Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WAVY Virginia)   Disgusting child pornographer caught and charged for tweeting nude pictures of innocent 16-year-old girl   (wavy.com) divider line 157
    More: Interesting, innocent, child pornography, Department of Veterans Affairs, County Police  
•       •       •

18387 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Feb 2014 at 9:14 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



157 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-08 10:20:56 AM  

geek_mars: Are the cops going to track down everyone who received the photo, even if unsolicited, and charge them with possession of child pornography?


They will try their hardest.
 
2014-02-08 10:20:59 AM  

max_pooper: Prey4reign: jaylectricity: It won't be long before today's sexting teens will be tomorrows lawyers and lawmakers. It's just a transitional period, much like when blacks were first allowed to ride in the front of the bus.

Because now blacks are driving the buses?

Can't get any further to the front than that.


Oh yes you can.  Probably a black bus driver.
 
2014-02-08 10:22:04 AM  

yakmans_dad: Nudity is not pornography.


I suggest you let the police know of your collection and see what they say about it.
 
2014-02-08 10:22:21 AM  
"I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?
 
2014-02-08 10:23:39 AM  
So...what's her twitter handle?
 
2014-02-08 10:24:47 AM  

dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?


What if her photos were two years old?
 
2014-02-08 10:26:34 AM  

sendtodave: dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?

What if her photos were two years old?


Then she is well and truly farked.
 
2014-02-08 10:27:17 AM  

MechaPyx: Back in the day we'd just take away her phone and ground her for a week or two. Sheesh.



www.lostrepublic.us
 
2014-02-08 10:29:46 AM  

MechaPyx: sendtodave: dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?

What if her photos were two years old?

Then she is well and truly farked.


Yep.

Interesting, though, that a person doesn't have the right to show their own body.  I guess they don't really own it until they are 18.
 
2014-02-08 10:29:59 AM  

dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?


Holy fark.  Some retard really said that?  And allowed herself to be attributed for it?
 
2014-02-08 10:31:59 AM  

Lsherm: Kids these days have it too easy.  I remember when I first talked a girl into showing me her boobs.  There wasn't any of this picture horseshiat.  You had to find a place you could be alone together and then you really had to step up your game.  We were in my high school's boiler room - 110 degrees, dead cockroaches and cigarette butts from the janitor everywhere, and the janitor's porn collection.  It was so romantic.


Freddy?
 
2014-02-08 10:32:45 AM  
Anyway, is there any place that doesn't have totally arbitrary laws, based on moral panic or otherwise?

If I have to deal with them regardless, I might as well move (back) to somewhere where I can bride the cops.
 
2014-02-08 10:33:24 AM  
She is not a criminal, she's just a naughty girl.  A very very naughty girl.  Who needs to be administered a good spanking.
 
2014-02-08 10:33:47 AM  

wambu: Police  say the teen crossed the line of sexting to child porn because of the lewdness of the photos.


So she's a dirty, dirty girl

3.bp.blogspot.com

"Yes she is... Yes she is."
 
2014-02-08 10:34:22 AM  

markfara: So nudity = pornography and a 16-year-old is a "child"? Really?

We've really gone overboard on this sh*t. jesus. . . .


likes to  watch you masturbate but says being necked is wrong
 
2014-02-08 10:36:25 AM  

generallyso: It's quite the legal system where one person can be both the perpetrator and the victim.


And being that the state is required to provide victim services it really gets tricky there.. How does one comply with the court order to stay away from ones self..
 
2014-02-08 10:38:39 AM  

sendtodave: Anyway, is there any place that doesn't have totally arbitrary laws, based on moral panic or otherwise?

If I have to deal with them regardless, I might as well move (back) to somewhere where I can bride the cops.


Not sure making them your bride will help.  Unless you like domestic abuse with nothing being done about it because of blue line...
 
2014-02-08 10:42:35 AM  
Gah, I made the same type doth types!

I need to brink some coffee.
 
2014-02-08 10:42:59 AM  

sendtodave: MechaPyx: sendtodave: dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?

What if her photos were two years old?

