20 Years for Loli Manga: “Victims Don’t Have to Exist”

beako-loli-schoolgirl.png

A federal appeals panel has upheld the 20 year sentence of a lolicon found to have received illustrations of underage sex by email, saying that “it is not a required that the minor depicted actually exists”, and so ruling art not to be universally protected free speech.

The court also insisted that purely textual email containing incest related material was not constitutionally protected free speech, and so also upheld his conviction on these grounds.

The man concerned (55), a resident of Richmond, Virginia, is serving a 20 year sentence after being convicted in 2005 of “receiving 20 Japanese cartoons, called anime, illustrating young girls being forced to have sex with men”, which he rather unwisely received using a public computer at the Virginia Employment Commission.

Additionally, he was found to have sent and received incest related emails of a purely textual nature, which were judged to be obscene and therefore not constitutionally protected free speech.

Clouding the issue further, the man apparently also received unambiguously illegal photographs of underage sexual conduct.

All this resulted in a jury convicting him of 74 offences, including receiving obscene materials, receiving obscene visual representations of underage sex, receiving child pornography and sending and receiving obscene emails. His sentence of 20 years was the maximum possible.

The notorious PROTECT Act of 2003, which permits arbitrarily stripping material of its First Amendment protections if it can be judged obscene according to the criteria of the Miller Test, was instrumental in securing these convictions; in fact this represents the first successful conviction under it.

In his appeal against the convictions, he claimed that the illustrations were protected by the First Amendment, as they do not depict real children. He also claimed the PROTECT Act was unconstitutional as textual emails cannot be considered obscene.

The judges would have none of it, holding that the act was made for the protection of imaginary children:

“It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.”

One of the three judges did accept his arguments, though this had no impact on the majority ruling. The convictions for the photographs did not come into question.

The man intends to continue elevating the appeal, to the Supreme Court if necessary, in order to get the relevant parts of his conviction quashed.

It is not his first brush with the law: in 1999 he was sentenced to nearly four years for possessing pornography depicting minors, so clearly he is not the most charismatic appellant.

This via AP, brought to my attention in the forums.

The PROTECT Act of late seems to be coming to the fore in relation to cases involving loli manga; there is also the recent case of an Iowa man facing similar convictions, although in his case without any real imagery involved.

Given that so much anime and manga, both mainstream and erotic, revolves around sexual situations involving participants clearly under what US law would regard as a legal age for such depictions to not constitute child pornography,  just how much of mainstream anime and manga, to say nothing of actual pornography, will eventually come under the remit of such laws should they go unchecked?

With lower courts and national politicians gleefully stripping both speech and art of Constitutional protections using the evils of underage sex as a lever, we have to wonder whether the Supreme Court will actually rectify matters at some point?


    Post Comment »
    253 Comments
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Avatar of Miroku74
    Comment by Miroku74
    02:34 09/01/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Here's a thought that may be out there a bit:

    If imaginary loli has human rights, does that mean they're considered actual people too?

    I mean, how long before some ronery individual (ex: otaku) adds two and two and actually goes out to get matching wedding bands for himself and his favorite anime/manga/eroge character? Blood tests? Invitations for the ceremony? Joint checking accounts? You see where I'm taking this? How far does the stupidity go?

    This is an issue I'll await lulz from as much as frustration.

    Comment by TerrawindX2
    02:06 09/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    If the judge's argument is that there is no requirements for the minor to exist, then who is the one being protected as the result of the conviction? Wouldn't that be a contradiction?

    If any anime enthusiast is arrested, I think it is best if Anonymous made a go at the supreme court rather than Scientology.

    I actually thing that the real reason why lolicon possession is still viewed as a "serious" offence is because the old judges probably never owned a computer or understood the internet. Keyword: old ignorant people. They really need to lurk moar to be less ignorant of the fact that millions of anime enthusiasts had at least seen, viewed, or possessed lolicon material. (That, and those who viewed would still be charged as a result of forensic hard drive investigations).

    Younger kids and mainstream audiences who are regulars to the internet would have agreed that 20 years is too much; if possession of lolicon is the only charge. We need to keep up with the times. If the law fails to keep up with current ideals, then it is a failed legal system. It has failed the requirement for social progress.

    Comment by varutieru
    20:38 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    more scenario to add to my yet to be made manga :D
    zetsubou zetsubou no sekai

    Comment by Anon
    09:29 09/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    A lesser nation... let me think... China? Cuba? Or some other country where legal system is not a joke, but a fantasy? Countries where you would get your ass in jail before you know that you can defend yourself in court? Or countries where the legal system is so corrupted when you can get away with murder"s", not to mention pedophilia... I think people in America is very lucky. It's not propaganda, since most of you complaining about America's legal system clearly have not lived in the other parts of the world, where people are actually starving, new vocab guys! STARVE!!!

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:47 07/07/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    Lesser? Lesser how? Lower asshat headcount?

