4 ms·
Teen prosecuted as adult for having naked images – of himself – on phone
- paublyrne 11y agoYou almost want to laugh. This sounds like a story out of the Onion. Unfortunately it is not.
- rsp1984 11y agoThere's a word for that: "Kafkaesque". I rarely find it more appropriate.
- iamcurious 11y agoI no longer can tell when I'm reading the guardian from when I'm reading the onion without looking at the URL.
- weddpros 11y ago"Justice" is the only thing I'm scared of, because of the "". Laws are made to protect children, and "Justice" abuse those laws against... children. "Justice" is just an administration today, devoid of logic and intelligence.
- fingerprinter 11y agoCan a legal expert please explain to me how this can even happen? Shouldn't a judge somewhere be able to take one look at this and realize the ridiculousness of the whole thing and throw it out?
- bbanyc 11y agoNot a legal expert by any means, but my guess is: the authorities disapprove of teens sexting, there's no specific law against sexting (and probably no constitutional way to ban it), but the child pornography laws can be stretched to extend to it. Thus although the prosecution is facially absurd, everyone involved knows what's "really" being prosecuted here and is okay with it.
- tsotha 11y agoJudges aren't supposed to pick and choose which laws get enforced - you can't have a system where the legislature passes a law and rest of the government says "Nah, we don't like that one." What needs to happen is 1) the legislature needs to change the law to include exceptions where appropriate and 2) the voters in that area need to take this case into consideration when the prosecutor comes up for reelection.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoWhere to begin. Judges don't enforce laws. The legislature passing laws and the executive deciding which to enforce is part of the design of checks and balances.
- tsotha 11y agoI can only assume you skimmed my comment without actually reading it. As I pointed out, judges should not be determining which laws get enforced. In North Carolina prosecutors are elected, so there's no "the executive" involved. Furthermore, in the federal system the executive does not decide which laws to enforce. That's a dereliction of duty - he's supposed to enforce them all. Not doing your job is not part of "the design of checks and balances".
- chrismcb 11y agoYou are right judges shouldn't decide what gets enforced. But they do get to decide if the law is a good one or bad one. They can overturn a law, so that it will no longer be enforced
- tsotha 11y agoOnly if there's a constitutional basis for doing so. I'm no expert on North Carolina law, but I'm going to go ahead and assume the state constitution is silent on electronic pictures of naked people.
- chrismcb 11y ago
- chappi42 11y agoWhat I don't understand is, that the two young persons didn't choose to say: f*uck you, stupid law, we won't strike a plea. You.are.nuts! Is the pressure in the US that strong that a sane person 'just has to do this'?
- minimaxir 11y agoWhile the case may be incredibly weak, the defendant may still be unable to fight it due to other factors (most notably cost and time), and therefore take the plea instead. Lawyers are expensive everywhere. Generally, refusing a plea deal for ideological reasons is not a smart legal strategy.
- leaveyou 11y agoWhy are lawyers expensive everywhere ? Demand and supply does not apply to them ?
- minimaxir 11y agoLess of a supply/demand microeconomic reason, more of a willingness-to-pay rationale (i.e. if you are at risk of going to jail, you'll pay ANYTHING to avoid it, and lawyers charge accordingly).
- leaveyou 11y agoIt's kind of paradoxical that people would rather accept unfavorable pleas because they don't want to/can't pay anything.. and the lawyers are still expensive..
- ma2rten 11y agoI think s/he means lawyers are expensive everywhere in the US. I never heard of someone going bankrupt in Europe for defending themselves so I researched it. In Germany there are fixed prices that lawyers can charge.
- tsotha 11y ago
- andybak 11y agoHow does every single person involved in faciliating this case not wake up every morning and think "My entire live is an absurd joke". I've always been fascinated with the concept of institutional insanity - where a group of people can behave rationally but the combined effect of their behaviour is insane. It's possible there's some kind of 'gridlock' whereby it's impossible (or even damaging) for any individual involved to try and resist. It's a milder form of the level of insanity you see within totalitarian states. Reading this echos some of the bizarre logic I read coming from guards at Cambodia's horrific S21. The penalty for resisting (or merely lack of enthusiasm for enabling) was immediate and horrific and would have taken superhuman courage. And it would have most likely made no difference. In this case - the penalty for speaking out is probably nothing worse than damage to one's career. I'd love to know how many people involved in this at any level harbour doubts without acting upon them. I'd like to remind people that this is destroying the lives of two young people. Maybe not beyond repair but possibly sending them on a different course than before and probably not a better one.
- Zigurd 11y agoBecause we haven't actively made their life an absurd joke. While there is a lot to be said against internet mobs, it's a pretty mild step to make sure that the individuals involved in these travesties are identified, covered by the press, and made immortal in the internet halls of shame. They may say "we followed procedure" but it is on them to prove that "procedure" admits no common sense, because, otherwise, it's a failure of their sense and discretion.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- GeorgeOrr 11y agoThis sort of thing has to be remembered next time you hear that prosecutors need broadly worded statutes to have the tools to go after the bad guys. When people bring up criticisms of laws as over-broad, I often hear that prosecutorial discretion will keep such abuses from happening. People who suggest that the law as written will result in such injustice are often ridiculed for imagining that any prosecutor would act that way, or any Judge allow it. Turns out, anyone suggesting that even the most absurd interpretations are not possible are the ones who should be ridiculed. Remember this the next time someone proposes a law, no matter how well intentioned, and even if it happens to advance a cause you care about. The abuses will happen, and how will you feel about that cost if you are the subject of those abuses.
