Skip to content
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.

(The Colorado Sun)   The school principal who tried to investigate student sexting and wound up being charged with child pornography has been cleared   (coloradosun.com) divider line
    More: Followup, High school, Law, Child pornography, Sex offender, Testimony, Time, Police, Sexting  
•       •       •

2611 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2023 at 11:38 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



44 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2023-01-30 5:41:48 PM  
 
2023-01-30 8:51:59 PM  
I'm amazed by how low the ceiling for human intelligence has become when it comes to authority over sex.
 
2023-01-30 11:42:03 PM  
The Whitest Kids U' Know - Get a New Daddy
Youtube iNR-x1net-A
 
2023-01-30 11:44:03 PM  
This sounds like there might be something wrong with the Colorado law.
 
2023-01-30 11:53:41 PM  

covfefe: I'm amazed by how low the ceiling for human intelligence has become when it comes to authority over sex.


While Fark is (rightfully) ruthless in criticizing school administrators in most circumstances, he was caught in a terrible position here. I don't know the specifics of this situation, but it seems that an underage girl's nudes were somehow being sent throughout the school. This is a bad situation, but it seems the only legal solution is to call the cops and let them sort it out, since police are the only ones who are legally allowed to view or collect underage nudes for evidence.

We all know how things go when the cops are involved. Calling the cops multiplies the number of problems that anyone has to deal with. The cops would find the underage nudes and might be required to refer the kids passing these nudes around to the DA for distribution of underage pornographic content. The admin realized that it's kind of dumb to give kids the "sex offender" title for life, so he stepped in. He informed police, which is why he's now fighting against the "sex offender" title. The DA seems to be incredibly dumb or some kind of zealot, which is why it's likely he would have tried to prosecute each kid as a sex offender.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography. The DA probably would have charged the young girl with that as well.

Anyway, we need to enact some common-sense reforms to these dumb laws. We also need DAs to stop having all of the zeal of the Inquisition. It's almost like they wish every kid would end up with some criminal record.
 
2023-01-30 11:53:55 PM  
"From the beginning and it still troubles me now: We had a school administrator that knowingly kept nude images of a juvenile student on his phone. So in other words, he could pull up that image whenever he wanted to, anytime a day or night," Sides said.

I know that when I want people to face 12 years in prison, that it better be for virtual charges that they didn't even do.
 
2023-01-31 12:06:18 AM  

Fano: This sounds like there might be something wrong with the Colorado law.


Article says the judge tossed the case based on his thinking that there was no evidence of deceit or concealment and no "illegal intent".

The law doesn't have any carve-outs for any of that but the case isn't being appealed so that's it.
 
2023-01-31 12:07:01 AM  
...a high school principal ... Bradley Bass, 32

.

Talk about underage.
 
2023-01-31 12:08:12 AM  

proteus_b: "From the beginning and it still troubles me now: We had a school administrator that knowingly kept nude images of a juvenile student on his phone. So in other words, he could pull up that image whenever he wanted to, anytime a day or night," Sides said.

I know that when I want people to face 12 years in prison, that it better be for virtual charges that they didn't even do.


Well, the temptation is real for him, damnit.  So it must be the same for everyone else, too.

On a side note, the principal and his wife look like politicians, the way they're posing for that photo in front of the hay bales.
 
2023-01-31 12:09:39 AM  

untoldforce: covfefe: I'm amazed by how low the ceiling for human intelligence has become when it comes to authority over sex.

While Fark is (rightfully) ruthless in criticizing school administrators in most circumstances, he was caught in a terrible position here. I don't know the specifics of this situation, but it seems that an underage girl's nudes were somehow being sent throughout the school. This is a bad situation, but it seems the only legal solution is to call the cops and let them sort it out, since police are the only ones who are legally allowed to view or collect underage nudes for evidence.

