Is this legal?!? (warning... kinda adult discussion)

[udsuna]

I've got a hypothetical situation for you guys that someone might actually know the answer to.

Say you made an amature porno of yourself and someone else, when you're a minor, like... 16, yeah... and your partner is over 18. Well, if you put said video in storage, and end up uncovering it years later, when you're an adult, are you in possession of child pornography (in legal-ese, "recording the sex act of a minor")? And can you be charged with possessing such a thing, and prosecuted, despite the fact that it is YOU whom were the minor, you who filmed it, and you who was more than happy to participate in the first place?

I don't know if it's legal or not... I do know, if I was in a hypothetical trial for said hypothetical crime, I'd ask for a jury. Legal or not, who'd actually convict someone for something like that?

[Shlup]

Uhm, uhm, uhm...

[Big D]

Since "you" are in the video (as the minor), this would make "you" the victim, not the guilty party. However, "your" partner would be in strife.

Best solution: "You" should either keep the document very well hidden, or else destroy it.

Or better yet, create an all-new, all-legal version, now that "you're" old enough to do so.

[udsuna]

Hmm... methinks you did a little overkill on the quotations to point out a relatively minor grammar issue. Especially as it's one that only matters in formal writing, and is generally a non-issue in conversational dialogue.

[Devourment]

How can you be in possesion of child pornography if you are in it? It's only if it's someone else.

[Big D]

Hmm... methinks you did a little overkill on the quotations to point out a relatively minor grammar issue. Especially as it's one that only matters in formal writing, and is generally a non-issue in conversational dialogue.

I used the quotation marks because I was talking about a hypothetical "you", not literally you. You said it was a hypothetical scenario; I was being consistent with that.

The only way I could see someone getting convicted for an act like that would be if they showed the recording to other people. But it'd still be safer to destroy it, because it could cause problems for the actual offender, namely the one who was over 18 at the time it was recorded. I use 'offender' in the sense of one who committed a criminal act, not as an indication of moral judgment.

[udsuna]

How can you be in possesion of child pornography if you are in it? It's only if it's someone else.

Nope, like I said, according to law, it just requires a "sex act involving a minor". Nothing in the definition makes exceptions based upon the minor's willingness to participate, or for that matter, who can't be prosecuted if possessing.


Oh, so it was an overkill play-along hypothetical "wink-wink, nudge-nudge" thing. I thought you were mocking my use of second-tense, instead of first or third, which is a BIG no-no when dealing with grammar. We could also get a "big no-no" by breeding you with boris. Which is probably also illegal.

[Peegee]

"Your" 18 year old partner, assuming "he" were alive at the time of discovery of evidence would be guilty of sexual contact with a minor.

That is...if "you" were disgusting and sick enough to charge him. Pervert.

Just like Big D said. Though I'm not sure if he said anything about the partner being charged with being in pedo porn. Would he? Probably.

[Big D]

Nope, like I said, according to law, it just requires a "sex act involving a minor". Nothing in the definition makes exceptions based upon the minor's willingness to participate

That's because minors are legally presumed incapable of giving informed consent to acts like this. It's the same reason we have an 'age of consent'.

Without actually examining the statute in question, it'd be hard to give a legally sound answer to this question. But by using the harm principle and the normal victim/offender situation, I'd say it's perfectly legal. Even though the legislation might say that anyone is guilty, a certain degree of interpretation is required. The reason it might say 'anyone is guilty' is because it is intended to apply to anyone who has such a recording - on the basis that it is harmful for them to do so. Arguably, by possessing a recording of themselves, a person is not causing harm to anyone else, or benefitting from another's harm.[q=udsuna]We could also get a "big no-no" by breeding you with boris. Which is probably also illegal.
[/q]She's 19, I'm 21, so in theory it's legal, but in reality it's so unlikely as to be not worth considering.

[udsuna]

To add to the "hypotheticals"... let's just say the girl is protected from statutory rape charges by statute of limitations laws (which is 5 years here, assuming the minor is over 14 years old), and doesn't have a copy of the film.

[Big D]

Statute of limitations applies to criminal offences of that kind? I thought it was only for civil suits and minor crimes...

In that case, it's probably even "safer" to own a copy. Still not advisable, though there's less chance of anyone getting jailed for it. You couldn't be convicted for possessing it, but I'm pretty sure you'd have to surrender it if the authorities asked.

[Ravenmorghane]

er i thought the legal age for consenting sex was 16??? if the minor was 16 its legal isnt it? or maybe im being blonde again but never mind

destroying the tape would be a good idea unless the minor wanted to use it to convict the other party (the 18 yr old) muahahaha

[Big D]

er i thought the legal age for consenting sex was 16??? if the minor was 16 its legal isnt it? or maybe im being blonde again but never mind

In some US states, if one person's over 18 then they both have to be, or else it's statutory rape. The legal age for appearing in a pronographic publication is undoubtedly 18.

[udsuna]

Statute of limitations applies to criminal offences of that kind? I thought it was only for civil suits and minor crimes...

Actually, yes, there are statute of limitation laws on almost every crime, at least in the U.S.

Espionage against the government and murder are the only crimes that I know of that lack statute laws. For rape, I think it's 20, and same for child molestation (aka, sex act with someone under 14). Statutory rape (sex act with a minor over 14 who was consenting) is just a 5 year statutory.

As for filming a sex act with a minor, only the minor did the filming, and whatever the limitations on that, it's moot as the tape would still be in someone's possession, and the charge would be for possessing the film. Statute does not apply.

[SomethingBig]

Oh God, this really isn't hypothetical, is it? :weep: