To believe that is to believe that no one could be convicted under the
Mann act. This patently not true as a number of rather famous people
have been convicted under said act. The law assumes the ability to read
minds to discover intent.
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
On 10/17/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For your consideration, this photograph was taken in a public place,
the subject of the photo had no reasonable expectations of privacy,
and
I could have been arrested and charged for making this photograph
under
the new Texas law.
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_tgotj1b.html
to which Frank said:
only if it was done for the sexual gratification of you or others.
so then P. J. Alling wrote:
Not quite true, I don't have to intend it for my, or someone else's,
sexual gratification. If someone might find sexual gratification in
it, no matter what my intentions, I'm in trouble.
Frank's right, you *do* have to intend it:
Here's the relevant part quoted:
"A person commits an offense if the person: (1) photographs or by
videotape or other electronic means visually records another: (A)
without the other person's consent; and (B) with intent to arouse or
gratify the sexual desire of any person"
Here's the source:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.005.00.000021.00.htm
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
