Read the comments in the article if you want to see dumb beta male cucks
arstechnica.com
The girl in question, identified only as "S.K." in court documents, was 16 years old when she performed oral sex on an unidentified male. The act was captured on video—he appears to have been holding the camera—and S.K. shared the video with two friends via a text message. She eventually became estranged from one of the friends, a 17-year-old boy, and he showed the video to a police officer at the school.
The government charged the girl as a juvenile for distributing child pornography and displaying an obscene item to a minor. She was ultimately found to be involved in delinquent acts on both charges—the juvenile equivalent of a criminal conviction.
Because she was a minor, the girl didn't face prison time. But she was placed on a year's probation.
The girl appealed the decision, arguing that the state's child pornography law was designed to protect minors from sexual exploitation. S.K. argued that she wasn't exploited—and that it was nonsensical to prosecute someone for exploiting herself.
But the majority of the Maryland Court of Appeals—the state's highest court—was unconvinced. The court ruled that the statute banned all distribution of child pornography, with no exception for cases where the pornographer and the victim was the same person. The majority admitted that the outcome was unfortunate, but they argued that it was up to the legislature—not the courts—to change the law.
One of the court's judges, Michele Hotten, dissented, arguing that the judges were misreading the law. The law says that "a person may not cause, induce, solicit, or knowingly allow a minor to engage as a subject in the production of obscene matter." It also says that a person may not "photograph or film a minor engaging" in "sexual conduct."
Court: Girl broke child porn law by texting explicit video of herself
Teen girl, 16, is prosecuted under law intended to protect people like her.
The girl in question, identified only as "S.K." in court documents, was 16 years old when she performed oral sex on an unidentified male. The act was captured on video—he appears to have been holding the camera—and S.K. shared the video with two friends via a text message. She eventually became estranged from one of the friends, a 17-year-old boy, and he showed the video to a police officer at the school.
The government charged the girl as a juvenile for distributing child pornography and displaying an obscene item to a minor. She was ultimately found to be involved in delinquent acts on both charges—the juvenile equivalent of a criminal conviction.
Because she was a minor, the girl didn't face prison time. But she was placed on a year's probation.
The girl appealed the decision, arguing that the state's child pornography law was designed to protect minors from sexual exploitation. S.K. argued that she wasn't exploited—and that it was nonsensical to prosecute someone for exploiting herself.
But the majority of the Maryland Court of Appeals—the state's highest court—was unconvinced. The court ruled that the statute banned all distribution of child pornography, with no exception for cases where the pornographer and the victim was the same person. The majority admitted that the outcome was unfortunate, but they argued that it was up to the legislature—not the courts—to change the law.
One of the court's judges, Michele Hotten, dissented, arguing that the judges were misreading the law. The law says that "a person may not cause, induce, solicit, or knowingly allow a minor to engage as a subject in the production of obscene matter." It also says that a person may not "photograph or film a minor engaging" in "sexual conduct."
