Police Want To Force Teen To Get Erection

[Frankly Rich]

In their battle against child pornography, Virginia police want to force a 17-year old boy to get an erection. They say they need it as proof that he did, in fact, send a photo of his penis to a 15 -year old girl, who also sent him photos of herself.

 

This hardly seems to be the proper way to discourage teens from sexting. Aside from the titillating aspect of it, it sets a bad example. The police want to inject the youth with a drug that would make him erect, then photograph it. So far, lawyers have been able to stop the police effort.

 

The boy's sexting has left him faced with two felony charges, which could lead to his incarceration until the age of 21 and registration for life as a sex offender. The Washington Post reports: ...the case began when the teen’s 15-year-old girlfriend sent photos of herself to the 17-year-old, who in turn sent her the video in question. The girl has not been charged, and her mother filed a complaint about the boy’s video, ..." Police have already taken photos of the boy's genitals against his will, the story goes on to say, but now want a photo of him aroused.

 

The Post article concludes: "Carlos Flores Laboy, appointed the teen’s guardian ad litem in the case, said he thought it was just as illegal for the Manassas City police to create their own child pornography as to investigate the teen for it. “They’re using a statute that was designed to protect children from being exploited in a sexual manner,” Flores Laboy said, “to take a picture of this young man in a sexually explicit manner. The irony is incredible.” The guardian added, “As a parent myself, I was floored. It’s child abuse. We’re wasting thousands of dollars and resources and man hours on a sexting case. That’s what we’re doing.”

 

Foster said Detective Abbott told her that after obtaining photos of the teen’s erect penis he would “use special software to compare pictures of this penis to this penis. Who does this? It’s just crazy.”

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/local/wp/2014/07/09/in-sexting-case-manassas-city-police-want-to-photograph-teen-in-sexually-explicit-manner-lawyers-say/

[maninsoma]

This is ludicrous.

 

I would feel differently if the case was more involved. Say a 17 year old was accused of rape after having sent someone younger photos of his erect penis; he's denying involvement of any sort and the cops want to prove that the naked photo was of him. But even then it seems like there would be other ways to verify whether the 17 year old sent the photo in question other than having to take a new one.

 

Of course the other obvious issue is that the 15 year old was a willing participant in this sexting and even sent provocative photos of herself. I think the mother should try to develop a better relationship with her daughter that supports her healthy sexual curiosity while setting appropriate limits instead of trying to scapegoat another minor who just happens to be 2 years older than her daughter. It isn't like this 17 year old sent a naked photo to a grade school kid.

[marylander1940]

With so much poverty, wife beatings, HIV, obesity, incest, racism, xenophobia, lack of education, etc in our poorest counties...why the cops spent so much time on this?

[Frankly Rich]

The police this afternoon backed off on the attempt to photograph the youth's erect phallus in light of the widespread media attention.

[+ azdr0710]

here's an article and picture of the kid....

 

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Police-Drop-Plan-To-Take-Graphic-Photos-of-Va-Teen-as-Evidence--266600001.html

[marylander1940]

An educational video on sexting.

 

[video=youtube;4ovR3FF_6us]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ovR3FF_6us

[Diverdan]

I hope the parents of the boy sue the police department, the policeman involved and the city. This policeman is getting his jollies by taking this approach to a sad situation. He should be the one persecuted.

[+ azdr0710]

and/or I wonder if the parents of the girl were "so outraged" that the police felt compelled to look like they're on the ball going after him.....probably a lot more to the story than we know like the relationship between the four parents, the relationship between the girl and her parents, etc......

[+ deej]

probably a lot more to the story than we know

 

This.

 

Like so many other stories in today's media spectaulagasm, never form your opinions on the first day a story is "breaking news". There's likely more to come.

[Frequentflier]

I hope the parents of the boy sue the police department, the policeman involved and the city. This policeman is getting his jollies by taking this approach to a sad situation. He should be the one persecuted.

 

I agree. The way they are treating the young man is unacceptable. Maybe there is a good judge who will step up for him.

[Michael Wayne]

17 and 15 is two MINORS............ should not be illegal? If he were 18 it would be another story....or are virginias' laws different?

