told that “we just take him down to the hospital, give him a shot and then take the pictures that we need.”

Here’s Virginia’s child-porn statute, in pertinent part:

B. A person shall be guilty of production of child pornography who:

1. Accosts, entices or solicits a person less than 18 years of age with intent to induce or force such person to perform in or be a subject of child pornography; or

2. Produces or makes or attempts or prepares to produce or make child pornography; or

3. Who knowingly takes part in or participates in the filming, photographing, or other production of child pornography by any means;

When I first glanced at the story, I thought the kid was being charged only for obtaining prurient photos of his 15-year-old girlfriend. In fact, per WaPo, he’s facing two charges, possession of child porn and manufacturing child porn. Is … that why cops want photos of his penis? They’re accusing him of victimizing himself? Or are they accusing him of victimizing her, “manufacturing” porn involving his girlfriend by enticing her into taking photos of herself, with the penis shot needed solely to confirm the identity of the boy who was soliciting her?

If you think it’s insane that a 17-year-old might earn a lifetime stigma as an officially designated pervert by the state of Virginia for something like this, there’s nothing in the child porn statute that appears to exempt someone of his age from charges. There are age-related restrictions — lesser sentences if the victim is between age 15 and 18, for instance — but nothing that says someone who is himself a minor can’t be charged as a child pornographer under the law. Tell your children: No sexting penis pics until they can vote!

Here’s video of the teen and his aunt via NBC Washington. WaPo withheld his name from their story because he’s underage, but the kid’s not seeking anonymity. He wants some public outrage over this and appearing in front of the camera is, he apparently thinks, the first step. Exit question: How come his girlfriend’s not being charged too?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Already happening in Australia where teens sexting each other are cautioned they will be charged with production of child pornography. It’s a crazy world.

The Thin Man Returns on July 9, 2014 at 11:28 PM

Cops and prosecutors in Virginia have nothing better to do and they want force and erection and photograph it, which by Virginia law means they (the cops and prosecutor) would then be manufacturing child porn?

Kid, make them take you to trial, likely you will get a hung jury.

Wallythedog on July 9, 2014 at 8:52 PM

Yeah, but what happens if the evidence won’t stand up in court?

Palerider1861 on July 9, 2014 at 11:34 PM

If teens are going to engage in sexual activity no matter what… Then why was the illegitimacy rate far lower in the age before ubiquitous birth control and legalized abortion?

1940, 7%

1965, 23%

2008, 41%

mankai on July 9, 2014 at 11:43 PM

Just how are they planning to present this evidence to a jury?

Wallythedog on July 9, 2014 at 9:04 PM

Prosecution says:
If the pics fit, you must convict!

Defense says:
If the pics don’t fit, you must aquit!

Survey says:
The state is being boneheaded.

oryguncon on July 9, 2014 at 11:46 PM

To Serve and Protect, not Harass and Douche

J. Swanson

teacherman on July 10, 2014 at 12:09 AM

Blame the girl’s mother for freaking out over the consequences of buying her 15 year old daughter a cell phone that can play video or show pictures.

ButterflyDragon on July 10, 2014 at 12:10 AM

Exit question: How come his girlfriend’s not being charged too?

Because mansplaining, patriarchy, and white male privilege!

Hater!

JimRich on July 10, 2014 at 12:22 AM

…Harry Reid wants the pictures!

JugEarsButtHurt on July 9, 2014 at 8:37 PM

At 17, the boy’s far too old to get ol’ Harry hot ‘n bothered.

Left Coast Right Mind on July 10, 2014 at 12:45 AM

mankai on July 9, 2014 at 11:43 PM

I think it’s more than birth control and abortion at work.

I think societal attitudes towards pre-marital sex have changed, where people are more accepting of anyone and everyone having sex before marriage.

Even many conservative Christians have as of late abandoned defending the idea of remaining a virgin until marriage.

