A 17-year-old Manassas teen is facing felony charges for allegedly sexting his girlfriend, who was 15 at the time.
NBC4 reports that the teen was caught sexting with his then-girlfriend in January and "was charged with manufacturing and distributing child pornography. According to the Post, the incident started when the teen's girlfriend sent him nude pics, and then the 17-year-old responded with a video of his, um, private parts. The video was discovered by the girl's mother who then filed a complaint.
After the teen was arrested, police took pictures of his genitalia for evidence, the teen's aunt tells NBC4:
"He said they took him to a room and took pictures of his genitalia...I asked if they’re allowed to do that, and [he] said, ‘I tried to refuse,’” which he did, he didn’t want to do it. They told him if he did not they would do it by force.”
This isn't the first such case, but these prosecutions continue to strike me as bonkers. The Manassas police and the girl's mother are causing grave harm to these kids, especially to the boy.
The article asks and I wonder why only the boy was charged with making and distributing child porn. Perhaps this would be explained by some technicality related to age, but I'm left to wonder if there isn't also some weird gender bias at work.
Here is the Virginia child porn statute. I don't see a reason for charging the boy, but not the girl. Could be some other statute or a court ruling supersedes the statute. Or maybe this was driven by demands from the mother of the girl or something else we don't know about the people and relationships involved.
But then there is the problem of treating the supposed victim of child porn as a perpetrator. If a 30-year-old man shot the video with the 17-year-old voluntarily participating, would the police charge this 17-year-old with a felony or treat him as the victim of a crime?
I bet they would treat him as the victim of a crime. Yet when the 17-year-old makes the video, the victim and perp are merged. Now the victim is inescapably punished along with the so-called perpetrator because they are one and the same person. Is there no room for the law to recognize that kids photographing or filming themselves present a fundamentally different situation from adults creating nude images of children for sexual purposes?
Of course there is room to recognize the difference and authorities throughout the country recognize the difference. I've read about a number of cases in which police have publicly explained that they treat these situations as matters for parents to sort out, unlike the knuckleheads in Manassas, Virginia. I'm sure that plenty of police agencies understand that treating kids as criminals in these situations is far worse than the supposed crime itself.
Is there more to the story or are the police doubling down in reaction to nationwide ridicule? What's being reported is that the police want to take pictures of his erect penis, and they have threatened to take the boy to a hospital to inject him by force with a drug that would cause an erection. I can't imagine a physician would agree to do that, but if this is true, I'd suggest instead that doctors consider injecting the investigators with Haldol.
A $120 beer is coming to Chicago at the end of the month. It would be perfect for pairing with New York's Douche Burger.
Over 300 city parking tickets have been issued in error because of problems implementing the Smartphone payment system. Just last week, I thought about downloading the app, but decided against doing so because it seems like there's too much room for things to go wrong. For the foreseeable future, I'll stick with hard receipts from the parking boxes.
82 people were shot in Chicago over the holiday weekend. The gunmen were mostly honor students, basically good boys who had just been turning their lives around and young men who always had a smile and a joke to cheer up others.
Another sign that Dan Gilbert is rekindling his LeBronmance.
A guy who slept during a Yankees game is suing the Yankees, ESPN and Major League Baseball for defamation because...
A former Wheaton police officer fired for watching pornography in his cruiser is fighting to receive disability pension pay.
Thomas Sommerfield was terminated earlier this year after an internal investigation showed he had been watching pornography in his cruiser, according to records obtained by the Tribune. Sommerfield, a 23-year veteran patrol officer, was among the officers who were honored last year for arresting a man in a shooting incident.
Sommerfield is claiming a psychological disability, said Richard Reimer, attorney for the pension board. Reimer would not discuss specifics of the case or comment because it is pending. In general, he said, line-of-duty disability pension benefits offer 65 percent of the officer's salary and non-duty disability pension pays out 50 percent.
Considering the things we see police get away with, could they not simply suspend this officer and save the firing for officers who commit criminal acts?
By the way, without suggesting that I know what's going on with this specific police officer, I think there could be cases of an officer who has been traumatized by a job-related experience that might lead to porn use on the job to regulate overwhelming affects. Though I don't regard porn viewing as a psychopathology, it could be a symptom of a diagnosable condition, just as many things that aren't pathological, in and of themselves, can serve symptomatic functions.
At about 5:30pm yesterday, a tourist trolley was waiting in a line of vehicles on State Street north of the traffic signal at Grand Avenue. The trolley was packed with clearly intoxicated, 20-something, white males who were hanging out the windows, loudly wuffing and chanting, USA! USA! USA! Why? Perhaps they were still smarting from the defeat by Belgium on Thursday, but chanting USA! USA! is also something young white males do when alcohol stokes their not-yet-done-with-adolescence grandiosity.
While the trolley waited in the line of vehicles, some of the young men held beers out the window, urging a middle-aged, homeless, black man at the curb to accept a beverage. When the homeless fellow approached and reached up toward the trolley windows, someone poured a beer all over him. He yelled, ASSHOLES, as the passengers in the trolley roared in hysterical laughter. Very funny, huh?