07-11-2014, 08:02 AM
(07-11-2014, 03:25 AM)Cutz Wrote: ...in either case, more info is needed, and harder to procure in child cases I'm sure. To me tho, it just seems like they jumped straight to the worst charges they thought they could stick. I hope it's not the case, but just a gut reaction.
I hope it's not the case either, but it well could be.
When phone cams and texting pics took off, there were cases where really conservative LE tried to prosecute teens (usually male) for sending sexy shots of themselves to each other. There was a lot of public outcry as to the overreach and I haven't seen one of those cases in the media in a long time -- but, maybe that's exactly what's happening here. If so, the public outcry and the media exposure could wind up helping the 17 year-old a lot.
We'll have to wait and see if there's more to the story than what the defense attorney and the boy's aunt have told the media. Teens, defendants' families, and defense attorneys sometimes minimize wrong-doing greatly, as I'm sure you know -- so I never discount that being a possibility, but I don't assume it's a given.
As for age of consent, it could be that the LE and/or prosecutors are using federal statute as a guideline or reference in justifying charges considering VA age of consent is 18 as well.
The PROTECT Act, ยง 503, makes it a federal crime to make (or possess or post online, etc.) sexy photos or videos that include a person under 18, even if under the relevant state law any activity depicted is legal and even if the photos or videos are made (or possessed or posted, etc.) by the juvenile(s) depicted in them. This essentially establishes a federal age of consent of 18 with respect to being photographed in a sexual context.
I don't disagree with anything you've posted being a possibility, Cutz. Unless we see warrants or court docs (which may be sealed) or the PD or DA decide to provide more info to the public, I'm on the fence.