First, the secular feminists began complaining about “slut shaming” (That is, making women feel bad or guilty for having pre-marital sex.)

Then, left-wing type Christians and ex-Christian groups picked up on the “slut shaming” trend and started writing anti-sexual purity / anti- modesty / anti- virginity blog pages.
—–
A side note:
I do to a point agree with them – there are problems with how some Christians teach about sexual purity and modesty, and yes, it’s sexist at times, in that Christians bombard females with virginity talk when the topic is brought up, but they seldom lecture teen boys or males to remain sexually pure/virgins.

Also, there is too much emphasis in Baptist, fundamentalist, evangelical churches and Reformed on marriage (as well as parenthood)…

There is nothing in these churches for single adults who are celibate (and also childless), no encouragement, no sermons or booklets, advice or help for their life situation.
—–
Anyway, the more left wing or moderate Christian blogs seem to have been influenced a bit by all the “slut shaming” rhetoric of secular, left wing, feminist sites.

So, there is a big old backlash against sexual purity and modesty, and against virginity.

After a year or two of this by the secular left wing groups, conservative Christian bloggers picked up on that attitude, and, on their blogs and radio programs, they started bashing the concept of virginity, and bashing the idea of staying a virgin until marriage, and they began preaching an “easy breezey,” cheap grace view of sexual sin.

Concurrent with this is that other conservative preachers and mouth pieces (including prominent Southern Baptists) assume (wrongly) that there are no Christian celibates or virgins over the age of 25.

Therefore, they crank out editorials, and appear on shows and in podcasts, also giving “easy breezey, cheap grace” commentary on sexual sin (they assume everyone is fornicating and hence need to be reminded that God forgives fornication)…

AND they (conservative Christians) claim that anyone who is still a virgin over age 25 has made virginity into “an idol” or “a fetish.”

So, 1. you have secular, left wing feminists bashing virginity and sexual purity,

then 2. the left wing (to possibly moderate) Christian women, then the
3. conservatives bought into it…

Now, if you are a virgin, or support anyone abstaining until marriage, you are thought by all these various groups (remember this includes conservative Christians) to be a judgmental, hateful jerk, just for following the Bible’s teachings on sexual morality.

I believe the Bible teaches that both genders are to remain virgins until marriage.

One of the weaknesses in this area is that for decades, churches have only emphasized female virginity – males are not held not the same standards as females.

If churches had emphasized male virginity as much as female virginity, I don’t think we’d be seeing quite the backlash against virginity- until- marriage as there is now.

Anyway – society overall, including even conservative Christians now, have developed very permissive attitudes in regards to sexual sin.

Yes, you can still find some conservative Christian groups or preachers paying lip service to the concept of sexual purity (and celibacy / virginity), but…..

They contradict this profession when two minutes later, on the same blog or program, they go on and on about how wrong the church is to keep telling people that virginity is a big deal, that it’s hurtful to respect virginity, and that doing so causes people (ie, fornicators) to feel shame, if preachers preach against pre-marital sex, etc.

It’s not only the secular left wingers teaching sexual hedonism these days, it’s conservative Christians now as well, which is odd and very disappointing.

TigerPaw on July 10, 2014 at 1:46 AM

I believe the Bible teaches that both genders are to remain virgins until marriage.

One of the weaknesses in this area is that for decades, churches have only emphasized female virginity – males are not held not the same standards as females.

If churches had emphasized male virginity as much as female virginity, I don’t think we’d be seeing quite the backlash against virginity- until- marriage as there is now.

Anyway – society overall, including even conservative Christians now, have developed very permissive attitudes in regards to sexual sin.

Yes, you can still find some conservative Christian groups or preachers paying lip service to the concept of sexual purity (and celibacy / virginity), but…..

They contradict this profession when two minutes later, on the same blog or program, they go on and on about how wrong the church is to keep telling people that virginity is a big deal, that it’s hurtful to respect virginity, and that doing so causes people (ie, fornicators) to feel shame, if preachers preach against pre-marital sex, etc.

