Pornography

George Skumanick's Provocative Pose

|

This week a federal appeals court upheld a preliminary injunction preventing a Pennsylvania prosecutor from forcing girls into "education and counseling" by threatening to prosecute them on child pornography charges for appearing in "sexting" photos. The case began in October 2008, when school officials in Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, found nude and semi-nude pictures of teenaged girls on several students' cell phones. The matter was referred to Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr., who sent letters to the parents of about 20 students who either had appeared in the photos or had them on their phones, inviting them to participate in "a six to nine month program which focuses on education and counseling." Among other things, the program involved writing essays of self-criticism "explaining why you are here," "what you did," "why it was wrong," who was victimized by it, and how it "affect[ed] the victim, the school, [and] the community." Skumanick told the parents that "participation in the program is voluntary"—except that students who did not get  with the program would face felony charges of possessing or distributing child pornography. Not surprisingly, most of the students enrolled in Skumanick's re-education sessions. But the mothers of three girls sued him in federal court, arguing that his threat violated their 14th Amendment rights to direct the upbringing of their children and their daughters' First Amendment rights by compelling them to say things they did not believe. A federal judge, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail, issued a preliminary injunction in March 2009, and on Wednesday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit upheld that decision.

Although the 3rd Circuit's ruling does not hinge on whether the cell phone pictures did in fact constitute child pornography, the theory behind Skumanick's prosecution threat is worth noting because it shows why he never should have been in the position to make such decisions. (The voters of Wyoming County, who booted him out of office while the case was on appeal, apparently agreed.) While one of the plaintiffs appeared topless in a towel, the other two, 12 and 13 at the time, were shown from the waist up wearing opaque white bras, one of them talking on the phone, the other flashing a peace sign. Although their parents thought the girls were just goofing around, Skumanick explained that they were posed "provocatively" and therefore had participated in the production of child pornography. Likewise another girl who was photographed in a bathing suit. Skumanick refused to explain the legal test for provocativeness, so presumably it depended on his own subjective reaction to the photographs, which says more about him than it does about the girls' intent in posing for the pictures. In any event, the 3rd Circuit noted, "appearing in a photograph provides no evidence as to whether that person possessed or transmitted the photo," so Skumanick did not have probable cause to charge the girls. Hence the girls and their mothers had a strong case that his threatened prosecution amounted to an illegal act of retaliation for the exercise of their constitutional rights.

Legal issues aside, the case illustrates how sexting drives government officials to absurd lengths, always (even in cases of actual prosecution) for the sake of teaching kids a lesson and saving them from themselves, even when the lesson causes more damage than a risqué photo ever could. The 3rd Circuit's decision is here (PDF). Radley Balko discussed the case in a January column. More on sexting, including "Anatomy of a Child Pornographer," Nancy Rommelmann's eye-opening July 2009 story for Reason, here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Gay Dutch Genocidaires: A Warning From the Recent Past

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I think that a lot of the problem here is that the legal system does not have any way to acknowledge that teenagers are not children (they are not adults either, but they really do not belong in the same category as children, particularly when it comes to sex). There is nothing pathological (in general) about teen sexuality, but the way the laws are set up in regard to minors and sex, it winds up being treated as such in cases like this.

    1. The legal incoherence just takes my breath away. How can a minor, who’s presumed to be incapable of giving consent in sexual matters, be legally liable for (or even capable of) “victimizing” him or herself?

      1. Well, you see, there is this thing called “legal reasoning”…. I know, I know…Legal reasoning sounds as fucking stupid as legal math, legal addition, the legal laws of thermodynamics. But hey, these morons have carved out their own way of thinking.

        1. The type of reasoning involved is, metaphorically, dragging the pivot foot.

    2. There is nothing pathological (in general) about teen sexuality

      But adults’ reaction to teen sexuality is completely, undeniably, epitomously (sp?), pathological.

    3. “The type of reasoning involved is, metaphorically, dragging the pivot foot.” Thats correct

  2. the case illustrates how sexting drives government officials to absurd lengths, always (even in cases of actual prosecution) for the sake of teaching kids a lesson and saving them from themselves, even when the lesson causes more damage than a risqu? photo ever could.