Then she is well and truly farked.

Yep.

Interesting, though, that a person doesn't have the right to show their own body.  I guess they don't really own it until they are 18.


Unless there is a draft.
 
2014-02-08 10:47:56 AM  
surely the best interest of this girl are in mind by exploding this to the level where her photos are layed out in a courtroom for her and everyone else. thats healthy
 
2014-02-08 10:56:10 AM  
From Wikipedia:

"The age of consent in Virginia is 18, with a close-in-age exception that allows teenagers aged 15 to 17 to engage in sexual acts but only with a partner younger than 18."

So she is old enough to masturbate, barely.
 
2014-02-08 10:56:42 AM  

vygramul: yakmans_dad: Nudity is not pornography.

I suggest you let the police know of your collection and see what they say about it.


There really seems to be a confusion here beyond the usual facetiousness.

Pornography demands the depiction of a sexual act. The body isn't pornographic.

(And breast feeding isn't  a sexual act. To nip that in the bud, so to speak, since that tangent is often mentioned.)
 
2014-02-08 10:57:21 AM  

MechaPyx: sendtodave: dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?

What if her photos were two years old?

Then she is well and truly farked.


Yep - in fact, I believe it's happened where an adult had naked pictures of themselves and hadn't even distributed them.
 
2014-02-08 11:02:14 AM  

yakmans_dad: vygramul: yakmans_dad: Nudity is not pornography.

I suggest you let the police know of your collection and see what they say about it.

There really seems to be a confusion here beyond the usual facetiousness.

Pornography demands the depiction of a sexual act. The body isn't pornographic.

(And breast feeding isn't  a sexual act. To nip that in the bud, so to speak, since that tangent is often mentioned.)


Like I said - feel free to test the system. *Parents* have lost custody of children for a month while untangling the legal hassles from having bathtub pics of their kids. If you were a stranger to the kids, I wouldn't want money riding on your staying out of jail.
 
2014-02-08 11:02:37 AM  

Lsherm: Kids these days have it too easy.  I remember when I first talked a girl into showing me her boobs.  There wasn't any of this picture horseshiat.  You had to find a place you could be alone together and then you really had to step up your game.  We were in my high school's boiler room - 110 degrees, dead cockroaches and cigarette butts from the janitor everywhere, and the janitor's porn collection.  It was so romantic.


Man, I really miss the 70's.
 
2014-02-08 11:03:57 AM  

MechaPyx: Back in the day we'd just take away her phone and ground her for a week or two. Sheesh.


that's a relatively recent "back in the day" - you do realize that most farkers didn't have cell phones at that age, because...in 1995, only 1 in 10 people had a cell phone, and those people were business people (typically) who were paying out the ass for it?  And a 16yo in 1995 would only be 34 now.

"back in the day" indeed.

//harumph
//get off my lawn!
 
2014-02-08 11:06:01 AM  
What happens if she had used her head shot and photo shopped it with someone else's nude body who was over 18 yo?
 
2014-02-08 11:06:50 AM  

wildcardjack: I just want someone to do this to Justin Bieber. You know he has nude selfies from when he was 16 on a computer or cell phone of some sort in his possession. THAT would be enough to deport him and get him banned from entering most countries.


Sadly the Canadians have stated that much like Rafael "Ted" Cruz, they don't want him back either.
 
2014-02-08 11:07:09 AM  

IamAwake: MechaPyx: Back in the day we'd just take away her phone and ground her for a week or two. Sheesh.

that's a relatively recent "back in the day" - you do realize that most farkers didn't have cell phones at that age, because...in 1995, only 1 in 10 people had a cell phone, and those people were business people (typically) who were paying out the ass for it?  And a 16yo in 1995 would only be 34 now.

"back in the day" indeed.

//harumph
//get off my lawn!


Yeah yeah. Back in the day we'd take her polaroid camera away instead of a cell phone.
 
2014-02-08 11:07:28 AM  

yakmans_dad: vygramul: yakmans_dad: Nudity is not pornography.

I suggest you let the police know of your collection and see what they say about it.