It’s not only the secular left wingers teaching sexual hedonism these days, it’s conservative Christians now as well, which is odd and very disappointing.

TigerPaw on July 10, 2014 at 1:46 AM

The Bible does not teach a double standard, where it’s somehow okay for boys, but not okay for girls.

Regardless, there is the simple, if ugly, fact that boys don’t get pregnant. Girls do. Girls quite simply have more reason to be cautious. There have been far too many girls who found out they were pregnant, then found out that boyfriend didn’t really love them after all.

But what’s the surprise here? It’s not just teen pregnancy, or even promiscuity. We now have a culture where refusing to indulge yourself just because it’s immoral is weird.

This is the natural result of the attitude “If it feels good, do it. If it itches, scratch it.”

And yes, if you aren’t having sex with that boyfriend or girlfriend just because you’re not married, there are people who will ask what’s wrong with you.

Even Christians are influenced by the culture they grow up in, unless they do like Daniel of old and “determine in their heart that they will not defile themselves.”

There Goes the Neighborhood on July 10, 2014 at 2:23 AM

This is stupid stuff. Cops are going wild all over. This can’t be typical.

Sherman1864 on July 10, 2014 at 5:03 AM

Notice how there is no dad or uncle in this story?

By the way, IIRC, this is the same area of Virginia where the Lorena Bobbit story took place. Just sayin…

Galtian on July 10, 2014 at 8:06 AM

Since the teen’s innocence is presumed, an induced erection can only be intended to produce evidence of guilt. I wonder how that comports with the doctor providing the shot’s responsibility to ‘first, do no harm’.

PersonFromPorlock on July 10, 2014 at 8:10 AM

Um. Except far more Americans used hard drugs prior to World War II than do now.

I suspect this is more dishonest revisionist nonsense from the phony professor as it is trying to conflate use with abuse.

Given that abuse is more prevalent in adults, the present population over 18 population of the US is about 231,000,000. In 1940, it was about 92,000,000. The present estimate of drug abusers (per the CDC) in the US is 30,000,000, so the argument that a third or more of the adult population prior to 1940 were abusers is absurd.

Next, the only available “hard drugs” were opiate derivatives, cocaine, and things like chloral hydrate. Regardless, and though epidemiological studies prior to WWII are limited, best estimates of opiate abuse place the number of US abusers at only 2-300,000, which, even if the same number abused the other available drugs, is a far cry from 30,000,000.

Now if our resident “professor” is trying to conflate legal use of formerly OTC preparations containing opiates and other drugs (paregoric, elixir of terpin hydrate, etc.) with the present rate of abuse, it is just more of the intellectual vacuity and dishonesty we have all come to expect from an ill-educated hack.

F X Muldoon on July 10, 2014 at 8:15 AM

Wasn’t this in the movie Porky’s?

vcferlita on July 10, 2014 at 9:27 AM

F X Muldoon on July 10, 2014 at 8:15 AM

We know he talks through his behind. He just want the pictures.

katy the mean old lady on July 10, 2014 at 9:41 AM

We know he talks through his behind.

Indeed, a veritable human Klein bottle.

F X Muldoon on July 10, 2014 at 9:48 AM

F X Muldoon on July 10, 2014 at 8:15 AM

You’re using CDC statistics to make a point? This is the same lying CDC that said AIDS was a disease for everyone and published phony statistics to try and prove their point. Only a moron would believe anything the CDC says (or any other govt. agency).

earlgrey on July 10, 2014 at 9:58 AM

The kid’s 17, his girlfriend’s 15, and allegedly they ended up doing what horny teens in the age of ubiquitous smartphone cameras tend to do. Then, somehow, her mother found out.