    Maybe the girls could be placed in the prison cells of actual rapists and child molesters overnight. That would teach them a lesson they wouldn’t soon forget.

    And the DA could watch, and take pictures. For evidence.

    1. I really agree with you Jacob Sullum! I mean this kind of atrocities has always been there in many schools and colleges and even to the most developed countries where they say they are civilized. Besides, what makes these developed countries even more civilized is that their government’s refusal to take legal actions against these people!,its high time that the Government should play its part. I do hope that these incidents won’t happen in the future through grueling this person with the maximum punishment possible!

  3. I am a proud graduate of Tunkhannock Elementary and Middle schools and went to school with this lard bucket’s younger siblings. I would be remiss if I failed to suggest that the family is pure Appalachia.

    All you need to know about Skumanick, from his re-election web-site:

    These important life lessons of hard work and fair play helped George become his family’s first college graduate, and he takes these qualities with him to work in the DA’s office every day.

  4. Skumanick refused to explain the legal test for provocativeness, so presumably it depended on his own subjective reaction to the photographs, which says more about him than it does about the girls’ intent in posing for the pictures.

    I’ve been dealing with this issue in my own household. LEO went through my daughter’s pictures on myspace and was most appalled at a head shot in which she had tape on her mouth. I thought it kind of looked dumb but… silly me….for not looking at my daughter through a sexualised lens. He said this was “highly suggestive.” Well, yeah, highly suggestive if your a fucking pervert.

    My instinct tells me that the pedos aren’t in the bushes hiding, they have badges or are called teacher.

    1. My instinct tells me that the pedos aren’t in the bushes hiding, they have badges or are called teacher.

      This is actually a very important point. What happened when a class of people–namely priests–had unsupervised access to young children? Their ranks became filled with…dudes who like to abuse young children. It’s so obvious that it’s ridiculous, but NO ONE (basically) even considered it until it exploded.

      So let’s see…if you were into looking at teenage girls, what job would you take in today’s world? Maybe high school teacher? Maybe a cop or DA who investigates sexting?

      1. Well, the ranks of priests were required to be filled by people who took an oath of chastity, resulting in some massively sexually frustrated people, so that too ought to have been a warning sign to those not blind to human sexuality.

        1. Well, the ranks of Congress were required to be filled by people who took an oath to uphold the Constitution, resulting in some massively financially frustrated people, so that too ought to have been a warning sign to those not blind to human greed.

          Cast the plank from your own eye before you seek to remove the speck from others’ eyes, prolefeed. You anti-chastity hypocrites expect no one to make the connection between encouraging teen promiscuity, encouraging adult promiscuity, and encouraging adults and teens to be promiscuous with each other, but the perverts have already made that connection, and so have the teens’ moral guardians; essentially, everybody but you pot-headed libertines.

          Your response when there’s a scandal is to attack the guardians and their morals. So what does that tell us about whose side you’re on, prolefeed–or should I say–you freakin’ perv!?

          1. pot-headed libertines.

          2. Incidentally, don’t think this means I agree with George Skumanick Jr. at all; he’s on the perverts’ side too, as anyone can see from his finding an underage girl “provocative” just for being in a swimsuit. You and he and all the other perverts trying to pollute our kids’ minds with this crap ought to be locked up together in maximum security prisons with the biggest and foulest-smelling bisexual rapists anyone can find.

            1. your shooting for punishment?

              1. This is a really good read for me. Must agree that you are one of the coolest bloggers I ever saw. Thanks for posting this useful information. This was just what I was on looking for. I’ll come back to this blog for sure clasamente !

            2. I don’t think anything for it,.

    2. And my eyes were rolling when I read that a girl in a swimsuit was considered “provocative”. I think society would be better if these government nonces were thrown in jail.

      1. Now, now, they haven’t committed a crime (yet) (OK, that we know of). But, having stated publicly that they find teenagers in swimsuits provocative, they are clearly the kind of sexual deviants who should be put on the sex offenders (well, soon, anyway) database.

