Sexting Roundup: The Anxiety Surrounding Teens Sharing Naked Pictures of Themselves Continues to Make News

Ohio lawmaker wants to make sexting a misdemeanor

Last week, the Columbus Dispatch reported that Ohio State Representative Ron Maag (R-Lebanon) plans to introduce a bill in the Ohio state legislature which would make the creation, exchange, and possession of nude materials between minors a First-Degree Misdemeanor.

According to Representative Maag,

Local prosecutors have brought to my attention that under current Ohio law these teens could be charged with a felony and classified as sex offenders …There is concern that this may not be appropriate for these minors.

Under Ohio law, the punishment for a First Degree Misdemeanor is either no more than a six month prison sentence, or a fine of no more than $1,000.  (R.C 2929.28)

While Maag’s heart is in the right place—his proposed bill will prevent fifteen-year-olds from being registered sex offenders well into their 30s, and maintain a legal regime where prosecutors only apply felony possession/distribution of child pornography laws to those laws’  intended population of actual child-pornographers—he ultimately misses the point.

Like those minors charged with felonies, teenagers charged under Maag’s proposed law would still be compelled to navigate the criminal justice system as a consequence of their expression.  It is doubtful whether this experience will lead to the intended result of curtailing the practice of sexting.

Mass Sexting or Mass Hysteria?

In another instance of sexting meets the criminal justice system, three Massachusetts teenagers are under investigation by the Holbrook, Massachusetts police department for allegedly creating and distributing a video that, according to news reports, features two of the kids “having sexual intercourse while the third recorded it.”

The video was shared amongst students attending Holbrook Junior-Senior High School.

One of the two people featured in the video, a girl under the age of 16, claims that

she did not realize she was being captured on cell phone.


She went to police with her parents when she realized the video was circulating.

The district attorney is now grappling with what charges to bring against these minors.

The police are encouraging

students who have received the video on their phones to bring it to police so it can be disposed of properly.

The Holbrook police are also planning to speak at school assemblies addressing the practice of sexting.

The police department’s impulse to apply criminal and legal consequences is less appropriate than their plan to educate youth about the sexting issue.  Teenagers are best served by an educational program which gives them the information necessary to recognize the social consequences of sexting.

A Fourteen-year-old is Arrested for Posting Nude Photos of Self on MySpace

The Associated Press reports that a New Jersey teenager has been arrested for posting nude photos of herself on MySpace.

The fourteen-year-old was arrested after a state task force, relying on a tip from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, alerted the Passaic County Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff’s Office, upon investigation into the matter, found that the fourteen-year-old had posted nearly 30 nude photos of herself. A spokesman for the Sheriff’s Office reported that the photos were “very explicit.”

The fourteen-year-old, who posted the photos for her boyfriend to see, faces charges of possession/distribution of child pornography.   If she is convicted, she would be required to register as a sex offender under New Jersey’s Megan’s Law.

In an interesting twist, New Jersey resident Maureen Kanka, the mother of Megan Kanka for whom Megan’s Law was named following the 7-year-old’s rape and murder by a convicted sex offender, has spoken out against the charges brought in this case. Kanka believes that the fourteen-year-old’s actions:

shouldn’t fall under Megan’s Law in any way, shape or form. She should have an intervention and counseling, because the only person she exploited was herself.

Intervention, counseling, along with education are the ways to address the practice of teens sharing nude photos of themselves via interactive technology.  Not criminalization.

For NCAC’s previous coverage of this issue, click  here, here and here.

About Blog of the National Coalition Against Censorship

Blogging Censorship is where National Coalition Against Censorship staff weigh in on the censorship issues on their minds.
This entry was posted in Jennifer Liebman: Author and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Sexting Roundup: The Anxiety Surrounding Teens Sharing Naked Pictures of Themselves Continues to Make News

  1. Pingback: Vermont Looks to Decriminalize Teen Sexting « Blogging Censorship

  2. Denis Drew says:

    Possible First Amendment protection for teen “sexters?”

    The justification for not protecting child pornography under the First Amendment is that it is necessary to take prurient advantage of a child to make the picture. Hand drawn or computer generated child porn is not illegal (unless they use a live child for an artist’s subject I suppose) – one thinks movie scenes in “The Glitter Dome.”

    A sexting teen who transmits her own is not being taken advantage of by an adult or anyone else. If she sends nude pictures to an 80 year old her part in the transaction might very well be protected under the First Amendment – once the first principles of the scenario are considered. Ditto for her side of sexting to a friend.

    There is an outside chance a child possessing such the “sext” should be considered to be taking prurient advantage of a minor under the First Amendment (depending on which generation of judges gets hold of it maybe) – but does it make sense to make a teen boyfriend — who may even have made legal sexual contact with the girl — the equivalent of an adult who possesses child pornography?

    The free speech crossover seems to be when boys distribute nude pictures of girls among themselves without the girls permission – certainly not free speech. But to begin with no child was hurt making the image. The kind of personal damage to a child making pornographic images may be much more devastating than that of having the image passed around (again, once thinks of “The Glitter Dome”) – at least most of the time.

    Wouldn’t we feel more comfortable with law that punishes such a gross invasion of privacy in a case for case damage way – not rounding up dozens of students and plastering them all with sex offender status and heavy jail time – but treating the offense as the privacy offense it really is?

  3. Pingback: Blogging Censorship

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s