[maninsoma]

17 and 15 is two MINORS............ should not be illegal? If he were 18 it would be another story....or are virginias' laws different?

 

The laws not only vary state to state but they can also be very confusing. It isn't as simple as "they're both under 18" since the age gap between the two people is one consideration and the age of the youngest person is another. So, for example, the two year gap between a 13 and 11 year old might not be significant legally since both parties are under 16 but the two year gap may be significant when one is under 16 and the other is over 16. What is confusing, however, is that according to this Wikipedia page Virginia's law allows for sexual contact between a 15 year old and 17 year old.

 

Even though these two had dated (and presumably had sex) at some point, it sounds like law enforcement was pursuing this case not on the basis of sexual behavior but rather pornography.

[+ quoththeraven]

17 and 15 is two MINORS............ should not be illegal? If he were 18 it would be another story....or are virginias' laws different?

 

There are a few different things going on here. For one, every state gets to set its own age of consent, varying from 18 (about half the jurisdictions, including VA and CA) to 17 (NY) to 16 (NJ). (For comparison purposes, age of consent in the UK and Canada is 16.)

 

Many states have so-called "Romeo and Juliet" laws that decriminalize or remove from coverage sex between teens of approximately the same age, many of which take the form of decriminalizing sex between a covered minor and someone who is less than four years older as long as the covered minor is older than a specified age, usually thirteen. Virginia's law removes acts between 15 and 17 year olds from the reach of its statutory rape statute. So the statutory rape laws aren't the issue here. They could be if we were talking about an adult in a position of authority, like a teacher; states with lower ages of consent than age 18 generally have separate statutory rape statutes that apply in these situations.

 

Age of consent laws are separate from child porn considerations, however, which apply until age 18. So two teenagers can have consensual sex that isn't considered statutory rape but recordings and photos of such acts can still be child porn. Drawings and illustrations of the same and written depictions are not child porn in the US and can only be prosecuted under general obscenity statutes. (This is not true everywhere, for example, Australia and Canada criminalize visual depiction of child porn even if no actual children are involved and in some cases even if the character depicted is canonically an adult but looks like a minor.)

 

In the past, teens who send each other nude or racy photos have been prosecuted for distributing or possessing child porn even though the child porn statutes were not drafted with this situation in mind and in many ways, prosecuting minors who are exchanging such material under child porn laws has the effect of exposing them to legal danger rather than protecting them. It's unusual here that only the boy is being prosecuted, but there are a number of possible explanations for that -- her photo is risque but doesn't qualify as child porn; the boy is viewed as harassing her because he kept sending it to her after being told not to, because of accompanying comments, or for some other reason.

[+ glennnn]

Interesting. Has the boy come to trial yet? The articles mention a trial date in August. What is the final dispensation of this case?

[nycguy]

I bet there was one or more cops who volunteered for fluffer duty to get the boy hard.

[TruHart1]

Interesting. Has the boy come to trial yet? The articles mention a trial date in August. What is the final dispensation of this case?

 

This was published August 1, 2014: http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Trial-for-Teen-Accused-of-Sexting-Begins-Friday-269521611.html and although this states a follow-up hearing was scheduled for a year later (August 1, 2015) I could not find anything about it online.

 

TruHart1

[seaboy4hire]

Interesting. Has the boy come to trial yet? The articles mention a trial date in August. What is the final dispensation of this case?

 

Check with the courts maybe?

 

Hugs,

Greg

[Frequentflier]

I found this update online.

 

A Northern Virginia boy who was accused of child pornography charges for sexting his then-girlfriend was given one year of probation Friday.

 

The Prince William County judge's ruling puts off for one year any declaration of guilt or innocence for 17-year-old Trey Sims.

 

The probation comes with several stipulations: Sims is prohibitied from texting, using social media or using the internet for the year. He also must complete 100 hours of community service and cannot contact the victim or the victim’s family.

 

Sims will not be placed on the sex registry or sex offender list. In a year, if he abides by all the stipulations, all charges could be dismissed.