We all know how things go when the cops are involved. Calling the cops multiplies the number of problems that anyone has to deal with. The cops would find the underage nudes and might be required to refer the kids passing these nudes around to the DA for distribution of underage pornographic content. The admin realized that it's kind of dumb to give kids the "sex offender" title for life, so he stepped in. He informed police, which is why he's now fighting against the "sex offender" title. The DA seems to be incredibly dumb or some kind of zealot, which is why it's likely he would have tried to prosecute each kid as a sex offender.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography. The DA probably would have charged the young girl with that as well.

Anyway, we need to enact some common-sense reforms to these dumb laws. We also need DAs to stop having all of the zeal of the Inquisition. It's almost like they wish every kid would end up with some criminal record.


"almost"
 
2023-01-31 12:11:15 AM  

Boo_Guy: Fano: This sounds like there might be something wrong with the Colorado law.

Article says the judge tossed the case based on his thinking that there was no evidence of deceit or concealment and no "illegal intent".

The law doesn't have any carve-outs for any of that but the case isn't being appealed so that's it.


The law probably should have some sort of discretion built in rather than a blanket rule.

Note: the administrator was a dummy for trying to Scooby Doo this shiat on his own.
 
2023-01-31 12:13:47 AM  

Fano: Boo_Guy: Fano: This sounds like there might be something wrong with the Colorado law.

Article says the judge tossed the case based on his thinking that there was no evidence of deceit or concealment and no "illegal intent".

The law doesn't have any carve-outs for any of that but the case isn't being appealed so that's it.

The law probably should have some sort of discretion built in rather than a blanket rule.


Some jurisdictions do. Its usually based on time to authority notification.
 
2023-01-31 12:21:04 AM  
While I appreciate that he was trying to help... what a farking dumbass.

There is no point at which having a copy of an underage nude on your work phone would be in any way advantageous. What an incredibly stupid reaction. "I'd better save this evidence!" What the fark man, you're a principal, not Inspector Clouseau. TAKE A KID'S PHONE AND GIVE THAT TO THE COPS. If you know for a fact that a phone has illegal pron, don't farking copy it. Jesus titty-farking christ, dude!

I should be an adjunct professor somewhere keeping well-meaning dipshiats from cutting off their feet. You're a farking Idiot 100.
 
2023-01-31 12:21:38 AM  

Fano: The law probably should have some sort of discretion built in rather than a blanket rule.


Discretion leads to free thinking, and free thinking leads to communism.
 
2023-01-31 12:30:17 AM  

untoldforce: covfefe: ...This is a bad situation, but it seems the only legal solution is to call the cops and let them sort it out, since police are the only ones who are legally allowed to view or collect underage nudes for evidence.
...


Lawyer up first. Then call the cops.

Never skip the first step.
 
2023-01-31 12:33:13 AM  
No one had ever accused [principal Bradley] Bass of bad intent, but under Colorado law, knowingly possessing any explicit image of kids is child pornography, no matter the intent. Law enforcement officers investigating are one of the few exceptions to the rule.

Allowing many of Colorado's finest to enjoy a nice little side-hustle selling the pictures on the dark web, no doubt. Which is why your local police department will probably never support a rational approach to dealing with compromising pictures of the underage.

(The kids? Serves them right for being sluts. Serves their momma right too, for giving them a smartphone instead of a Bible. Momma wants someone to blame for her little Janey being a slut, tell her to go look in the mirror.

Colorado's finest obviously raised their own kids better than that. They go to church and never talk about sex. They'd never let some boy talk them into taking a photo of them topless. Never in a million years.)
 
2023-01-31 12:38:06 AM  

MikeyFuccon: No one had ever accused [principal Bradley] Bass of bad intent, but under Colorado law, knowingly possessing any explicit image of kids is child pornography, no matter the intent. Law enforcement officers investigating are one of the few exceptions to the rule.

Allowing many of Colorado's finest to enjoy a nice little side-hustle selling the pictures on the dark web, no doubt. Which is why your local police department will probably never support a rational approach to dealing with compromising pictures of the underage.

