[The lawyer] said Detective Abbott told her that after obtaining photos of the teen’s erect penis he would "use special software to compare pictures of this penis to this penis. Who does this? It’s just crazy."
July 9, 2014
"A Manassas City teenager accused of 'sexting' a video to his girlfriend is now facing a search warrant..."
"... in which Manassas City police and Prince William County prosecutors want to take a photo of his erect penis, possibly forcing the teen to become erect by taking him to a hospital and giving him an injection, the teen’s lawyers said....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
56 comments:
I'm thinking that you are out-drudging Drudge.
The police seem to be confused about who belongs behind bars.
There's a Boomer who want a dick pic in here somewhere.
What a dick move...
Because of media exchanged with his fifteen year old girlfriend? Outrageous. He should submit to it under no circumstances.
So he is a victim of child pornography created by himself.
He's 17, she's 15. So the question is, was she charged when she sent naked her pictures and or stored his dick pic on her phone?
If not, why not?
If you read the story, the girlfriend (aged 15) sent him a nude picture first, and he responded with the dick pic. So why isn't she being prosecuted as well? (Her mother is the one who called the cops apparently.)
If the kid is convicted, he would have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
I thought this was why kids use Snapchat these days.
The spirit of Mrs. Balbricker lives on!
What the cops and the DA won't do to get a buzz.
Sorry about the huge address.
This one works too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmS95hp4uM8
Tar.
Feathers.
OK, so a 15 year old girl and a 17 year old boy have been caught playing 'you show me yours and I'll show you mine', something that probably 50+% of all teenagers engage in. I don't think either should be charged with much of anything- its dumbass consensual behavior by two minors. Let their parents deal with them.
The state wants him to do hard time.
Everyone has it wrong.
Kill all the police first, THEN kill all the lawyers.
"We had to make teen porn to save the world from teen porn" is the new "We had to burn down the village in order to save it."
The first problem is, the authorities have to prosecute in these cases, or get hit with selective prosecution when they try to prosecute the real perverts.
The second problem is, when these photos get out (and they always do) they soon make there way onto the perverts' sites. In order to prosecute them, you have to prosecute those who took the picture.
There is no "i'm a minor", "I took a nude picture of myself" or "I took a nude picture of my boyfriend/girlfriend exemption in the law.
Hell..they're attacking moms for putting "coppertone" style pictures of their kids on facebook.
Why are the cops acting so crazy. Did the girl's mom fire them up with allegations that some internet sex monster was after her little girl?
Althouse: Isn't forcing the boy to get an erection in order to compare photos a form of self-incrimination? One would think his attorney could stop that. Of course, one can't stop blood tests or DNA tests these days. So I guess that's their precedent.
EDH said...
The state wants him to do hard time.
LOL, good double-entendre.
The war on men has descended to the war on boys.
"...Manassas City police and Prince William County prosecutors want to take a photo of his erect penis, possibly forcing the teen to become erect by taking him to a hospital and giving him an injection....
I hope they take him to Guantanamo before they do this. Otherwise people might start to lose respect for our legal system.
There are so many things wrong with this I don't even know where to start.
"Detective Abbott told her that after obtaining photos of the teen’s erect penis he would "use special software to compare pictures of this penis to this penis."
One of the most insane things I've ever read and that's saying a lot.
So he is accused of trafficking in child pornography when the "child" in question is himself? Can you be guilty of robbing yourself too?
And if he's guilty of manufacturing child pornography by taking and sending a photo of his own penis, how exactly are prosecutors not doing the same here?
The tactic makes no sense from a practical standpoint--if they needed to prove that he sent something he shouldn't have to another minor, they can prove it simply by showing that he sent that photo from that phone--no need to prove that it was his own penis. None of this makes sense.
This is the sexual assault of a teenage boy by adults under the color of authority. Anyone who is party to this other than the boy should be on their way to prison.
The State of Virginia sucks in so many ways.
"So why isn't she being prosecuted as well?"
Because she doesn't have a penis.
Can the police and prosecutors here just FOAD? Or go to hell by the shortest possible route?
There is no "i'm a minor", "I took a nude picture of myself" or "I took a nude picture of my boyfriend/girlfriend exemption in the law.
Of course there is a minor exemption in the law. These prosecutors are insane.
If they were caught having sex, there would be no charges. After all, they were both given codoms at their public school since 6th grade. So the government will actually facilitate in this boy putting his dick in his girfriend, but if he just shows her a picture of it instead they arrest him, charge him with two felonies and sexually abuse him.
I am so disappointed with Virginia.
Brando said...
if they needed to prove that he sent something he shouldn't have to another minor, they can prove it simply by showing that he sent that photo from that phone--no need to prove that it was his own penis.
Since they want to charge him with child pornography, they need to prove that the penis was underage. For that they do need to prove that it was his.
Note: I am not defending the police actions here.
Are there no adults with judgment in the Prince William DA's office?
So, vaginal ultrasound is rape, but injections to force erections are OK?
When are cops allowed to use injections into a body to gain evidence?
He should have posed naked holding an AR-15 magazine and moved for a change of venue to District of Columbia.
Why would they need an injection to get a 17-yo to have an erection?