- sarciszewski 11y ago> Turns out, anyone suggesting that even the most absurd interpretations are not possible are the ones who should be ridiculed. Yep. See also: the CFAA.
- discardorama 11y agoNext up: teen accused of being a peeping tom for looking at himself in the mirror after a shower.
- djent 11y agoSo much for the right to face your accuser - was there a mirror in the courtroom for him to look into?
- minimaxir 11y agoFrom the linked article: > The Fayetteville, NC 17-year-old, Cormega Copening, faced five charges of sexual exploitation after police found the photos while searching his phone in an unrelated incident at his school last fall. There is a third-party accuser.
- djent 11y agoFrom the title: >Teen prosecuted as adult for having naked images – of himself The prosecutor is prosecuting on behalf of the very person who is also supposedly the perpetrator. Do you seriously think our founding fathers intended for "The People" v. Copening to be a replacement for Copening v. Copening?
- informatimago 11y agoThis is just the exact same thing as the Ahmed Mohamed clock. Anybody who retain some sanity should leave the USA ASAP.
- minimaxir 11y agoNo? That incident was caused by unfortunate racial stereotyping; this is caused by a literal interpretation of the letter of the law that hasn't caught up with the times.
- jMyles 11y agoYou are right; they are opposites in this way. However, they share the thread of being implementations of unsustainable zero tolerance.
- weddpros 11y agoNobody can imagine tolerance to bombing... but you can imagine tolerance to sexting. These cases are radically different. In the case of the clock, the "Justice" was not involved, there was no accusation.
- jMyles 11y agoI can certainly imagine tolerance to things that look like bombs or even that simulate bombs in every meaningful way other than explosion. "Zero tolerance" for bombs and weapons hasn't generally meant that bombs and weapons are not tolerated - that was already the case. Instead, it has meant that things that merely evoke the image of a bomb or weapon are met with intolerance. For example, I imagine you came across this story: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/08/28/school-allegedly-asks-deaf-preschooler-to-change-his-name-because-sign-language-version-resembles-weapons/ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/08/28/school-allegedly-...
- weddpros 11y ago"things that merely evoke the image of a bomb or weapon are met with intolerance": I call it fear... The deaf boy story is amazingly stupid too. It seems to me we've put to many people in a position to restrict others liberties/rights, and now we pay the price of stupid "rules" or interpretations of "rules". When you give someone a uniform (it's an allegory), you give him power, which must be handled with care... and intelligence. I see all this as a lack of intelligence/common sense.
- kaonashi 11y agoUsually these types of things are about punishing interracial relationships.
- sigma2015 11y agoWhat the article does not mention is that the guy and his gf are black ... [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3223533/North-Carolina-hgh-school-quarterback-girlfriend-charged-adults-exchanging-nude-photos.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3223533/North-Caroli...] Now one might righfully argue that this case is not just ludicrous but also racist.
- sigma2015 11y agowhy the downvote?
- dtech 11y agoExcept this happens a lot more, independent of race. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/police-drop-plans-to-photograph-teens-erection-in-sexting-case/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/police-drop-plans... http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/bizarre-sexting-case-virginia-may-reconsider-sending-naked-photos/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/bizarre-sexting-cas... http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/underage-sexting-isnt-ruining-lives/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/underage-sexting-isnt-ru... https://aclu-wa.org/blog/sexting-and-law-press-send-turn-teenagers-registered-sex-offenders https://aclu-wa.org/blog/sexting-and-law-press-send-turn-tee...
- tsotha 11y ago>Now one might righfully argue that this case is not just ludicrous but also racist. Purely based on the fact the defendant and his girlfriend are black? No, I think not.
- aresant 11y agoStory I expected based on headline and the outraged HN comments: "guy takes nude selfies and is charged with crime." Actual story "guy is charged with having nude images of underage girlfriend on his phone, prosecutors inflate charges to force settlement by reaching to include his own nude photos". Still stupid. But way less black and white.
- jarfil 11y agoThe other part of the story is: "girlfriend also gets charged with having selfies of herself" They both got charged as adults for exploiting themselves as minors to share the pics with each other.
- dtech 11y agoGirl was also charged but took a plea deal. Also these people could legally have sex with each other, but apparently aren't allowed to have nude pictures of each other or themselves.
- jarfil 11y agoThis is what I love about this case: Let it be known that Brianna Denison, Fayetteville, North Carolina, by order of the court won't have a cellphone with her to call for help if someone abducts her and tries to rape her. Very smart, yessir.
- gozo 11y agoJust having your phone searched and the police looking at pictures of you and your girlfriend naked seems like enough of a violation in itself.
- jzd 11y agoNorth Carolina. Black people. Got it
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- soneil 11y agoI've said this before elsewhere, but one concern with cases like this is that it means sex offender registries are becoming more and more useless. When people end up having to register because of 'stupid' crimes like this - either they stand the chance of being persecuted as a sexual offender for the rest of their lives. Or the registry itself becomes increasingly useless as we start to assume people are there for peeing in the wrong place.