Parents who think they are going to help or save their child by getting the pigs involved soon find out the hard way it just ain’t so. Thugs do what thugs do, and when they have the power of government behind them it is even more destructive.

earlgrey on July 10, 2014 at 10:02 AM

He should declare himself an illegal. The law will leave him alone for a generation…minimum.

stop2think on July 10, 2014 at 10:03 AM

Won’t they be required to have a “penis line-up” so as to determine the sole perpetrator???

supersport667 on July 10, 2014 at 10:06 AM

You’re using CDC statistics to make a point?

Yes, because regressives and other various statists believe anything the government says, it is often useful to use their own statistics when arguing a point with them; you should try it some time.

F X Muldoon on July 10, 2014 at 10:23 AM

So to “protect” children, we have to spend taxpayer time and money to sexually assault them in hospitals in order to send them to jail?

Eagles409 on July 10, 2014 at 10:34 AM

He should declare himself an illegal.

That, or file for office as a democrat.

F X Muldoon on July 10, 2014 at 10:34 AM

They want to make child porn so that they can prosecute a child for making child porn — of himself. Can he then sue the cops that are taking pictures of genitals for making child porn?

Eagles409 on July 10, 2014 at 10:36 AM

It will never stand up in court.

Wander on July 10, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Usually you can’t prosecute an individual for violating a statute when the statute in question was designed specifically to protect that individual from the criminal action in question. It’s the same principle as statutory rape laws. You don’t prosecute minors in that situation, even though they may have violated the statute, because the statute is designed specifically to protect them.

Claiborne on July 10, 2014 at 1:01 PM

Update: Somethingus Interruptus

Virginia police back off plan to take explicit photo of teen in sexting case

bofh on July 10, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Wasn’t this in the movie Porky’s?

vcferlita on July 10, 2014 at 9:27 AM

Yes, Beulah Balbricker wanted to line up a bunch of boys and have them expose themselves so she could identify the perp by visual inspection of their penises. Her suggestion was roundly laughed off and dismissed by the Principal and the coach -which is what the Judge in this case should do when the DA’s office asks for this warrant.

And yeah, just how come it is that the 15 year old girl isn’t being charged with anything?

djm1992 on July 10, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Good grief. Just horny teen stuff with both minors & no one damaged or even touched – just a dumb photo. Let it go. Isn’t there some real crime to worry about?

Chessplayer on July 10, 2014 at 9:11 PM

The laws concerning statutory rape have to be redone. Society and what it accepts as normal sexual behavior has changed dramatically, and not for the better.

I’ve worked the cases, and have assisted major crime detectives in working the cases.

Here’s the down and dirty of sex crimes.

1. They were pushed forward by an agenda driven by the fact we did ignore victims at one time and the political demand by the Left to punish men. But it has gotten to the point where they are simply a punishing force used against mostly men for things that are not crimes.

Sure, protect the real victims, but don’t do it by creating a law that can and is abused all the time.

2. I talked with one female detective who told me over 80% of her cases were bullsh*t. They fell into three major categories.

A. The “victim” is a pissed off woman who claims an assault when it wasn’t. The guy can’t really defend himself from the charge if he is in a sexual relationship with the woman. DNA… It’s her word against his, and he will lose.

B. The offender is just over the limit- by statute- and the “victim” is under the limit. But both of them are have been sexually active long before they met and had sex. But the guy is 18 and the girl is fifteen. She gets mad when they break up and cries assault. Guess what- he goes to jail and is saddled with a sexual offender curse forever.

C. As in this case, the girl is happy, the guy is happy but the parents find out and complain. More than once though, the parents are alright with the relationship UNTIL the guy breaks up. Then down to the police department they trot filing felony charges.

And the guy goes to jail and is branded forever.

Folks, there are real assaults out there. But there are also aggressive parents, angry women, cops and prosecutors who love to just pummel men for the heck of it.

If you are in a relationship with a girl, you had better get I.D. a letter of consent and then just hope for the best.

And women wonder why men are skittish.

archer52 on July 10, 2014 at 10:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2