(The kids? Serves them right for being sluts. Serves their momma right too, for giving them a smartphone instead of a Bible. Momma wants someone to blame for her little Janey being a slut, tell her to go look in the mirror.

Colorado's finest obviously raised their own kids better than that. They go to church and never talk about sex. They'd never let some boy talk them into taking a photo of them topless. Never in a million years.)


Your post reads like the introductory page to some rather messed up amateur erotic fiction.

"Never in a million years," the narrator says. Then the story continues..
 
2023-01-31 12:39:26 AM  
Sounds like the DA was being a weinerface about the whole thing.
 
2023-01-31 12:50:43 AM  

stevesporn2000: nobody is kidnapping kids and raping them to make kiddie porn movies when there is plenty to be had from willing participants.


There are plenty of willing adult women willing to have sex with pretty much anyone but somehow rape still exists. Hmmm.
 
2023-01-31 12:52:46 AM  

gameshowhost: Sounds like the DA was being a weinerface about the whole thing.


Well since the DA saw the evidence, time to charge them...
 
2023-01-31 1:19:04 AM  

Cythraul: MikeyFuccon: No one had ever accused [principal Bradley] Bass of bad intent, but under Colorado law, knowingly possessing any explicit image of kids is child pornography, no matter the intent. Law enforcement officers investigating are one of the few exceptions to the rule.

Allowing many of Colorado's finest to enjoy a nice little side-hustle selling the pictures on the dark web, no doubt. Which is why your local police department will probably never support a rational approach to dealing with compromising pictures of the underage.

(The kids? Serves them right for being sluts. Serves their momma right too, for giving them a smartphone instead of a Bible. Momma wants someone to blame for her little Janey being a slut, tell her to go look in the mirror.

Colorado's finest obviously raised their own kids better than that. They go to church and never talk about sex. They'd never let some boy talk them into taking a photo of them topless. Never in a million years.)

Your post reads like the introductory page to some rather messed up amateur erotic fiction.

"Never in a million years," the narrator says. Then the story continues..


As Fark is not, in fact, your personal erotica site, I'll leave you to your own devices to finish the story.

Sad to say, I doubt it would be a particularly difficult creative writing assignment.
 
2023-01-31 1:23:24 AM  
I would have given him the benefit of the doubt, but picture of his wife standing my her man with a t-shirt that has PRAY in big block letters..
 
2023-01-31 1:27:07 AM  
Hey it's the age of "zero tolerence," what were you expecting, common sense to be applied?
 
2023-01-31 1:59:02 AM  
Wound. Now there's a word to conjure with.
 
2023-01-31 2:41:19 AM  

untoldforce: r.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography.


I've wondered if you took naked photos of yourself when you were younger, and then sold them after you turned 18, could you be charged for child porn?

Like my mom took a picture of me playing naked in the tub when I was 2. So like what if some really weird guy offered me $1,000 bucks for it? I mean, shiat, it's a thousand bucks, who cares what he does with it? I'd sell my naked baby bath pictures all day long for that kind of scratch. But something tells me some government entity might have a problem with that.
 
2023-01-31 3:11:24 AM  

untoldforce: covfefe: I'm amazed by how low the ceiling for human intelligence has become when it comes to authority over sex.

While Fark is (rightfully) ruthless in criticizing school administrators in most circumstances, he was caught in a terrible position here. I don't know the specifics of this situation, but it seems that an underage girl's nudes were somehow being sent throughout the school. This is a bad situation, but it seems the only legal solution is to call the cops and let them sort it out, since police are the only ones who are legally allowed to view or collect underage nudes for evidence.

