Police want to force 17 yo to have erection as evidence

[TheHammer]

The same argument could be made then to allow underage children to drink as long as they don't drive anywhere.
Children under 18 really aren't in the position to be making those decisions. As to who it hurts, if one of those kids gets pregnant or an STI while fooling around those can be life altering. If those pictures being sent end up posted on the internet it can cause real harm socially at an age where social issues are of a major importance to a person's self worth.

Having kids who are caught doing such things compelled to attend extra sex-ed classes, and or community service is not the end of the world for them. If anything, it will make them think more carefully about their actions in the future. It doesn't make someone a prude to realize that given the potential consequences, sex isn't something to be cavalier about.

But extra classes aren't a fine, are they?

They can be perceived that way if the kid has to pay for them himself. I'd tend to think classes and community service rather than a fine would be a better way to go since they are a form of "soft time" that could have some benefit. But a fine is a way for the state to recoup costs incurred by having to prosecute the offender, and may be unavoidable. I'm not thinking of anything outrageous there though.

[bilateralrope]

The case was set for trial on July 1, where Foster said Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Claiborne Richardson told her that her client must either plead guilty or police would obtain another search warrant “for pictures of his erect penis,” for comparison to the evidence from the teen’s cell phone. Foster asked how that would be accomplished and was told that “we just take him down to the hospital, give him a shot and then take the pictures that we need.”

Sounds like they wanted to intimidate him into pleading guilty so they could skip the trial.

[Lolpah]

I'm trying to strike a balance between some sort of penalty (rather than outright permissiveness) and the incredibly harsh penalties that the subject of the OP is facing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that age of consent laws mostly deal with a person over that age having sex with a person under that age, not sex between two persons who are both under that age. The age of consent in Massachusetts is 16, so the issue in this case seems to be that the boy was over that age (17) and the girl under (15).

[Elheru Aran]

Age of consent has been quite the issue since people realized that teens are actually having sex (somewhere around the 60s or 70s). Generally it was/is as you describe (person over/person under), but now nuances are developing that need to be dealt with.

--Person underage having sex with person underage
--Person underage having sex with person younger than them (say a 16-year-old with a 13-year-old).
--Person slightly over-age having sex with person underage (situation of OP).

The problem is that if caught in the act and reported to the police (that's important), even consensual sex is usually considered illegal in most areas under age of consent laws. There is generally some latitude if both parties are underage, but a massive stink can be easily created that will ruin a teenager's life for years.

Cameras and phones add extra complications to the matter. It's not something that has an easy solution, especially with the accelerating pace of information technology. The best answer is education, and starting that from an early age... but the issue there is conservative attitudes in much of the US...

I wonder, could the non-US members who choose to reply here comment on how this situation might be handled in *their* countries for comparison purposes?

[General Zod]

It looks like internet outrage can occasionally be good for something. The police department in question has thought better of going through with it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... -teen.html

[blahface]

By this logic we should sit back and let the Prosecutor do it, then arrest him and the cops for possession of child pornography.

I'm sure state laws give the police immunity from prosecution, but would it be possible for them to be prosecuted under federal law? If so, wouldn't it even be a prosecutable offense just attempting to make underage porn? Aaron Swartz got prosecuted just for having intent to redistribute copyrighted material.

[AniThyng]

By this logic we should sit back and let the Prosecutor do it, then arrest him and the cops for possession of child pornography.

I'm sure state laws give the police immunity from prosecution, but would it be possible for them to be prosecuted under federal law? If so, wouldn't it even be a prosecutable offense just attempting to make underage porn? Aaron Swartz got prosecuted just for having intent to redistribute copyrighted material.

Is it "porn" though? If every image of a naked body is "porn" then there's a whole lot of museums and statues and medical texts that need recategorization...

(come to think of it, I once had a medical encyclopedia that had nude photos of 9 yo's to illustrate the developmental differences between dwarfism, normal growth and whatever it was that is the opposite of dwarfism. )

[Coop D'etat]

Age of consent has been quite the issue since people realized that teens are actually having sex (somewhere around the 60s or 70s). Generally it was/is as you describe (person over/person under), but now nuances are developing that need to be dealt with.

--Person underage having sex with person underage
--Person underage having sex with person younger than them (say a 16-year-old with a 13-year-old).
--Person slightly over-age having sex with person underage (situation of OP).

The problem is that if caught in the act and reported to the police (that's important), even consensual sex is usually considered illegal in most areas under age of consent laws. There is generally some latitude if both parties are underage, but a massive stink can be easily created that will ruin a teenager's life for years.

Cameras and phones add extra complications to the matter. It's not something that has an easy solution, especially with the accelerating pace of information technology. The best answer is education, and starting that from an early age... but the issue there is conservative attitudes in much of the US...

I wonder, could the non-US members who choose to reply here comment on how this situation might be handled in *their* countries for comparison purposes?

Canadian age of consent is 16, but 14 to 15 year olds can consent to people less than 5 years older than them, 12 and 13 year olds can consent to less than 2 years older. With a caveat that you must be 18 to consent to a potentially exploitative relationship. This is after the rules were tightened by the Federal government as part of their tough on crime gimic.

I'm perpetually astonished by the poor drafting and lack of thought that goes into American laws on consent without similarity in age provisions.

[Terralthra]

Many states do have such similarity in age provisions for sexual intercourse. Police in many states are trying to criminalize the legal sexual relationships by pursuing under clearly ludicrous grounds of child pornography.

[bilateralrope]

It looks like internet outrage can occasionally be good for something. The police department in question has thought better of going through with it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... -teen.html

I wonder if anyone is going to be looking into if that police department has tried to threaten anyone else into pleading guilty.