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:33 09/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'm not the most law-minded American citizen, but since when is obscenity illegal? If you're legitimately harming someone, that's one thing, but if it's just words and [drawn] images being passed between consenting adults, then where's the harm? If you prohibit the creation, existence, or willing possession of such material, then you're prohibiting thought itself.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:06 17/11/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    Ignorance of the law is not excuse to not follow the law. America was founded by puritans.

    Comment by Mecharonin
    03:11 21/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    This is completely ridiculous for the simple reason that the Supreme Court already ruled on a case exactly like this in 2004.

    Comment by thirtythr33
    02:32 20/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    God thank i dont live in that shithole called Amerika.
    The country gets stupid by the day

    Comment by Gothicer
    04:10 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Narcissist, you're quite obviously not better than anyone, except maybe your average retard, but I still have more respect for them than you. They're not amazingly ingnorant/racist, afterall.

    By the way, if you're gonna try to be racist to me (and I couldn't care less), you're gonna have to take a guess at where I'm from. It's not America, either.

    Back on topic; even though I quite clearly hate what they've done (if I didn't, I wouldn't be on this site), you have to realise that what they did isn't stupid. People tend to be scared of the unknown, and since I really doubt they've ever looked at Loli, they have no idea how it really is. The reason this guy is in jail is most likely because they were afraid that if they let him go, he'd just eventually become a pedo. As well as making them look bad, they most likely didn't want someone to actually become a victim of this. And since a lot of people here are racist idiots who don't understand other cultures, Loli isn't accepted everywhere. So it's accepted in Japan? Big deal. Why should other countries change their views if they dislike something just because a few people in their country like it?

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact

    According to UNICEF and most western governments, Japan had better change its ways because they don't like them.

    Avatar of Shizu's Waki Obsessor: MaidNiac
    Comment by Katameido
    19:39 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Otaku: Doesn't my figure Haruhi look hawt and cute?
    UNICEF: So you want to marry her? You're sick, she's NOT even real.
    Otaku: *Accidentally revealed his loli collections*
    UNICEF: What are these!!? These are Child Pornographies!!
    Otaku: No, they're just imaginary and they have nothing to do with any real children..
    UNICEF: We have to arrest you. These are as REAL as Child Pornographies, even if the victims don't exist at all!!

    Comment by TerrawindX2
    Comment by Anon
    08:06 19/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    so if i live in America and i draw 2 stick figures having sex and state that one is 15 and the other is 40, i mail this to a friend. Do i go to Jail then?

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:57 31/01/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yep with the way these judges are thinking.

    Comment by MdraG
    Avatar of Geerie
    Comment by Geerie
    01:24 10/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    FUCK YEAH!!!! im suing fosters home for imaginary friends because the i imagined the friend i pretended to aquire from them touched me funny.

    Comment by Anon GL
    12:55 12/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    it is probable that he brought forth his arguement under the wrong section of the law ...therefore they don't deem the fact that the child 'does not exist, as relavent to his argument of free speech...he needs to take this statement , by the judges , as a hint as to 'HOW TO APPROACH AND HOW HAS ' his rights been CONSTITUTIONALLY violated when he APPEALS to a HIGHER court , but it still doesn't justify the idiotic statement by the court , defending the protection of IMAGINARY CHILDREN..

    Comment by Tampopo
    07:42 15/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    All internet data centers must we moved to Easter Island LOL

    Not4chan in the exile

    Comment by Kira
    01:36 14/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Any criminalisation of purely fictional material is disgusting, fascist bullshit. The only reason they are getting away with this is because most people go through life wearing blinders, preventing them from seeing what's right next to them.
    Maybe you find loli hentai icky, but plenty of people share the same views about games like GTA, or COD. Should they also be locked up because innocent fictional people were harmed?

    It's absolutely anti-thesis to everything a liberal, free society should be. You people pointing and sneering are the stupidest of all, because you dumb fucks think you are safe because the otaku community considers your porn of choice adult. I guarantee you that the moral witch-hunters don't, they will tar you will the pedophile label and have you put in jail for life quicker than you can fucking blink.

    They love the power they have, and they won't stop as long as they still garner support from the 'missionary position with the light off' shitheads.

    Fuck, I hate the real world so much...

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:09 13/06/2014 # ! Neutral (0)

    You sound very wise with politics and law. Any other thoughts?

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:55 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    You guys are pissed because a judge is finally doing something to take away your fake pedophile shit.

    Your kind can have whatever bad luck falls on you.

    However I do see the point that art and fictional material that depict crimes being enacted shouldn't be actuall crimes for possessing them.

    How many "snuff" films do people watch? Saw, etc...

    I guess we should make imaginary snuff films also illegal and everyone who watched Saw should be arrested.

    Regardless, the important thing is... we all know Narcissist is an angry pedophile now.

    That is all.

    Comment by varutieru
    20:28 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    can't disagree with this :D
    well, its our nature to support our hobby/habit, therefore, we are fake pedophile narcisist

    so what? it doesn't hurt anybody, why are you americans keep nagging our ass for being a fake pedophile fan?
    and you guys fine with gore & bloods?

    1 thing i realize of what we are as living things
    we are sick

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:11 25/10/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    You do have a point.

    It's kind of the same with detective/mystery novels, TV shows, movies, etc. The genre commonly depicts illegal acts (ex: rape, murder, ransom, and so on...) The events are clearly fictional and would be no different to other published media with similar content (illegal activity).

    Comment by Seravy
    10:12 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I wonder if it's time to destroy the world already...or god will be a little bit more patient and give those idiots time to reconsider their laws?

    I wonder if I should pray for the world to be a better place or give up hope and wish for the destruction of it instead?

    Avatar of kebrus
    Comment by kebrus
    13:36 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    believe it or not I actually think like that, sometimes...

    Comment by ShiroKage
    Comment by Anonymous
    09:27 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    using a public computer

    If he's this dumb, putting him behind bars is a benefit to society.

    Avatar of lordchair
    Comment by lordchair
    11:03 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    That is exactly what the conviction on the email charge means, yes.

    I'm not joking.

    If you are an American, you need to contact the ACLU about this and state your concerns.

    I'm not joking.

    Comment by hurricane567
    15:58 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    VA? Yeah, there's places you can't buy beer, teach evolution, dance with people of the same sex, or open your business on Sunday in VA, this will get overturned somewhere up the line.

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:24 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    This convo has sunk to a new low, thanks to you Narcissist. I can't even bear to read all the BS comments about you....

    Okay, so what do I care about this? Nothing. I don't live in America so it doesn't involve me. Whatever happens in America stays in America......

    Comment by Anonymous
    Comment by Anonymous
    07:38 05/05/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I live in the USA. It does indeed suck.

    Comment by koala1552000
    17:41 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    DAMN i came in here trying to check out this retarded shit and i end up finding fucking ppl writing essays

    Comment by Christopher
    11:20 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I swear.... when are people going to realize that there is nothing wrong with lolicon or even pedosexuality. When their children start killing them in order to protect their lovers, as was done back in the day?

    Comment by longcatacgnol
    12:10 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Whorley case is old news. The man involved was a legitimate pedophile. Let's see what happens when the line becomes blurrier, such as in this pending case. http://www.cbldf.org/pr/archives/000372.shtml

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact

    We haven't covered it so actually it is new news.
    And we've already dealt with the other case:
    http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2008/10/24/american-faces-20-years-over-loli-manga/

    Avatar of kebrus
    Comment by kebrus
    13:34 08/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    WHAT THE F...

    illustrations? text messages?

    btw people, aren't you all over reacting with the europe vs america vs whatever thing?

    Comment by Tastentier
    09:51 31/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    “It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.”

    So they're essentially saying that there does not need to be a victim for a crime to have taken place. One can be a murder without having killed anybody, and a rapist without having touched anyone. Welcome to the wonderful world of thought crimes, where it doesn't matter if you did any harm; it's enough if you had a wrong thought.

    Comment by Dark Mage
    00:54 25/10/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The protect act is not worth the paper it's printed one.

    BTW dear moral fags since this guy can be jailed for up to 20 years have any idea how much this will cost tax payers?
    Since more fags typically have the glial cell count of a lemur and thus are incapable of counting I'll do the math for any reading this on average a year in the pen is $21,000 to $36,000 USD.

    That's $420,000 to $720,000 USD it will cost tax payers to punish this person for the horrible crimes of offending your morals and god.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:30 15/12/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Where's phoenix wright when you need him?

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:03 13/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    “It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.”

    So then I guess the great majority of the art world are murderers and hardened criminals. Then shouldn't Edgar Allen Poe gets slapped with a animal cruelty and Sir Aurthur Conan Doyle gets hit with federal drug charges?

    They'll never see how insane this is.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:14 16/03/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    watch out everyone. you may be guilty of crimes against imaginary people!

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:24 26/06/2014 # ! Neutral (0)

    oh my god D: I play Gta and Saints row almost every day ;-; ...they should lock me up and throw away the key...*sarcasm*

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:25 28/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @Narcissist.

    Dude just chill authority figures will always come by this because they want to protect children from future you know who's. In retrospect it's illegal in almost every country I think because of the protection, but that doesn't mean we can't continue to read those types of manga in the comfort of our own home. Not like we otakus are going to do anything bad right? So I guess enjoy it while it lasts =).

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:23 16/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    why do ppl go to jail for loli, i heard you can get caught easyer in verginia and texas... but so far in michigan. no one in michigan... loli isnt viewd as cp there. im glad to be a michiganian.

    Comment by Richard Gadberry
    07:31 12/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    If possesing hentai becomes a capital offense, the I would gladly give of my life for freedom

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:54 26/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    "The judges would have none of it, holding that the act was made for the protection of imaginary children:

    “It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists.” "

    What in the world?

    Additionally, The United States are no longer about liberty and freedom. Lol at a first amendment wich has 'unless' tied to it.

    What's next? Anything depicting the government as bad will be considered obscene?








    Post Comment »

Popular

Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments