>From my view, unless the boy was showing and/or forwarding the picture that he received, he should have never been arrested. It seems that more and more in our society, the DA's are charging people for things because they can win a case based on how the law is written, not on if it is the right or just thing to do.
Just my 2 cents. ------------------------------------------------ Jeffrey Sharpe CyberLynk Helpdesk and Support 414.858.9335 or 800.942.8022 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Slade Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 9:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [funsec] T33n pr0n ch!ldren OK, now that I have your attention ... (If that got by spam filters ...) This is about children taking pictures of themselves. It's also about who is responsible for the wrongness of an act. It's also about age of responsibility, although I'm not sure I want to get into a Carleton U discussion ... http://www.khou.com/news/state/stories/khou081008_ar_porntext.f31234e3.html http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=2833 I did a bit of a search, but most of the hits seem to turn up the Glenn Sacks blog or copies thereof, and I haven't yet found any updates on the story. It shouldn't be news: it's not an isolated case. Lots of instances: one in Florida has two teens who had consensual "relations," took pictures, transmitted them (one to the other), and are both now registered, convicted sex offenders. I imagine there needs to be a lot of education going on here. To kids, for awareness of consequences. To police, lawmakers, and the legal system, for reality checks. To parents, for awareness of the functions of seemingly innocuous devices (most of these cases involve cell phones or "Webcam" equipped devices). (Then, of course, there are the extensions: kids who take those images and manipulate or distribute them maliciously. And people in a "duty of care" position who figure they have done the right thing by alerting higher-ups [principals, school boards] and don't realize that they have, in fact, broken the law by alerting those people instead of law enforcement authorities ...) ====================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "If you do buy a computer, don't turn it on." - Richards' 2nd Law ============= for back issues: [Base URL] site http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/ CISSP refs: [Base URL]mnbksccd.htm Security Dict.: [Base URL]secgloss.htm Security Educ.: [Base URL]comseced.htm Book reviews: [Base URL]mnbk.htm [Base URL]review.htm Partial/recent: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/techbooks/ Security Educ.: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/comseced/ Review mailing list: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
