Children’s Child Porn Ring Smashed

loli-with-mobile-phone

A group of children who engaged in the practice of “sexting”, texting naked and semi-naked pictures of themselves to one another, have been arrested for manufacturing, disseminating and possessing child pornography.

The girls so charged are aged 14 or 15, and are accused of making the porn, whilst the boys, aged 16-17, are accused of possession.

Their child pornography sex ring was uncovered after teachers confiscated a mobile phone from a boy, and whilst rifling through its contents, as might be expected of them, found it to contain nude pictures of a classmate. The wise teachers quickly called in police to crack the case.

Police Captain George Seranko, who helped thwart the wicked pornographers and bring them to justice, eloquently described the photographic consequences of their obscene antics as: “a self portrait taken of a juvenile female taking pictures of her body, nude.”

The captain was clear that the villains must be made an example of:

“It’s very dangerous, once it’s on a cell phone, that cell phone can be put on the Internet where everyone in the world can get access to that juvenile picture. You don’t realize what you are doing until it’s already done.”

The school district was blasé about the child pornography ring uncovered in one of its schools: it found “no evidence of inappropriate activity on school grounds … other than the violation of the electronic devices policy.”

A lawyer with experience with such cases weighs in, saying the laws are not meant to target wicked juvenile pornographers, but “sexual abuse” by “dirty old men in raincoats.”

“It’s clearly overkill … The letter of the law seems to have been violated, but this is not the type of defendant that the legislature envisioned.”

Pennsylvania does not have a mandatory minimum sentence for such offences, so it is his opinion that they may escape jail.

However, if convicted they would become registered lolicon sex offenders for at least 10 years, meaning they would be subjected to such restrictions as not being able to visit or live in proximity to schools (difficult in the case of school children), having to report their convictions to employers, and apparently in some states they would even have to surrender their passwords to the authorities.

There have been a number of other similar cases involving minors creating criminal depictions of themselves, and the law has been successful in ensuring that a number of these juvenile child pornographers have been brought to justice for their crimes.

That said, there are some doubts over whether the privacy violating phone contents searches will fare well in courts.

Disturbingly, we also hear that as many as 20% of teenagers may be wicked child pornographers, as a National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy survey revealed 22% of girls and 18% of boys admitted sharing nude images of themselves.

Truly, even the schools themselves are not safe from this blight.

Via Slashdot.

Will no one think of the imaginary children too?


    Post Comment »
    121 Comments
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Avatar of shockerz
    Comment by Tommy
    11:01 24/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    These are just kids who doesn’t know what they are doing. So, can't they have a light punishment and get over it?

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:49 14/11/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    Why punishment? I see nothing wrong except for police and teacher behavior. They should be punished alright.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:55 11/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    actually they probably did know wat they were doing

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:42 24/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I, for one, support underage sexting.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:51 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    So loli get charged as a lolicon? How unusual.

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:35 04/02/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The most hilarious thing about this is that it isn't child pornography at all.

    Firstly because the photos were merely nude pictures, involving no sexual material whatsoever. Secondly because the people involved are not children, they are young adults who are sexually mature.

    Why must the world be so full of gibbering fools?

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:04 30/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Because Americans are idiots?

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:01 29/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    WE WILL PROTECT THE CHILDREN, even if we have to kill them all off to do it!

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:51 14/11/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    These kids now have criminal record and are probably on sexual offenders list. They are fucked as far as getting jobs go. Another people on government dole lol.

    Comment by God
    08:59 30/04/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    the teacher looked at the pictures thus he is guilty...

    the police looked at the pictures they are guilty...

    this is an invasion of privacy...

    everyday the people die a little more...

    you want to enforce the law...

    then nuke the planet...

    only way to be sure

    Comment by Azure Xuchilbara
    07:57 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'll stick to masturbating to photos of myself when I was 10 then...Nothing wrong with that...Unless they make another 'law'...