        1. Maybe I’ve been reading TV Tropes too much, but if may copy and paste from the article “You Keep Using That Word”:

          Pedophilia is specifically a sexual preference for prepubescent children, whether acted on or not.

          Any man who looks at a picture of a girl in a swimsuit (or a girl with tape (?) over her mouth) and proclaims “this is provocative” is a nonce. People who believe “sexting” between teenagers constitutes child pornography are nonces. Have I made that clear enough?

          1. I agree; toss all those government whores in the slammer! They are the very perverts they pretend to be attacking, which is why they want so much power over those teenagers. Really, how hard can it be to see what they’ll do next with that kind of power? “If you don’t spend the night with me, kid, this picture of you is going out to everybody’s cell phones from yours. We both know what will happen to you and your parents after that!”

            I should point out, though, that my browser’s spell-checker fails to recognize both “hebephilia” and “ephebophilia” as legitimate words, even though those are the (more) proper words for an attraction to pubescent and post-pubescent children. Somebody definitely needs to fix this in the next edition of Mozilla Firefox.

            1. you are too obvious.

          2. Whats the difference between sexting…and passing notes to catch up under the bleachers later? Or playing spin the bottle, or ” if you show me yours, I’ll show you mine?”

            1. Sexting makes a record of the naughty behavior that can’t easily be unmade. Those other things are probably pretty memorable to the people involved, but they aren’t in the form of files that can be infinitely copied and spread all over the internet for anybody to see.

              1. really, no difference in intent. It makes me think about that scene in Demolition Man, when Sly thinks they are going to have sex and finds out it is without body contact. Sexting is just a step in that direction.

    3. That would be hilarious if it weren’t so creepy. Tape over her mouth? Really? Jesus.

    4. “” LEO went through my daughter’s pictures on myspace… “”

      And why was a LEO doing this?

    5. Does the tape suggest she doesn’t give head? How is that provocative?

      1. Or does it suggest that she wouldn’t be able to talk about her feelings or where the “relationship” was going — OK, that would be kinda provocative. 😉

      2. Tape suggests being silenced, usually as a political statement (ironically enough).

        Cops around the world are often sexually excited by domination, political repression, and violence against citizens, especially weaker, meeker, and more sexually violable citizens like women and teenage girls.

        While not surprising, you would think they would eventually realize that this fetish isn’t mainstream and juries won’t understand that footage of tweens being tasered repeatedly is the equivalent of kiddie porn.

  5. “…arguing that his threat violated their 14th Amendment rights to direct the upbringing of their children and their daughters’…

    This one always drives me nuts.

    Just for the record, parents have a right to direct the upbringing of their children regardless of whether they have that right legally via the Fourteenth Amendment or any other amendment.

    It’s kind of amusing, actually, when prosecutors run into this kind of thing, when the semantics of those artificial constructions they call “legal rights” run into rights, the real thing. …and everyone seems to understand the difference except them.

    1. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

      Yeah, I know. That one’s dead.

      1. It’s still my favorite though. Always will be!

        It says it right there plain and simple–there are these rights in law we’re gonna talk about, but they’re only a shadow of the real thing. …so don’t get confused, m-kay?

        Gotta love that one!

        1. So you’re talking about God-given rights?

          Or natural rights that are so transcendently obvious that they exist despite the failure of any authority (or indeed most individual citizens) to recognize them?

          Good luck on getting agreement about what those are.

          1. I’ve come to think of rights as something of a social adaptation. …that’s kinda my own personal explanation, anyway. They certainly seem to have given us an advantage vis a vis the Nazis or the Soviets.

            At any rate, we may not all agree on what they are, exactly, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. And I think this may be a case in point…

            “…the theory behind Skumanick’s prosecution threat is worth noting because it shows why he never should have been in the position to make such decisions. (The voters of Wyoming County, who booted him out of office while the case was on appeal, apparently agreed.)”

            This prosecutor seems to have thought parental rights were something that only existed in law. Just because he didn’t know there was a third rail there, doesn’t mean it didn’t exist.

            It electrocuted him anyway, didn’t it?

