I understand not wanting to create new crimes of Teen Sexting in the VA Code (see editorial below) BUT the problem is the wording in the code for child pornography production, dissemination and viewing/possession includes Teen Sexting, like it or not.
What if at the next G.A. session (January 2015) there is a proposal to the various Child Pornography statutes to add a line excluding Teen-to-Teen “Sexting”? This way over zealous Commonwealth Attorney’s and Magistrates don’t overstep in this area.
Such a disclaimer/exclusion in code should have an age gap allowance (4 years) for age appropriate relationships.
This would stop any stubborn House or Senate members who have fought past Sexting proposals based on the claim it would open the door for 50 year old perverts to take advantage of our children.
AND some how we need to include the 18 and 19 year olds. I know they are adults in the eyes of the law but it is completely appropriate for an 18 year old to date a 16 year old and a 19 year old to date a 17 year old. If the 18 and 19 year olds have not threatened, forced or intimidated the younger person, if they have not extorted them and if they have not forwarded the image on to others or posted it on the Internet then they should not face felony child pornography charges either. One other point to consider is the now 18 or 19 year old may have sent or received the images when they were minors but when the images are finally discovered months or years later they are legal adults, the time in which the images were sent or received should be the time considered by the state.
I hope the ACLU-VA will consider supporting a campaign to amend Virginia Child Pornography statutes to exclude consensual Teen Sexting so cases like the
one will not
result in felony charges and the possible public label of Sex Offender. Manassas
By Rob Poggenklass
Virginians have expressed justifiable outrage at a clear abuse of power. Prosecutors in
have charged a
17-year-old boy with felony distribution of child pornography after he
allegedly sent sexual images of himself to a 15-year-old girl. Though the girl
also apparently sent explicit images of herself, she was not charged.
Incredibly, law enforcement did not stop there. Officials took the atrocious
step of getting a warrant to take photos of the boy’s erect penis. Fortunately,
public indignation (or common sense) prompted police and the prosecutor to
abandon the search. They have not yet abandoned the prosecution, however. The
boy’s trial is set for August. Manassas
While the media understandably focused outrage on the disgusting attempt by law enforcement to photograph a teenager’s genitals, just as outrageous are the two felony charges still pending against the boy, for manufacturing and distributing child pornography. These are the same charges that, earlier this year, commonwealth’s attorneys told a House of Delegates committee likely would never be filed in a sexting case.
Possession or distribution of child pornography is and always should be a crime. The problem is, laws against child pornography exist to protect children from abuse, not to turn children into felons. As the
case demonstrates, subjecting a
17-year-old to felony child pornography charges is worse than the sexting
itself. Few Virginians believe that such actions should make a child a felon
and result in a lifetime on the sex offender registry, yet both are distinct
A teenager who engages in sexting should have a conversation with an adult about the potential consequences of that risky behavior. But
’s legislators should leave those
conversations to parents and educators, not prosecutors and judges. Virginia
Earlier this year, the General Assembly considered a bill that would make sexting a new crime in
The rationale is that, if prosecutors can charge teens with a misdemeanor,
they’ll be less likely to bring felony child pornography charges against teens
who sext. Aside from the numerous problems that arise when creating any new
criminal offense, this legislation ignores one of the reasons Virginians are so
incensed about this case: sexting between teens is dumb, risky behavior, but it
should not be a crime. We cannot drag children into court for every poor
decision they make. Virginia
Just three years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a common-sense decision articulating why the justice system treats children differently. Children “generally are less mature and responsible than adults,” they “often lack the experience, perspective, and judgment to recognize and avoid” bad choices, and they “are more vulnerable and susceptible to outside pressures than adults,” the court said. These three points make clear why the solution to sexting lies in our classrooms and living rooms, not in our courtrooms.
Consider that a juvenile charged with a Class 2 misdemeanor still faces the possibility of six months of incarceration and registration as a sex offender, not to mention the humiliation of a criminal trial. In a recent study of the juvenile justice system, journalist Nell Bernstein found that “the greatest predictor that a kid would grow up to be a criminal was being incarcerated in a juvenile facility.” Because our juvenile justice system has strayed far from its century-old purpose of diverting children from traditional criminal punishments and encouraging rehabilitation and has become nothing more than a junior varsity prison system, parents, educators, prosecutors and law enforcement should work together to find a solution for the sexting problem that doesn’t involve passing a new law to criminalize poor judgment.
The temptation is strong for a government to criminalize every dumb action a person can take. But especially when it comes to the actions of children, legislators must let parents, educators and prosecutors do their jobs.
Commonwealth’s attorneys must be expected to act ethically and to exercise sound judgment in deciding which cases are worth prosecuting. Every prosecutor has professional, ethical responsibilities that go beyond those of other lawyers. As the Virginia State Bar’s Professional Guidelines make clear, “A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate.” Commonwealth’s attorneys have broad authority to decide which crimes to prosecute, and which ones to drop. A prosecutor’s first and most important task is to see that justice is done. Justice is not served when a prosecutor brings a charge that turns a teenager who engages in sexting into a criminal.
Bottom line — sexting is bad and risky behavior, but turning kids into criminals is the wrong solution.