"Since they want to charge him with child pornography, they need to prove that the penis was underage. For that they do need to prove that it was his."
I guess that makes sense if the charge is based on him somehow exploiting a minor with the minor being himself, which is of course absurd. I mean, if the police busted a child porn ring where adults were filming children having sex, would the police charge the children as well? My thought was that the children were the victims here.
If they're trying to charge the 17 year old boy here because he sent a naked photo to a 15 year old girl, on the other hand, then it doesn't really matter whose penis was in the photo. Of course, if it isn't against the law for a 17 year old boy to have sex with a 15 year old girl--and I don't know whether that's the case in VA--then it's equally absurd for him to be criminally liable for sending her a nude photo.
I'm all for protecting minors, but this is a perfect example of overzealous prosecution--because "protecting children" is such a political goldmine, there's always this sort of overreach and abuse of power. Unfortunately we have a low-information citizenry that hears "accused of sex crimes involving children" and they go right into torch-wielding mob form without stopping to hear the details.
The idea that this kid can be hobbled for life as a "sex offender" is frightening.
My newest theory is that the justice system is full of pedophiles and rapists who want to dilute the importance of the sex offender registry by convicting as many teens as possible for being teenagers.
The Manassa PD released a statement last night that seems to claim that both the search warrant story and the story about having already photographed this kid's private parts are a hoax:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/local/wp/2014/07/09/manassas-city-police-release-statement-on-teen-sexting-case/
You can see a picture of the child-abusing sex pervert here: "Master" Detective Abbott.
And even if the boy's erect penis looks exactly like the one "sexted," is there no reasonable doubt that it might not be his?
"Why would they need an injection to get a 17-yo to have an erection?"
To keep it medical. To deny prurience.
The idea that this kid can be hobbled for life as a "sex offender" is frightening.
If people are put on sex offender lists for something that is ultimately a 17-yo making bad judgement, then it devalues the list. People will just start claiming they're on there for something stupid they did as a minor.
@BigMike, I'm sure the defense attorney could have a field day with this, showing 100s of erect penises -- carefully chosen, of course -- to the jury. And then asking: Do they look the same to you?
@JeffHall, from the Manassas PD statement:
It is not the policy of the Manassas City Police or the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office to authorize invasive search procedures of suspects in cases of this nature and no such procedures have been conducted in this case. Beyond that, neither the Police Department nor the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office discusses evidentiary matters prior to court hearings.
Read that carefully. It's not their policy, and nothing has been done yet. That is bureaucratic weaselspeak that says precisely nothing.
"If people are put on sex offender lists for something that is ultimately a 17-yo making bad judgement, then it devalues the list. People will just start claiming they're on there for something stupid they did as a minor."
It absolutely devalues the list. We're already at the point where whenever we hear someone is on a sex offender registry, our first question is "what are they on for" because there's a world of difference between running drunk and naked across your college campus and raping babies--yet both offenders end up on the same list. Sort of like how the White House's statistics showing one in five women are "sexually assaulted" on campus, which is frightening until you realize that "sexual assault" includes not just rapes, but also "any sexual touching you didn't consent to"--which arguably could include getting an unwanted hug that went on too long. It devalues the actual cases of what we normally think of when we think "sexual assault".
Much of this I think is due to prosecutors trying to make their numbers look good--think how good at election or reappointment time it looks to say "I successfully convicted over 200 sexual predators!" when maybe five of them were the sort of predators we should want locked up.
Can't he claim unfair prosecution since SHE isn't being charged with the identical crime?
Were the photos the 15-year-old sent to the 17-year-old of herself in the nude? The story doesn't actually say. But if they were, then obviously she's exactly as guilty as he is, and deserves prosecution exactly as much.
Needless to say, I think "exactly as much" = "not at all." Incredible.
damikesc said...
Can't he claim unfair prosecution since SHE isn't being charged with the identical crime?
While I agree, because she sent the first pic, the DA would argue that it is his decision to apply resources to one offense and not the other.
From a feminist perspective:
Planned Parenthood argues that a
- 15yo is a woman, able to make choices about her body, then turns around and argues
- she is in capable of making a choice, and was a victim, when she sent him the nude pic
Don't question law enforcement you damn anarchists.
NEVER.
"Porky's" in real life.
Why would they need an injection to get a 17-yo to have an erection?
When I was that age, all that was required was a picture of Barbi Benton.
@eddie, damn right!
The WaPo article didn't say, but does anyone want to wager that the 17-year-old boy is black and that his 15-year-old girlfriend is white?
We are truly doomed.
@MadisonMan
My reading comprehension is fine, thanks. The extract you quoted is certainly not "weasel-speak". They specifically deny that any invasive search was performed. If the boy's ad litem guardian is correct that an invasive search was performed, then this statement is a bald lie. Falsifiability is precisely what weasel-speak is designed to avoid.
the boy is white. I'm in DC and he's been on TV.
As a parent I am livid about this, still I can't help hearing play over and over in my mind...
"Harry's jockstrap, Harry's jockstrap... she gave him an injection, it gave him an... "
Also, did a friend at TSA give him the cop that 'special software'? The mentula-mensura-matic?
Post a Comment