We all know how things go when the cops are involved. Calling the cops multiplies the number of problems that anyone has to deal with. The cops would find the underage nudes and might be required to refer the kids passing these nudes around to the DA for distribution of underage pornographic content. The admin realized that it's kind of dumb to give kids the "sex offender" title for life, so he stepped in. He informed police, which is why he's now fighting against the "sex offender" title. The DA seems to be incredibly dumb or some kind of zealot, which is why it's likely he would have tried to prosecute each kid as a sex offender.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography. The DA probably would have charged the young girl with that as well.

Anyway, we need to enact some common-sense reforms to these dumb laws. We also need DAs to stop having all of the zeal of the Inquisition. It's almost like they wish every kid would end up with some criminal record.


Prosecutorial zeal is how most counties keep the outrageous budget afforded to law enforcement from bankrupting the Treasury. They really have no choice but to engage in a steady stream of court sanctioned extortion. As a consequence, prosecutors are conditioned to become psychopaths. Voters--especially Republican voters--reward this behavior so there's really no reason for it to stop.
 
2023-01-31 3:39:20 AM  

MythDragon: untoldforce: r.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography.

I've wondered if you took naked photos of yourself when you were younger, and then sold them after you turned 18, could you be charged for child porn?

Like my mom took a picture of me playing naked in the tub when I was 2. So like what if some really weird guy offered me $1,000 bucks for it? I mean, shiat, it's a thousand bucks, who cares what he does with it? I'd sell my naked baby bath pictures all day long for that kind of scratch. But something tells me some government entity might have a problem with that.


If that was legal then it would be a thousand times more difficult to convict anyone for possession, without first identifying the victim and confirming they weren't now an adult consenting to that possession. Far easier, and safer overall, to just say "don't farking do it, ever."
 
2023-01-31 4:04:04 AM  
Maybe he was doing research, like Pete Townshend.
 
2023-01-31 4:21:04 AM  

MythDragon: untoldforce: r.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography.

I've wondered if you took naked photos of yourself when you were younger, and then sold them after you turned 18, could you be charged for child porn?

Like my mom took a picture of me playing naked in the tub when I was 2. So like what if some really weird guy offered me $1,000 bucks for it? I mean, shiat, it's a thousand bucks, who cares what he does with it? I'd sell my naked baby bath pictures all day long for that kind of scratch. But something tells me some government entity might have a problem with that.


If someone offers you a grand for pictures of you naked as a toddler I suggest you run like hell.  Now you should be safe on child porn charges because simply being nude isn't inherently sexual so those pictures shouldn't be considered pornographic.  But if you go selling them or distributing them online then you may attract the attention of the police and DA.  A thousand bucks would be anywhere near worth that kind of risk.
 
2023-01-31 4:42:46 AM  
Where did the prosecution store the evidence?
 
2023-01-31 5:56:24 AM  

Neondistraction: MythDragon: untoldforce: r.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography.

I've wondered if you took naked photos of yourself when you were younger, and then sold them after you turned 18, could you be charged for child porn?

Like my mom took a picture of me playing naked in the tub when I was 2. So like what if some really weird guy offered me $1,000 bucks for it? I mean, shiat, it's a thousand bucks, who cares what he does with it? I'd sell my naked baby bath pictures all day long for that kind of scratch. But something tells me some government entity might have a problem with that.

If someone offers you a grand for pictures of you naked as a toddler I suggest you run like hell.  Now you should be safe on child porn charges because simply being nude isn't inherently sexual so those pictures shouldn't be considered pornographic.  But if you go selling them or distributing them online then you may attract the attention of the police and DA.  A thousand bucks would be anywhere near worth that kind of risk.


Depends on your country though. Any depiction of underage nudity is illegal in Australia since minors cannot provide consent for others to possess (the requirement to avoid prosecution). Though laws do vary slightly by state. Baby and young child bath pictures are therefore problematic for parents.
 
2023-01-31 6:33:17 AM  

untoldforce: covfefe: I'm amazed by how low the ceiling for human intelligence has become when it comes to authority over sex.