There really seems to be a confusion here beyond the usual facetiousness.

Pornography demands the depiction of a sexual act. The body isn't pornographic.

(And breast feeding isn't  a sexual act. To nip that in the bud, so to speak, since that tangent is often mentioned.)


OK.  And good luck with that defense in court.

And they will still bring you up in possession of child porn, even if the children were only nude, and not doing anything sexual.  Because they can.

Just like they will bring you up on lewdity charges if you are walking around your house naked with the windows open, and some kid sees your dong.  Because they can.

Your limp dong is porn.

There are enough prosecutors and enough judges out there that would say any nudity is porn.  And enough of the general population agrees.
 
2014-02-08 11:07:52 AM  
Burn her!
 
2014-02-08 11:08:23 AM  
That'll teach her to show off her raisins!
 
2014-02-08 11:08:50 AM  

oukewldave: AngryDragon: "A school resource officer was notified, and spoke with the teen and her mother. "

The schools have officially gone full retard.  WTF?

Not just the schools, the idiot who decided they needed to notify the school resource officer is also retarded.  Just rub one out, talk behind her back, and call it a day.  That's the end of it.


She was probably ugly, that is why they notified the school resource officer.
 
2014-02-08 11:10:24 AM  

TeddyRooseveltsMustache: That'll teach her to show off her raisins!


Raisins are nice. I'm more of a marshmallow man my damn self.
 
2014-02-08 11:10:36 AM  
We need to see the pictures in order to determine if they were actually pornographic.
 
2014-02-08 11:11:25 AM  
There is no better way of teaching young women about responsibility and modesty than to make the register as a sex offender for the rest of their lives, and take away their ability to be around children.
 
2014-02-08 11:11:31 AM  

vygramul: yakmans_dad: vygramul: yakmans_dad: Nudity is not pornography.

I suggest you let the police know of your collection and see what they say about it.

There really seems to be a confusion here beyond the usual facetiousness.

Pornography demands the depiction of a sexual act. The body isn't pornographic.

(And breast feeding isn't  a sexual act. To nip that in the bud, so to speak, since that tangent is often mentioned.)

Like I said - feel free to test the system. *Parents* have lost custody of children for a month while untangling the legal hassles from having bathtub pics of their kids. If you were a stranger to the kids, I wouldn't want money riding on your staying out of jail.



I didn't believe you but a cursory Google search says that you don't want to mess with Texas. (Alhough the dates of the articles are from 2008 and 2009. Things may have changed.) But, to be fair to Texas, that prosecutor seems to be the Texas equivalent to Sherriff Joe.

So, I will amend my statement with an implicit Texas footnote. I just imagine a map where the edge of the known world is the Texas border and in the white space beyond that in 17th century script, "Here Be Assholes".
 
2014-02-08 11:13:19 AM  
The great thing about scaring the shiat out of teens is that you really don't have to do it all that long - just long enough to amplify their natural reticence until they're eighteen years old and one day, when they can stop being "precious little snowflakes" and can be held to economic pain and moral slander like everyone else.   

/The best part of being a teen was all the free sex.
// When everyone got a job, lots of that just went away.
 
2014-02-08 11:15:50 AM  

Alphakronik: There is no better way of teaching young women about responsibility and modesty than to make the register as a sex offender for the rest of their lives, and take away their ability to be around children.


What happens if a female sex offender gets pregnant and has a child?  Isn't that like dividing by zero?
 
2014-02-08 11:17:05 AM  

AngryDragon: Alphakronik: There is no better way of teaching young women about responsibility and modesty than to make the register as a sex offender for the rest of their lives, and take away their ability to be around children.

What happens if a female sex offender gets pregnant and has a child?  Isn't that like dividing by zero?


I'm guessing that she gets to keep it until it is born.
 
2014-02-08 11:18:01 AM  

jaylectricity: It won't be long before today's sexting teens will be tomorrows lawyers and lawmakers. It's just a transitional period, much like when blacks were first allowed to ride in the front of the bus.


"The Internet is evil" is basically "video games are evil" 20 years ago and "heavy metal is evil" 30 years ago.

