4
   

Judges Object to Bad Sex Crime Laws

 
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2010 08:59 am
@firefly,
Hear, hear!!

http://open.salon.com/blog/greg_correll/2009/02/11/files/applause1234363884.gif
0 Replies
 
HesDeltanCaptain
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 14 Aug, 2015 07:41 am
@hawkeye10,
Sounds like they're talking about how some states or localities have a x months/years PER image. Given how many individual images most porn collections are, sentences can reach into the centuries or even millenia pretty easily.
0 Replies
 
HesDeltanCaptain
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 14 Aug, 2015 07:42 am
@Intrepid,
Devil's Advocate: Used to have the exact same feelings of public outrage over homosexuality too.
0 Replies
 
HesDeltanCaptain
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 14 Aug, 2015 07:47 am
@hawkeye10,
"Max Hardcore" did time in prison for this very thing. Though his videos use all over 18 actors, in one of them the "actress" claimed she was 12 (was in fact in her 20s.) So that statement alone classified the whole video as child pornography.

That's obviously not something which should be illegal since the absurdity stands apparent if you imagine the cast of "90210" (who were in their 20s and 30s) claiming to be minors. Though I didn't follow the series, I would assume there were scenes of making out or even sex which this kind of law would make child pornography even though the sex is simulated, and the actors NOT minors.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 14 Aug, 2015 10:18 pm
@HesDeltanCaptain,
Quote:
hat's obviously not something which should be illegal since the absurdity stands apparent if you imagine the cast of "90210" (who were in their 20s and 30s) claiming to be minors.

Interesting. I get around but this is the first time that I have heard this point.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:22 pm
Quote:
“That makes a great deal of sense,” Kennedy responds. And suddenly the government’s odds of winning fall to roughly zero.

In fact, only one justice—Samuel Alito—appeared inclined to rule against Lockhart on Tuesday. Every other justice seemed to lean against the government and in favor of sparing Lockhart a mandatory 10-year sentence. Presuming this near-unanimity holds until decision day, Lockhart could be a slam dunk for criminal defense attorneys—and a strong reprimand to overzealous prosecutors eager to land lengthy sentences. Everyone wants to put child pornographers, rapists, and child pornography–consuming rapists behind bars. But the justices’ message to the government on Tuesday was clear: Before you go in for the law-and-order stuff, find a law that actually makes sense.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2015/11/supreme_court_lockhart_case_scalia_argues_for_lenity.html

And it would be well past time for the Supremes to deal with abusive prosecutions. They are over 20 years late in understanding that this government abuses its citizens with the "justice" system.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/14/2021 at 02:20:35