 

The judge in the case said he didn't want to see the teen start out his adult life with a felony conviction.

[+ glennnn]

I found this update online.

 

A Northern Virginia boy who was accused of child pornography charges for sexting his then-girlfriend was given one year of probation Friday.

 

The Prince William County judge's ruling puts off for one year any declaration of guilt or innocence for 17-year-old Trey Sims.

 

 

 

The probation comes with several stipulations: Sims is prohibitied from texting, using social media or using the internet for the year. He also must complete 100 hours of community service and cannot contact the victim or the victim’s family.

 

Sims will not be placed on the sex registry or sex offender list. In a year, if he abides by all the stipulations, all charges could be dismissed.

 

The judge in the case said he didn't want to see the teen start out his adult life with a felony conviction.

 

 

Thank you so much for finding and posting this update. It's still seems rather draconian. This is not the first time a minor child has been punished by the very law that was written to protect him or her from ADULT sexual depredations. He was under age for God's sake and it was only a photo.

[Frequentflier]

Whether its the hiring of a politician or anyone in uniform to work for us, I think the DNA of the person is of critical importance. There was another thread which included the video murder of a man on the ground after being tazed by a cop. We have an unarmed man being shot in the back by a cop. We sometimes learn of atrocities committed by soldiers in uniform. The cops who stripped the teenager this thread is about and took pictures of him, and apparently wanted more while he was in an aroused state, were supported by a magistrate. We can legislate until the cows come home but people in actual or apparent authority need to be of good character (DNA). A person who does something to another that is just cruel isn't of sound character. More voters need to consider that and more police departments need to screen applicants for the right attributes.

 

I would never think of shooting an unarmed man in the back as he was running away from me. I would never think of being so mean and cruel as to shoot a man in the back as in the video that was posted. I would never treat a person's child the way the teenager in this post was or the way the South Carolina cop threw a female student (over a cell phone). We do have too many laws and too many mean spirited people in positions of power. Some people don't have the filter to stop, step back and think "wait, this is crazy".

 

Abraham Lincoln "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

[+ glennnn]

Whether its the hiring of a politician or anyone in uniform to work for us, I think the DNA of the person is of critical importance. There was another thread which included the video murder of a man on the ground after being tazed by a cop. We have an unarmed man being shot in the back by a cop. We sometimes learn of atrocities committed by soldiers in uniform. The cops who stripped the teenager this thread is about and took pictures of him, and apparently wanted more while he was in an aroused state, were supported by a magistrate. We can legislate until the cows come home but people in actual or apparent authority need to be of good character (DNA). A person who does something to another that is just cruel isn't of sound character. More voters need to consider that and more police departments need to screen applicants for the right attributes.

 

I would never think of shooting an unarmed man in the back as he was running away from me. I would never think of being so mean and cruel as to shoot a man in the back as in the video that was posted. I would never treat a person's child the way the teenager in this post was or the way the South Carolina cop threw a female student (over a cell phone). We do have too many laws and too many mean spirited people in positions of power. Some people don't have the filter to stop, step back and think "wait, this is crazy".

 

Abraham Lincoln "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

 

You are so right and so awesome. I love reading your posts. Thanks. If someone forced my son to undress and took photos of his genitalia.... heads would roll.

[tanman4u]

The police want to inject the youth with a drug that would make him erect, then photograph it.

And what is it they're injecting him with? Even Viagra and Cialis (neither of which need to be, or maybe even can be, injected) guarantees an erection lacking suitable stimulation. If I were in a room full of cops who wanted to take a picture of my hard on I doubt it would ever happen even with a handful of V or C. (Well unless the cop was that seriously hot looking NYC cop whose pictures have been making the rounds of the internet lately.

[Kenny]

The kid's guardian is right. The police wanted to press a child porn claim by making child porn to prove it. Brilliant.

[Frequentflier]

You are so right and so awesome. I love reading your posts. Thanks. If someone forced my son to undress and took photos of his genitalia.... heads would roll.

 

You are very kind Glennnn. Thank you.

[+ Funguy]

They probably want to inject Trimix or similar into the penis to cause an erection.