            1. I’ve come to think of rights as something of a social adaptation. …that’s kinda my own personal explanation, anyway. They certainly seem to have given us an advantage vis a vis the Nazis or the Soviets.

              Not good enough. If you’re contending that rights evolve, these government predators can easily point out that their “right” to decide what’s kiddy porn and what isn’t and to punish you and your kids accordingly has “evolved” from our society, just as the “right to free education” evolved from our society (and has since “evolved” into the compulsory schooling laws). If you go trying to derive “ought” from “is” that way, you’ll discover you don’t really have any rights at all.

              The Communist and Fascist societies ultimately collapsed, yes, but I should remind you that (A) our own societies are headed for collapse under the welfare states that “evolved” from them; (B) natural selection does not necessarily favor any of the behaviors we consider noble or heroic; (C) those immoral societies stood a reasonably good chance of corrupting and destroying ours in their time, especially the Soviet Union which stood for some people’s entire lifetimes; and (D) any morality derived from society is ultimately just a fallible human construction that anyone sufficiently intelligent or (supposedly) “evolved” enough to realize how hollow it is can and will easily circumvent.

              I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: all atheist morality is bullshit. In a universe bereft of divine direction, the only “right” is what you can get away with doing and the only “wrong” is what you can’t. e.g. in an atheist universe, Stalin is in the right because he got away with oppressing his people and died in his bed instead of being executed by a firing squad, while his many foes are wrong because they didn’t get away with opposing his regime and got shot for it. Any criticism after that is irrelevant to what was right or wrong for Stalin and his opponents to do because they aren’t around to appreciate anyone’s opinion of it anymore.

  6. the theory behind Skumanick’s prosecution threat is worth noting because it shows why he never should have been in the position to make such decisions. (The voters of Wyoming County, who booted him out of office while the case was on appeal, apparently agreed.)

    Apparently Jacob failed to get the memo that voting is useless and libertarian issues can only be advanced by running crying to mama in the form of the courts. </sarcasm>

    You know what will discourage prosecutors from pulling stunts such as this? Voters kicking them out of office. Not adverse court decisions.

    1. I’ll take both. I don’t think you need to choose one or the other.

      1. I was mainly criticizing the smattering of Reason writers who claim that voting is pointless at best and immoral at worst. Doherty, Mangu-Ward, and the rest of the usual suspects.

        1. It takes a combination of those things; also of public protests something like what the Tea Parties are doing. Opinion polls are easily rigged to say what politicians want to hear, but it’s harder for them not to get the message when we’re heckling them at a speech or shouting at them through their office windows.

    2. Works so well in Mississippi and Maricopa County.

  7. Skumanick refused to explain the legal test for provocativeness, so presumably it depended on his own subjective reaction to the photographs, which says more about him than it does about the girls’ intent in posing for the pictures

    I don’t think that the pictures in which no privates are made public can be called “child porn,” but I also think that you can generally tell what the subject of a posed photo is trying to convey. 13 year olds posing in their bras might be trying to be provactive. Again, I don’t think it’s a federal case, but my 13 year old would be grounded and never have cell privileges again.

    1. I also think that you can generally tell what the subject of a posed photo is trying to convey

      This can be a lot more subjective than you might think …

  8. I still don’t like that the school officials, detectives and Skumanick aren’t on the sex offenders list for having been looking at phone-based child pornography. The perverts.

    1. Nice argument by the way. I guess no one wants any noise that will come from this person and his surrounding. essay writing service

  9. Really, to be considered pornography, a picture should at least have some explicit genital content, if not people actually fucking. These photos probably are properly considered provocative, but that really shouldn’t be sufficient to meet any standard of what qualifies as pornography.

    1. I believe the definition of pornography is anything that warms the nether regions of a cop or DA.

      1. Right. Either that or the closely related “I know it when I see it” standard.

      2. If that’s the definition of pornography (and I guess it is) what does it say about the man who’s first response to seeing a photograph of a girl with tape over her mouth (I really hope that story isn’t true) is “that’s pornography”!

    2. If an adult were taking and distributing topless photos of 13-year-old girls, child porn prosecution would definitely be warranted. Do you disagree with this?