While Fark is (rightfully) ruthless in criticizing school administrators in most circumstances, he was caught in a terrible position here. I don't know the specifics of this situation, but it seems that an underage girl's nudes were somehow being sent throughout the school. This is a bad situation, but it seems the only legal solution is to call the cops and let them sort it out, since police are the only ones who are legally allowed to view or collect underage nudes for evidence.

We all know how things go when the cops are involved. Calling the cops multiplies the number of problems that anyone has to deal with. The cops would find the underage nudes and might be required to refer the kids passing these nudes around to the DA for distribution of underage pornographic content. The admin realized that it's kind of dumb to give kids the "sex offender" title for life, so he stepped in. He informed police, which is why he's now fighting against the "sex offender" title. The DA seems to be incredibly dumb or some kind of zealot, which is why it's likely he would have tried to prosecute each kid as a sex offender.

In some states I've read that an underage person taking nudes of themselves could also be charged with production of underage pornography. The DA probably would have charged the young girl with that as well.

Anyway, we need to enact some common-sense reforms to these dumb laws. We also need DAs to stop having all of the zeal of the Inquisition. It's almost like they wish every kid would end up with some criminal record.


I just had a conversation with SLEZE Jr. about this very topic last night.  Someone in school sends you a nudy pic?  Delete and let me know.  If you take a nudy pic and send to someone?  It could spread through the school and you could still go to jail as a perv.  SLEZE Jr was shocked, to say the least.
 
2023-01-31 7:00:38 AM  

180IQ: stevesporn2000: nobody is kidnapping kids and raping them to make kiddie porn movies when there is plenty to be had from willing participants.

It turns out that human trafficking is still a real problem.  I just found out today, thanks to the work my wife does, that there are a surprising number of 'massage parlors' in the county that move a steady stream of underage girls.  The police know. The DA knows. No one cares, apparently.  Oh, and we have at least one judge that doesn't think it's possible for a woman to be raped, which isn't helping.

We'd all like to think it's just a few random Republicans and similarly aged teens on the 'demand' side, but it's apparently big enough to support a whole farking industry.

The weird part is that the kids aren't generally kidnapped.  The industrial side is a mix of runaways and kids in the foster system, but most trafficking is done by relatives, parents included.  It's really disturbing.


Aaaand my faith in humanity is now basically in the negative. JFC......
 
2023-01-31 7:27:03 AM  

untoldforce: Anyway, we need to enact some common-sense reforms to these dumb laws. We also need DAs to stop having all of the zeal of the Inquisition. It's almost like they wish every kid would end up with some criminal record.


Welcome to today's edition of "The Cruelty is the Point".

Criminalizing self-nudes will allow cops to go into classrooms and pontificate on the Evils of Sexting, where YOU could go to JAIL and be a SEX OFFENDER FOREVER with NO FUTURE!

Come to think of it, they've taken the place of the pulpit and the terrors of Hell. Cops are our modern Invisible Sky Wizard Inquisitioners.
 
2023-01-31 8:28:01 AM  

Bandito King: While I appreciate that he was trying to help... what a farking dumbass.

There is no point at which having a copy of an underage nude on your work phone would be in any way advantageous. What an incredibly stupid reaction. "I'd better save this evidence!" What the fark man, you're a principal, not Inspector Clouseau. TAKE A KID'S PHONE AND GIVE THAT TO THE COPS. If you know for a fact that a phone has illegal pron, don't farking copy it. Jesus titty-farking christ, dude!

I should be an adjunct professor somewhere keeping well-meaning dipshiats from cutting off their feet. You're a farking Idiot 100.


You get into warrant trouble with that.
 
2023-01-31 9:15:05 AM  

Bandito King: While I appreciate that he was trying to help... what a farking dumbass.

There is no point at which having a copy of an underage nude on your work phone would be in any way advantageous. What an incredibly stupid reaction. "I'd better save this evidence!" What the fark man, you're a principal, not Inspector Clouseau. TAKE A KID'S PHONE AND GIVE THAT TO THE COPS. If you know for a fact that a phone has illegal pron, don't farking copy it. Jesus titty-farking christ, dude!

