§ 11-207. (a) A person may not:
(1) cause, induce, solicit, or knowingly allow a minor to engage as a subject in the production of obscene matter or a visual representation or performance that depicts a minor engaged as a subject in sadomasochistic abuse or sexual conduct;
(2) photograph or film a minor engaging in an obscene act, sadomasochistic abuse, or sexual conduct;
(3) use a computer to depict or describe a minor engaging in an obscene act, sadomasochistic abuse, or sexual conduct;
(4) knowingly promote, distribute, or possess with the intent to distribute any matter, visual representation, or performance that depicts a minor engaged as a subject in sadomasochistic abuse or sexual conduct; or
Part of the statue ....
Why is the word "may" there v. "shall" ?
I think that the "person" portion would include the minor too.
The word "may" indicates that its not always prohibited. In this case, the minor approved, so I think that a conviction is inappropriate.
That's not what the court ruled. But judges are idiots.
When in court, explain everything to a judge because that person is an idiot.
What the state does is imprison you.
They want to do it ? They need to do it right.
Sure its cp, but the law is written poorly to negate the effect on the minor herself doing it.
Its not good enough that the act should be punishable....question is , does the law read that way.
You maybe happy here but this ruling might spread to cover other crimes. Like if you shoot yourself...there's attempted murder, life in prision.
(post is archived)