[Grumman]

The case was set for trial on July 1, where Foster said Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Claiborne Richardson told her that her client must either plead guilty or police would obtain another search warrant “for pictures of his erect penis,” for comparison to the evidence from the teen’s cell phone. Foster asked how that would be accomplished and was told that “we just take him down to the hospital, give him a shot and then take the pictures that we need.”

Sounds like they wanted to intimidate him into pleading guilty so they could skip the trial.

That's what I thought when I read it too. While they might have been able to dress it up as "necessary", what they were doing was basically threatening to rape him if he didn't plead guilty.

It looks like internet outrage can occasionally be good for something. The police department in question has thought better of going through with it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... -teen.html

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Apparently we need to repeat these same instances every so often to remind us all how stupid zero tolerance laws are. Child pornography laws exist to protect children from adults. Period.

[General Zod]

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

One thing at a time, eh?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

Not a whole lot you can do on this one. Maybe he could sue the entire justice system down there but he wouldn't be able to focus on just one. Though personally I hope he does because you're right. The police are bastards for even going through with this. The prosecutors are bastards for not pulling the plug and the judge, in my opinion the worst one of the bunch, approved a search warrant to photograph the erect penis of a 17 year old and forcefully if necessary.

Shameful.

[TheFeniX]

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

One thing at a time, eh?

Not really. The whole "penis needle stabbing for justice" incident really exists as an escalation of the current stupid laws. If there wasn't such a punitive punishment on the table for nude selfies, they couldn't even entertain the possibility of potentially permanently fucking up someone's junk just so a guy could get paid to scrutinize both photos and be like "I've seen quite a few peckers in my day. It's my professional opinion that this is the offending penis."

[General Zod]

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

One thing at a time, eh?

Not really. The whole "penis needle stabbing for justice" incident really exists as an escalation of the current stupid laws. If there wasn't such a punitive punishment on the table for nude selfies, they couldn't even entertain the possibility of potentially permanently fucking up someone's junk just so a guy could get paid to scrutinize both photos and be like "I've seen quite a few peckers in my day. It's my professional opinion that this is the offending penis."

I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue against.

[Grumman]

Apparently we need to repeat these same instances every so often to remind us all how stupid zero tolerance laws are. Child pornography laws exist to protect children from adults. Period.

Come to think of it, there's another way that child pornography laws hurt children. You know how every now and again some kid is talked into posting a nude selfie which is then used as blackmail material? Under a non-shit legal framework, the blackmailer would be the first person on the hook for child pornography charges, for threatening to send the kid's photos to anyone without the kid's permission. Instead, they can threaten the kid with jail time on top of the humiliation of having the photos distributed.

[TheHammer]

Semi NSFW?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75yAH9hWrZ0

[Elfdart]

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

Not a whole lot you can do on this one. Maybe he could sue the entire justice system down there but he wouldn't be able to focus on just one. Though personally I hope he does because you're right. The police are bastards for even going through with this. The prosecutors are bastards for not pulling the plug and the judge, in my opinion the worst one of the bunch, approved a search warrant to photograph the erect penis of a 17 year old and forcefully if necessary.

Shameful.

Why not just disclose the names of the police, prosecutors and the judge in the case? I assume that as in most southern states, judges in Virginia are elected rather than appointed. If so, run campaign ads that this judge wanted to force a boner on a teenage boy and take pictures of it. I doubt the judge would be re-elected. The police and prosecutors could use some public shaming as well.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Not good enough. They're still a pack of bastards who are charging him for having naked photos of himself.

Not a whole lot you can do on this one. Maybe he could sue the entire justice system down there but he wouldn't be able to focus on just one. Though personally I hope he does because you're right. The police are bastards for even going through with this. The prosecutors are bastards for not pulling the plug and the judge, in my opinion the worst one of the bunch, approved a search warrant to photograph the erect penis of a 17 year old and forcefully if necessary.

Shameful.

Why not just disclose the names of the police, prosecutors and the judge in the case? I assume that as in most southern states, judges in Virginia are elected rather than appointed. If so, run campaign ads that this judge wanted to force a boner on a teenage boy and take pictures of it. I doubt the judge would be re-elected. The police and prosecutors could use some public shaming as well.

As long as it is done in a responsible and thorough manner I don't have a problem with this.

[houser2112]

I don't know if this is answered anywhere, but why are they jumping right to chemically inducing an erection? Surely they could try just giving him some magazines first?

[LaCroix]

As strange as it sounds, that would be providing pornography to a minor, and probably illegal... #crazyworld

[Elheru Aran]

As strange as it sounds, that would be providing pornography to a minor, and probably illegal... #crazyworld

This is unfortunately probably the case. At least it's an academic question now as it's been dropped.

[TheHammer]

I don't know if this is answered anywhere, but why are they jumping right to chemically inducing an erection? Surely they could try just giving him some magazines first?

Considering he would know why he was there, I'd say that's a major boner-killer. The root problem is the law in the first place anyway.

[bilateralrope]

I don't know if this is answered anywhere, but why are they jumping right to chemically inducing an erection? Surely they could try just giving him some magazines first?

This was never about gathering evidence. This was about intimidating him into pleading guilty.
To quote from the article:

The case was set for trial on July 1, where Foster said Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Claiborne Richardson told her that her client must either plead guilty or police would obtain another search warrant “for pictures of his erect penis,” for comparison to the evidence from the teen’s cell phone. Foster asked how that would be accomplished and was told that “we just take him down to the hospital, give him a shot and then take the pictures that we need.”

Pity the sexual nature of everything involved distracted everyone from the attempt at a forced confession.