Isn’t this kind of akin to the liar’s paradox?
A child before age 16 [or whatever it is in a given jurisdiction] can give no informed consent for sexual activity.
A child before age X CAN give informed consent when it comes to taking explicit pictures of herself.
But if she can’t consent to the first activity, then wouldn’t she be unable to have full responsibility for the second activity?
I have mentioned this before and usually get shouted down by those who have read things on the internet and therefore know better. But what the hell I’ll try again.
Law enforcement is well aware of the fact that teens send naked pictures to each other. I don’t know all of the circumstances in the particular case. There may be extenuating circumstances that led to charges. If I went after every kid that had a naked picture on their phone I would have to lock up our entire high school. Even when pictures are spread it is usually taken care of in the school without police involvement. When it does have to rise to the level of police involvement and charges our prosecutors will handle juveniles with diversionary programs rather than prosecution. In many states they are changing the laws to reflect the new reality. In others prosecutors are using discretion. There is a lot more leeway in dealing with juveniles.
The bottom line is that if enforcement was as draconian as some believe by reading a few articles arrests would be made on a daily basis in every jurisdiction. It is that prevalent. It has become guys opening move to ask for naked pictures. That is even before the first date. I don’t usually get involved unless someone posts the pictures online for anyone to see. Most of the time a pissed off ex-boyfriend. When it comes to the attention of school officials more often than not the student is told to delete the photos and we are not even told about it. That is the reality.
Here is an article about how the New Jersey law changed in 2012. It is from a lawyer website not the state but it is accurate. Prior to 2012 prosecutors used their discretion to keep juveniles from having a record for this. The new law codified it. In various conferences I’ve attended it was mentioned that many other states have changed their laws or were moving in that direction.
OK, the fixed title makes this post make less sense.
I have to highly, highly recommend you start getting on social media now and start using it, familiarizing yourself with it, and getting used to the different kinds. The stats are something like: 87% of the people under 30 are on some kind of social media. You don’t want your kids using something you don’t know about, or you unable to reach them or talk to them!
Social Media is like the sex talk now: should happen early and often. 
D’oh, my spoil chuck got me.
I thought you were making an Emily Litella statement.
On this basis I should have been arrested for thousands of counts of statutory rape when I was a teenager.
It depends on the jurisdiction and, to a degree, the DA. From some quick searching, just being intoxicated (under the influence) is itself a crime if there are narcotics in your physical possession or not. It is often a lesser offense these days and rarely charged but the laws that would pull you jail time (or more likely time in a psychiatric facility) for it are still on the book. I couldn’t pull an exact case to cite but I remember some in the 80s and possibly 90s where the “crime” of addiction or drug use absent possession was used by families or prosecutors through the courts to force people into rehab.
(There are times when I wish I had full access to Westlaw)
Not a hope in hell. I’m going nowhere near it. As I said, we already have talks about it, just as we do with sex and drugs and drink and all other matters of the world. I don’t have to have done something in order to be well enough informed about the pros and cons of it.
I’m sure you wouldn’t suggest I take cocaine in order to prepare myself properly?
What if she also used the phone to take a picture of a fake ID showing that she was 21? 
On the other hand, she should just be locked up. She’s been looking at an underage girl naked every time she goes into the shower - repeatedly, for years! That kind of experience would make anyone deranged.
The case of the young man is especially Kafka-esque in that at 16 his a minor for the purpose of defining child porn, but an adult for the purpose of applying the law.
So he is old enough to hang as an adult for the crime of exploiting himself as a child.
I go my first son through the minefield and into adulthood with some very specific discussions that neither of wanted to have, but needed to be done. I have one more to deal with (my boys have almost 8 years of age difference - so I am starting over).
What, you and your friends didn’t take polaroids of yourselves during the orgies like the rest of us?
No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to take nakies of yourself. I’ve somehow managed for many many years.
I like this message board. I learn things. Today I learned that a nude photo is rape.
I hate quoting long posts just to add a few lines, but wanted to say that I not only heard what you said, Loach, but I appreciate it. I have no doubt that what you say is true and that these outlier cases must be some sort of anomaly in the overall scheme of things. Glad to know there’s much common sense involved with law enforcement’s discretion in dealing with these types of things and that they’re striving to catch up to technology. Gives me hope for the future. Thanks for the SD.
I’ll give you a hint, I wasn’t taking nude photos of myself.
You may jest but I recall several incidents as a young teenager that would count as (mild and extremely unsophisticated) “orgies”. Huge fun but not something I’d have wanted captured and shared.
at age 14-16 I was a hypersexed idiot with poor judgement. Pretty much all of us were. I have no doubt at all that easy access to the sort of technology we have today would have seen me and my friends making exactly the same mistakes as the kids in the OP.
Originally: No.
Now: Never mind.
I don’t understand how anyone could be legally considered a child AND an adult at the same time, for the purpose of one law. That defies logic.
It does, however, set up an interesting victim impact statement…
Here’s the other weird thing: most states have laws decriminalizing sex between persons within 2-3 years in age of each other, where one or both are minors. But due to the child porn laws, it’s often illegal for them to share pix with each other of the acts they’ve engaged in together.
It would seem common sense that whatever it’s legal for two people to do together, it shouldn’t be illegal for them to share photos of it with each other. But in the case of minors and sex, what’s common sense isn’t necessarily the law.
From another account of the case:
Moral: Words to live by – “Show Me Your Warrant”.
The problem, Loach, is that leaving it up to prosecutor discretion is exactly what creates cases like this. In fact, my post was just going to be “See what happens if you just rely on prosecutor discretion?”
If we all agree that this shouldn’t be a crime, and it sure seems we do if the police won’t even enforce it, then make it not a crime. If there’s some version of it that should be a crime, make that explicit, and remove the other version.
Discretion is for extenuating circumstances or just prioritizing what matters. It’s doesn’t work as a form of nullification.
And, speaking of, I wonder if it would be better for the jury to nullify, or to let this stupidity happen. I guess it depends on whether anyone would care. Or is it better to send the message to the prosecutor that we won’t convict for this “crime”?