      1. In many places, breasts are much less sexualized than in the US, so it’s by no means guaranteed that tween boobies are porn (depends on where the pics were taken and whether they were some sort of sexy pose or just day-to-day life a la National Geographic).

        Some 13-year-olds can make babies, at which point biology says they’re young adults — different legal regimes might extend that line (or, rarely, pull it back), but once we get beyond science it’s pretty damn subjective. In a society where a 13-year-old could work full time at a factory or farm or serve in the military, it would be strange to suggest that topless photos of a 13-year-old were unusually exploitative. Unusually boring, maybe.

        Moreover, in certain contexts, even in our society, pictures of breasts are not sexualized. If a police officer was taking pictures of cigarette burns on a sexually-abused 13-year-old’s breasts for evidence and eventual distribution to a prosecutor and jury, does that mean that he (or she!) is sexually exploiting the victim?

        Granted, none of these cases were what you meant. But “prosecution would definitely be warranted” is overstating the case.

        1. The special cases you mention would be legitimate affirmative defenses (ie, they are presumed not to apply and the defendant must prove that they do). If the prosecution has to prove that the pictures were not taken in Somalia in every child pornography case, the law will effectively have become void due to the impossibility of convicting anyone.

          So in a superficial sense, you have a point, just as a person who objects to the statement “it is wrong to kill children” because that would cover collateral damage to children living in enemy military installations during wartime has a point.

        2. I should add that I was responding to the poster who claimed that explicit sexual activity was necessary to make a picture child pornography.

  10. Even if the photos were indisputably pornographic, the very idea of prosecuting minors for distributing pornographic images of themselves is beyond ridiculous. The putative reason for the child pornography ban is to prevent the exploitation of children by others. It makes no sense to claim that a child is exploiting him- or herself.

    1. I exploited myself at least five times a day when I was that age.

    2. I’m in favor of ordering all the pictures destroyed and turning over all matters of punishment for such misbehavior to the moral guardians of the teen in question (her parents, or anybody else who can legally claim her as a dependent on his tax forms). Anyone who keeps the pictures after that can be prosecuted as a sex offender, while the moral guardians can decide what lesson is to be taught the errant teenager.

      If it were my daughter sending out naked pictures of herself? She’s grounded for a week and I’m impounding her cell phone for a month. If I find pictures of the school slut in nothing but her underwear on my son’s cell phone? Same punishment. Second-time offenders? This time she’s grounded for a month and I’m taking away the cell phone for the rest of the year. If my son got a naughty picture but immediately deleted it? He gets a short and stern lecture that he needs to drop her from his lists and maybe get some new friends.

  11. Just for the record, parents have a right to direct the upbringing of their children regardless of whether they have that right legally via the Fourteenth Amendment or any other amendment.

    In order for a lawsuit to be cognizable under the federal statute which here authorized suit, 42 United States Code ? 1983, there must be a deprivation of federal constitutional or statutory rights committed by a person who acts under color of state law. Identification of the federal right, including identification of the source thereof, is a necessary part of determining whether such a lawsuit can go forward.

  12. I’m not that surprised by this judgement. And in my option the children are not that clear all of blame. I would personnaly not excuse them, but make them understand that there are some rules not to break.

    Scrabble Word Finder

    1. how would you accept such a judgment , suppose on of these girls is from your family , will you accept this judgment as well , i doubt in that .
      router wireless reviews

  13. If teaching a child a lesson on how to not get in trouble for sexting, “saving themselves from themselves” (as the author stated) but in doing so you actually cause the child more trouble than a risque photo ever cound, Then what exactly are you teaching your children? I mean seriously? I would like a response from someone in support of this methodology who actually has children that fall in the at ‘risk age’ for this. I probably would get many response because those people probably don’t care enough about their kids to so much as click a mouse and make their own voice heard, but if there is a few of you that know how to pick up a keyboard I would love to hear from you.