I should be an adjunct professor somewhere keeping well-meaning dipshiats from cutting off their feet. You're a farking Idiot 100.


If you took the kids phone to give to the cops, you are knowingly In possession of child porn and therefore breaking this law
 
2023-01-31 12:04:38 PM  

Another Government Employee: Bandito King: While I appreciate that he was trying to help... what a farking dumbass.

There is no point at which having a copy of an underage nude on your work phone would be in any way advantageous. What an incredibly stupid reaction. "I'd better save this evidence!" What the fark man, you're a principal, not Inspector Clouseau. TAKE A KID'S PHONE AND GIVE THAT TO THE COPS. If you know for a fact that a phone has illegal pron, don't farking copy it. Jesus titty-farking christ, dude!

I should be an adjunct professor somewhere keeping well-meaning dipshiats from cutting off their feet. You're a farking Idiot 100.

You get into warrant trouble with that.


Plus kids "I only talk to my parents". Well, until the rest of the BeerBro OfTFG Court decides otherwise.
 
2023-01-31 12:10:10 PM  
Simple nudity is not pornography.
 
2023-01-31 12:17:44 PM  
LiberalConservative:

Depends on your country though. Any depiction of underage nudity is illegal in Australia since minors cannot provide consent for others to possess (the requirement to avoid prosecution). Though laws do vary slightly by state. Baby and young child bath pictures are therefore problematic for parents.

Never understood the fascination with that..  my daughter is 12.   I dont have a single baby/toddler pic of her naked.  I have some cute tub pics, but none show anything below the equator...  I run a slide show on my PC (3 monitors, almost 200k pics).   I wouldn't want any of that showing up.
 
2023-01-31 2:07:02 PM  

bigmoneygrip: Simple nudity is not pornography.


My corporate web filter would disagree with you.
 
2023-01-31 2:17:19 PM  

untoldforce: While Fark is (rightfully) ruthless in criticizing school administrators in most circumstances, he was caught in a terrible position here. I don't know the specifics of this situation, but it seems that an underage girl's nudes were somehow being sent throughout the school. This is a bad situation, but it seems the only legal solution is to call the cops and let them sort it out, since police are the only ones who are legally allowed to view or collect underage nudes for evidence.


Yeah, but he couldn't prevent the deletion of the material.  Thus he copied it.  The basic problem is our insane strict liability standard about child pornography.

Bandito King: There is no point at which having a copy of an underage nude on your work phone would be in any way advantageous. What an incredibly stupid reaction. "I'd better save this evidence!" What the fark man, you're a principal, not Inspector Clouseau. TAKE A KID'S PHONE AND GIVE THAT TO THE COPS. If you know for a fact that a phone has illegal pron, don't farking copy it. Jesus titty-farking christ, dude!


He can't seize the cloud--and can't stop it from being deleted from elsewhere.  Copying was his only way of preserving the evidence.
 
2023-01-31 3:22:01 PM  
It's sex trafficking to tell anyone where child pornography is.
 
2023-01-31 4:23:40 PM  
Just as stupid as DAs that wanted to charge kids taking nude selfies with child porn.
 
2023-02-01 7:05:49 AM  

Derek Force: LiberalConservative:

Depends on your country though. Any depiction of underage nudity is illegal in Australia since minors cannot provide consent for others to possess (the requirement to avoid prosecution). Though laws do vary slightly by state. Baby and young child bath pictures are therefore problematic for parents.

Never understood the fascination with that..  my daughter is 12.   I dont have a single baby/toddler pic of her naked.  I have some cute tub pics, but none show anything below the equator...  I run a slide show on my PC (3 monitors, almost 200k pics).   I wouldn't want any of that showing up.


I agree. I don't get it either. But seems quite a few parents think it is cute.
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  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.