People who are in the generation using those things say "meh".
 
2014-02-08 11:18:05 AM  

sendtodave: MechaPyx: sendtodave: dangelder: "I don't think she should be charged with child pornography, because she is a child herself, but if she was 18 or older of course," said parent Emily Altman.

But if she was 18 or older of course, what? It wouldn't be child pornography then, would it?

What if her photos were two years old?

Then she is well and truly farked.

Yep.

Interesting, though, that a person doesn't have the right to show their own body.  I guess they don't really own it until they are 18.




Nudity is evil if the person is under 18.

18 and over, nudity is immoral.

There is a reason the Michelangelo had to paint over all the naked people and cherubs he put on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
 
2014-02-08 11:18:15 AM  
/The best part of being a teen was all the free sex.
// When everyone got a job, lots of that just went away.


I don't think it was jobs. I think it's the realization -- around age 22 or 23 --  that Sex isn't Everything (or even all that much) and do you really want to get intimate with bozos.
 
2014-02-08 11:21:08 AM  

farkeruk: jaylectricity: It won't be long before today's sexting teens will be tomorrows lawyers and lawmakers. It's just a transitional period, much like when blacks were first allowed to ride in the front of the bus.

"The Internet is evil" is basically "video games are evil" 20 years ago and "heavy metal is evil" 30 years ago.

People who are in the generation using those things say "meh".


Don't forget "Comic books are evil" from 60 years ago.
 
2014-02-08 11:21:49 AM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: There is a reason the Michelangelo had to paint over all the naked people and cherubs he put on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.


David would like a word with you.
 
2014-02-08 11:24:40 AM  
This case is a good argument for more discretionary laws.  The only problem with those is you must rely on the discretion of the police and the prosecutor.  As with everything you have a few uptight cops who would do it just to punish the 'whore'.  The prosecutor on the other hand doesn't care he just wants that plus on added to his convictions.

/ethics isn't about honesty its about appearances with lawyers.
 
2014-02-08 11:31:02 AM  
I remember back in the AOL days there was some website that listed known "sex offenders". It was like a Google map type thing and if you moused over the tag it gave the names and address of the said offender. At the time I lived across the street from a high school. I could not believe there were like 20 within a several mile radius of my house and hundreds throughout the city.. I sat my daughter down (She was 14 or 15 at the time) down and explained that this is why she was to come home right after school and not hang out at the park or Dunkin Doughnuts. It was years later I found out that urinating in public (not on a bus, but behind a tree) got you classified as a sex offender. It's become a farkin witch hunt plain and simple. I wonder how much money the state makes from this shiate.
 
2014-02-08 11:32:04 AM  
So we're all agreed, then, we let children drive cars and allow them a chance to hit us and kill us on the roads.

What I'm saying is: Don't give out driver's licenses until people turn 18. :)  I want the "kids" off the road.

This is no joke! I dislike having to share the road with children who should be home playing with Duplo building blocks.

/heh
 
2014-02-08 11:33:19 AM  

yakmans_dad: vygramul: yakmans_dad: Nudity is not pornography.

I suggest you let the police know of your collection and see what they say about it.

There really seems to be a confusion here beyond the usual facetiousness.

Pornography demands the depiction of a sexual act. The body isn't pornographic.

(And breast feeding isn't  a sexual act. To nip that in the bud, so to speak, since that tangent is often mentioned.)


Pornography is in the mind of the beholder, same as beauty. A thing is not pornography, only in the mind.
If some money grubbing a$$wipe claiming to KNOW GOD has told/convinced you to hate your body "because god said so", then pornography, pornography everywhere!

pity the fool
 
2014-02-08 11:36:40 AM  

The One True TheDavid: From Wikipedia:

"The age of consent in Virginia is 18, with a close-in-age exception that allows teenagers aged 15 to 17 to engage in sexual acts but only with a partner younger than 18."

So she is old enough to masturbate, barely.


BTW, masturbation begins in the womb.
I'd show you the ultrasound, but that is illegal.
 
Displayed 50 of 157 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report