Viewing Children Possibly a Felony in Maine Soon

[Big Orange]

Somewhere in Britain several years ago, a local council decided cut down a large oak tree because they feared that it would be a good hiding place for molestors.

[Simplicius]

The quality of reporting on issues of significance is woefully inadequate, and there are two particular weaknesses from which legal reportage suffers. One: the reference to the actual legislation is almost never included in the article, so you can't look it up. Two: the reporters seldom represent the significant piece of legislature accurately.

An Act To Strengthen the Crime of Visual Sexual Aggression against a Child
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:

Sec. 1. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:
1. A person is guilty of visual sexual aggression against a child if:

• A. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire or for the purpose of causing affront or alarm, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age, exposes the actor's genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person's genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor's spouse, has not in fact attained 14 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime;
  
  B. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age, exposes the actor's genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person's genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor's spouse, has not in fact attained 12 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime;
  
  C. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age, intentionally engages in visual surveillance, aided or unaided by mechanical or electronic equipment, of the uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person in a private place, not the actor's spouse and not having in fact attained 14 years of age, under circumstances in which a reasonable person would expect to be safe from such visual surveillance. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; or
  
  D. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age, intentionally engages in visual surveillance, aided or unaided by mechanical or electronic equipment, of the uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person in a private place, not the actor's spouse and not having in fact attained 12 years of age, under circumstances in which a reasonable person would expect to be safe from such visual surveillance. Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime.

As used in this subsection, the term "private place" has the same meaning as in section 511.

Sec. 2. 17-A MRSA §511, sub-§2, as amended by PL 1999, c. 116, §1, is further amended to read:
2. As used in this section, "private place" means a place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from surveillance, including, but not limited to, changing or dressing rooms, bathrooms and similar places, but excluding a place to which the public or a substantial group has access.

Ed. note: since this board lacks a strikethrough option, text struck in the actual legislation is here shrunk and italicized.

For all the foolish paranoia in which children are blanketed these days, it would still be prudent to react to the laws in question rather than the inadequate journalistic coverage thereof.

[xerex]

I can understand the C and D parts. except for the : not the actors spouse "part. does main allow people 14 and under to be married ?

but dont the A and B parts fall under indencent exposre, indecent assault ?

[Jaepheth]

I can understand the C and D parts. except for the : not the actors spouse "part. does main allow people 14 and under to be married ?

but dont the A and B parts fall under indencent exposre, indecent assault ?

People visiting from other countries may be married very young. And even some states allow younger people to marry with parental consent.

This law will permit heftier penalties against people committing indecent exposure to children as opposed to adults.

[Coyote]

All I could find was the situation in England in 2006, with Abigail Rae, a 2-year-old who drowned. A bricklayer saw her wandering shortly before her death and decided not to help her because he was afraid of being mistaken for a pedophile.

UK Telegraph:

Day of the dad: paedophilia hysteria leaves men afraid to help
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 23/03/2006

The inquest on two-year-old Abigail Rae highlighted a sad dilemma, says Tom Leonard

There was one small detail that jumped out at me in the tragic story of Abigail Rae, the two-year-old who wandered off from her village playgroup and ended up dying in a garden pond. Tucked away at the end of yesterday's inquest report was a line about how Clive Peachey, a bricklayer, drove past a child on her own, whom he later concluded had been Abby.

She was not walking straight, she was tottering, said Mr Peachey. "I kept thinking should I go back? One of the reasons I did not go back is because I thought someone would see me and think I was trying to abduct her."

advertisementWithout wishing to add to the pain that Mr Peachey must be feeling, I have to say that opinion in my office was divided over his failure to intervene. Everyone agreed it could be filed under "sad sign of the times", but women generally thought his a pathetic excuse, particularly given that Abby was on her own. Men were more sympathetic and one female colleague said she could understand it "in a funny sort of way".

I'd swear there was a similar case in America not too long ago involving a slightly older boy, but I can't find a newsfeed.