    Comment by Robocop
    20:01 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    what if you're carrying nude photo's of yourself. pornographic or not, maybe like portfolio stuff, nude though, but kinda artistic. is that gonna be the same thing?

    Avatar of metatron
    Comment by metatron
    00:49 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Wait a min...is there are proof that this "child porn ring" distributes the pictures over the internet?

    From what I see, they are only distributing it within a circle of friends, right?

    And these are just kids who doesn't know what they are doing...

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:14 22/03/2011 # ! Neutral (0)

    Um, they know what they are doing. They are sharing naked pictures of themselves. This us ridiculous; the only reason they have these laws is to protect children from sexual predators. Obviously when sharing these pictures among mutual friends in the same age group that involves no predator whatsoever. And isn't it kinda sexist to charge the boys with one crime and the girls with another? Give me a fucking break. Kids that age are going to be attracted to one another; would you rather they illegally look at playboy? And how in the hell are these purple content with prosecuting children?! Please excuse the rant.

    Avatar of chriselric
    Comment by Chris
    02:52 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Oh lawd! Children fappin' to children!

    Although they're at that age...

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:36 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Artefact, there is a error in your report, right here:

    "The wise teachers quickly called in police to crack the case AFTER they saved all the photos".

    Now we just need to wait the MOFO's to upload it.
    C'mon!!!

    Comment by Unsigned
    22:23 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I thought the age range was going to be like 7-12. Those are already teens.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:29 30/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yeah I think they need to make a bloody distinction in the law between a child and an adolescent as they are NOT THE SAME FUCKING THING.

    not an adult =/= a child. It can mean that certainly but they are incorrectly lumping a whole different decade full of ages which are neither children, nor adults.

    Hell if I was the kids I'd argue the fucking semantics of the thing. If nothing else maybe they could get the shit to make legal distinction between a fucking child and an adolescent.

    "We charge you for creating child pornography. How do you plead."

    "Not guilty. I am 15 years old and therefore no longer a child. Either charge me with 'adolescent pornography' or leave me alone with this idiocy."

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:00 28/05/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    This is kind of why I setup my phone to lock up on power up and 30 seconds of idol time. (Keeping people out of my call log & contacts if it's lost or stolen)

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:34 13/11/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    And teachers wonder why nobody likes them...

    Avatar of Persona
    Comment by Persona
    05:16 29/06/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    A few centuries ago it's common practice to marry a 12 years old almost everywhere, but now it's treated as a crime worse than murder. Just funny how moral can change with time.

    Avatar of owi2000
    Comment by owi2000
    06:11 29/06/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yes, but back then the average life expectancy was about 35 years. People were expected to grow up and start contributing to society alot earlier than they are now.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:00 03/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Ithink they are right keep it up guys i wish i were in your shoes haaaaaaaaaaaaa.

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:50 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Over reaction? Or maybe spot on teacher and poilce work

    Avatar of Onsokumaru
    Comment by Onsokumaru
    05:03 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Links to those vids would be nice. To uh...speculate.

    Comment by Tsunande
    02:48 28/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think I could prove that those images are not intentionally made pornographic material but made by mistake, thus making the accusation illegible!

    But eh... I first need to see all of them /grin

    Avatar of dmil666
    Comment by dmil666
    05:15 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    You have a filthy mind. Filthy, filthy filthy...

    Comment by Yoichi
    05:49 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    No, we're trying to help here /grin

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:02 29/06/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    remember that a boy's cellwas taken so do you really want his pics

    Avatar of KuroDubZero
    Comment by ObrokenO
    04:50 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I notice these threads get way more comments then normally when it's related to child pornography.