  14. There does seem to be a need for the legal system to develop a new group called young adult maybe. Because these girls are definitely not children but they are not quite adults either. convert youtube to mp3

    1. Agree on this. Maybe a 14 to 18 group would be advisable? Ire Kraig
      repossessed car auctions

  15. Resources like the one you mentioned here will be very useful to me! I will post a link to this page on my blog. I am sure my visitors will find that very useful.

    location automobile

  16. Great post, do you mind if I can reference back to it? I’ve been blogging about this and trying to find out a little more info on this, thanks for sharing it.

    Diamond Tools

  17. You’ve pretty much answered all my doubts with this and have done a great job with the article.

    Like yourself I’ve been blogging about this a bit and you’ve given me some good ideas for my next post. Thanks, I look forward to reading more 🙂

  18. In fact, we have been facing with tharges for appearing in “sexting” photos nowadays. I think the Government need have a great strategy for this to prevent it increase more and more in the future.
    mortgage calculator with taxes

  19. Hello! Took me time to read all the comments, but I really enjoyed the article. It proved to be Very helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! It’s always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained free bets bonus codes

  20. That is all so ridiculous……just leave the kids alone to make their own mistakes. You just can’t protect people from themselves….if the idiots are sexting, then they will get burned….and once that happens, they will not do it again.

    Mike the term life rates guy

  21. Great post, do you mind if I can reference back to it? anxiety symptoms. I’ve been blogging about this and trying to find out a little more info on this, thanks for sharing it.

  22. Resources like the one you mentioned here will be very useful to me! I will post a link to this page on my blog. I am sure my visitors will find that very useful. herpes symptoms

  23. Browsing on Google for something else closely connected, regardless before i ramble on too much i would just like to state how much I cherished your post, I’ve added your web blog and also obtained your Feed, Again thank you very much for the article carry on the good work.

  24. Browsing on Google for something else closely connected, regardless before i ramble on too much i would just like to state how much I cherished your post, I’ve added your web blog and also obtained your Feed, Again thank you very much for the article carry on the good work.

  25. Browsing on Google for something else closely connected, regardless before i ramble on too much i would just like to state how much I cherished your post, I’ve added your web blog and also obtained your Feed, Again thank you very much for the article carry on the good work.

  26. I like your blog,and also like the article,and thank you for provide me so much information :))

  27. Bonjour et merci pour les information bonne continuation
    zeturf

  28. You clearly know so much about the subject, you’ve covered so many bases. Great stuff from this part of the internet.
    Cheers, web design London

  29. Again thank you very much for the article carry on the good work.

  30. Hi! Took me time to read all the comments, but I really enjoyed the post. It proved to be very helpfull to me and I am sure to all the commenters here!

  31. First of all, teenagers are not really kids anymore when it comes to sex, as suggested in comments above. Of course they lack maturity, but they certainly understand many of the consequences of their acts. They indeed should be helped in cases like these as well as their families, but legal extortion is not the way.
    J. T.
    repossessed car auctions advice
    repossessed cars for beginners

  32. The post is written in very a good manner and it contains many useful information for me. You have a very impressive writing style. Thanks for sharing.
    iphone hard case

  33. I just read through the entire article of yours and it was quite good. This is a great article thanks for sharing this informative information. I will visit your blog regularly for some latest post.
    Link Building Service

  34. I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement. Thanks for sharing with us.

  35. for the sake of teaching kids a lesson and saving them from themselves. Parents should take care and keep their kids from watching “sex” photos and films.
    thames valley business information

  36. I think the unfortunate thing is there are going to be more and more cases like this due to our digital world. Only a small glimpse on what is yet to come. great article found it on the search engines.

  37. Unfortunately in this new digital world there is going to be more and more cases like this..

  38. In my opinion, government should do something to prevent this. refinance mortgage rates

  39. Very informative and uptodate post. That is why i wanna post something. The subject matter is sensitive and most important thing is health. Sound health can be maintained by maintaining oral health. Most of the diseases are occurred by the oral organ. So we need to go dentist every month. I go there Austin braces. They are providing modern health treatment.

  40. It seems like we are being controlled more and more everyday. When are we going to be able to live our lives without someone tell us what to do?

  41. Until now, I have no comment on that, it is waiting for something different.

  42. Thank you for the extremely impressive article.
    It has great detail that are easy to understand and it also has great tips. I can’t wait to read more of your blogs.

    tax credits calculator

  43. I definitely agree with Zeb, even though teenagers are not adults, they are certainly not children and should not be classed as children. I think this should apply to teenagers over the age of consent though.

  44. This is my first time i visit here. I found so many entertaining stuff in your blog, especially its discussion.

  45. This is a great share ! paris sportif

  46. Definitely agree with what you stated. Your explanation was certainly the easiest to understand. I tell you, I usually get irked when folks discuss issues that they plainly do not know about.

  47. Thanks for sharing your ideas and thoughts, i like your blog and bookmark this blog for further use thanks again?

    Force Factor

  48. The thank you very much , I well tray to keep rember it

  49. i find it quite hilarious how skumanick considers it child pornagraphy, first off, it became child pornography when he viewed it(being someone over the age of 18 himself), and secondly, the photos were taken several years ago at a birthday party and werent supposed to go anywhere, and they were not sent using cellphones originaly in this case, therefore, making skumanick seem as though he does not have all the facts

  50. George Skumanick pose?? Are you kidding? LOL

  51. I personally think adding a carbon tax is a good thing. This is the government’s way to control industry polluting the environment.
    refurbished laptop

  52. I just read through the entire article of yours and it was quite good. This is a great article thanks for sharing this informative information. I will visit your blog regularly for some latest post.
    refurbished laptop

  53. I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement. Thanks for sharing with us.

  54. The special cases you mention would be legitimate affirmative defenses (ie, they are presumed not to apply and the defendant must prove that they do). If the prosecution has to prove that the pictures were not taken in Somalia in every child pornography case, the law will effectively have become void due to the impossibility of convicting anyone.

  55. This is ridiculous. George Skumanick needs to sort himself out!
    best double stroller

  56. George Skumanick’s Provocative Pose, is a nice post. its really interesting for me!

  57. George skumanick pose??? Is it true or you are just explaining it for the concentration

  58. Are your sure that you are giving right information to us!

  59. Quite informative article. Thanks for sharing. Great stuff for essay writing help .

  60. I’ve seen progression in every post. Your newer posts are simply wonderful compared to your posts in the past. Keep up the good work.

    Boot Barn

  61. This was a very informative post. Thanks a lot for sharing.

  62. Nothing like a great load of snacks for the big game!

  63. “Sexting” is ridiculous.

  64. Skumanick declined to describe the legal test for provocativeness, so most probably it relied by himself subjective a reaction to the photographs, which states much more about him of computer does concerning the girls’ intent in appearing for that pictures

    I do not believe that the images by which no privates are created public could be known as “child porn,” however i also feel that you could generally tell what the topic of a posed photo is attempting to share. 13 year olds appearing within their brazier may be attempting to be provactive. Again, I do not think it is a federal situation, but my 13 years old could be grounded and not have cell rights again.

  65. The parents thought they were “goofing” around – I most definitely do not like the idea of my 13 year old posing in a bra and taking pictures!

    The kids of today definitely need some guidance or discipline so this case wouldnt have arisen in the first place.

  66. An interesting discussion is worth comment. I think that you should write more on this topic, it might not be a taboo subject but generally people are not enough to speak on such topics. To the next. Cheers…

    web design company
    ben10 games

  67. I don’t agree with this at all. I think this should go back to their parents for disciplinary action. They should also make a class in schools about what is appropriate in technology these days before they do something wrong and have to get a lawyer.

  68. I don’t agree with this at all. I think this should go back to their parents for disciplinary action. They should also make a class in schools about what is appropriate in technology these days before they do something wrong and have to get a lawyer.

  69. Thanks for an excellent article! I appreciate your insights and agree with what you wrote.

  70. Beh. I sometimes really wonder what’s going on. But I guess, it was just a matter of time.

  71. Government officials do go to absurd lengths as seen by this. I think they just have to realize that they are just like anyone else in this world and they should think before their actions.

  72. what Troy said I am shocked that a stay at home mom can make $7761 in one month on the computer. did you look at this web page http://www.Cloud65.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.