    The whole case is just stupid. If they want to distribute naked pics of themselves go for it. They will understand the consequences later on when they finally develop a brain. I think the teacher isn't completely wrong but he could have handled the situation way better. I would have just consulted the parents. Girls have it so damn easy lol. They could be just selling body shot for cash. Sounds like a nice inside school business if you don't mind be labeled a slut or worse

    Avatar of Zelgadis4tw
    Comment by Zelgadis4tw
    07:36 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Not really sure if it's so much caek that draws the comments, or the politics/legal that does it, but...I don't see what the harm is in letting these stupid kids do stupid things on their own. IMO though probably not relevant, the pictures should not be admissible in court because the teacher in this case acted as a representative of the State when he examined the phone and found the pics of them.

    Comment by Ichigo69
    Comment by Kgeddoe
    05:24 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Well they ARE child pornographers.

    I don't wish to go over the morality of it: right or wrong, as citizens we all play this game of Law. We're protected by it, so we're in the game. So, we must keep every violations our own secret. It's simple, really.

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:53 14/11/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    I hope you see your own stupidity. Why hide from thing that is suposed to protect you? It's obvious that when you feel the need to hide is from your enemy not your friend.

    Comment by Spoony Bard
    05:34 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Hah, so minors can now be labeled sex offenders for possessing naked pictures of themselves? That's as retarded as saying that you can go to jail for seeing yourself naked in the shower.

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:41 08/01/2015 # ! Neutral (0)

    The US has been pretty stupid with its laws and such. It seems to get worse with time. What they need to understand is in this day and age kids aren't the innocent little things they used to be 20+ years ago. Times change I mostly blame the internet, lets face it, its way to easy to stumple upon stuff on the net.

    Comment by Heavyoak
    05:50 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    oh noos.

    don't tell the police about the shower masterbaters then. that counts as both underage porn and underage sex.

    ROFLMAO.

    Comment by smeat
    20:28 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    genecide too as thousands of potential people drown (as may be the case of males)

    Avatar of Solarknight
    Comment by Jarmel
    05:57 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Whatever happened to the days where the teachers just went to the parents and you got the shit kicked out of you and that was it?

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:54 14/11/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    Government got bigger and certain laws bind teachers to report these kind of things or get fired.

    Avatar of DmonHiro
    Comment by DmonHiro
    04:20 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    .......this is why I hate people. How fucking retarted is the police. GO AFTER REAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS YOU STUPID S.O.BS..

    "Your tax dollars put to work" ...yeah.....I'm thrilled

    Comment by Anonymous
    05:09 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    you dumbass...

    Those kids above WERE child pornographers!

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:34 15/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    You say that like you think they WOULDN'T charge someone who committed suicide with 1st degree murder if they weren't already dead.

    Only reason why they don't is because it's impossible for now.

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:42 08/01/2015 # ! Neutral (0)

    Lol I like that "for now" at the end.

    Avatar of DmonHiro
    Comment by DmonHiro
    05:22 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    But they were pornographing THEMSELVES. That's like charging someone who atempted suicide with atempted murder.

    Comment by smeat
    20:24 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    or people who dump waste at a refuse site as enviromental vandals

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:52 11/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    It's not their fault they got these kids as child pornographers, kids are the only ones these lazy idiots can catch.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:14 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    yeah!

    And people withdrawing money as theft!!!

    Avatar of dmil666
    Comment by dmil666
    03:56 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I guess the cops can't catch real criminals, so they go after kids being dumb kids. The Barney Fife vice squad.
    Also, why the hell didn't I get to go to school with girls like that?

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:53 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    If a cop walks into a house without a warrant and finds a kilogram of coke he can't use it in court as evidence and one can not be prosecuted. The teacher had no right to search the cellphone and thus everything found on it can't be used as evidence.
    I'm no lawyer but that's how I see it.

    Avatar of owi2000
    Comment by owi2000
    03:29 29/06/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    True, he wouldn't be able to make an arrest right there, however it WOULD be probable cause for him to get a warrant radioed in and THEN make the bust. If it's in plain view, then yes, it can be held against you.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:14 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Students actually lose most of their constitutional rights at school. The laws still apply to law enforcement, but a school administrator can search you and your belongings whenever they want to for whatever reason they want to.

    Also, you can't plead the fifth. If an administrator asks you to reveal something incriminating about yourself and you refuse, you can receive further punishment.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:46 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Igiari!

    They don't "lose" their rights, they are only under a different government. The constitution states no other law or government can take away rights given by the constitution. You can ALWAYS plead the fifth, however that can be used against you as you cant defend yourself if they suspect you with some other evidence.

    A school administrator has the right to search you for suspicion of something dangerous, or law breaking not for any reason they want to. And they can do it by force, you don't "have" to show it to them, if you don't want to. Of course that can be worst if you are caught.

    The whole plead the fifth in school doesn't work is bull said by the faculty. In most cases not talking will lead to worst that's the only thing they can mean.

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:03 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    True, except they can punish you for disobedience. Even if the request is unreasonable or imposable

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:02 28/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Nobody ever had rights to begin with so they can't lose something that's nonexistent.

    Comment by ItAintEazy
    06:09 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Actually, the Supreme Court just ruled [http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20090121.html] that evidence that was gotten even without a legal search warrant are now admissable in court.

    Enjoy your fascism, guys!

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:00 23/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    actually the cell phone was confiscated legally though the looking through the contents part is an invasion of privacy they still had legal possession of it. So it could be argued the teacher did nothing wrong(from a completely technical standpoint)

    Avatar of Zelgadis4tw
    Comment by Zelgadis4tw
    07:26 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Thanks, I'll enjoy this fascism like I enjoy Silent Hill and Biohazard [Resident Evil].

    Avatar of kyonichi
    Comment by kyonichi
    10:55 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    America keeps making me throw up in my own mouth. I don't think there's really much in the way of fixing that can be done at this point.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:01 28/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Suitcase nukes can solve lots of problems in the blink of an eye.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:49 11/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Fire can also slove a lot of problems with the added bonus of being a lot funner (and prettier) to watch.

    Avatar of PaperJunkie
    Comment by Anonymous
    04:41 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    a teacher has every right that a parent or guardian does during school hours, after all they are the ones that look after them when the kids are at at there.

    Comment by Robocop
    20:06 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    yeah, but were the photo's taken during school hours? sharing them yes maybe, but not taking the photo's during hours. two different things completely. thats like talking about the drugs one had on the weekend during school hours and actually taking drugs during school hours.

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:57 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    OBJECTION!

    that might be true, however after calling the cops, the policemen were able to legaly trace the ring and find other images on the phones of other students.

    Comment by Tsunande
    02:45 28/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    OBJECTION!
    (.....yeah, thats it)

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:14 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    As I recall, unwarranted search and seizure only applies to law enforcement officials. If a private citizen finds something illegal (though they may find it through illegal acts themselves) it is still admissible.

    Also lol @ finding out about this on a site I read for Japanese news (living in PA).

    Comment by SaruDa
    04:05 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Take that! Dirty child pornographers get their just dues!
    Jeez, reminds me of the case where the 17 year old guy and the 15 year old girl were legitimately dating and the guy got charged with loli.

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:05 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The teacher isn't a law officer, so it doesn't matter if the search was "legal" since there are no laws restricting that kind of thing. The evidence can be used as long as the police didn't obtain it illegally themselves.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:02 03/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    That being the case the teacher should still be sued for a breach of privacy.

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:23 25/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yup, the teacher should be sued for that and the police should have some kind of document that state that they have the right to confiscate and look trough all the mobile's content.

    Which I doubt seeing as there was one call from the teacher that revealed it, and I don't think they make the documents like that from one call.

    Not to mention the teacher was viewing child pornography as well.

    Avatar of lordchair
    Comment by lordchair
    12:21 22/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Anonymous is right.

    Anonymous is wise.





    Post Comment »

Popular

Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments