09-24-2004, 02:23 PM
http://tennessean.com/local/archives/04/...D=58073437
Synopsis: Guy takes a picture of his son mooning him. Guy sends picture to his ex-wife. Ex-wife takes him to court, claiming that he exploited their son and should thus lose visitation rights...
Good God. It's because of cases like this that I believe that child pornography should be more specifically defined as pictures of children engaged in sex acts. For all the hardcore pedophiles that the current laws have jailed, you get these cases where some idiot takes a picture that he shouldn't have taken in the first place, or you get cases of malicious people who exploit the laws to screw somebody else over.
Synopsis: Guy takes a picture of his son mooning him. Guy sends picture to his ex-wife. Ex-wife takes him to court, claiming that he exploited their son and should thus lose visitation rights...
Good God. It's because of cases like this that I believe that child pornography should be more specifically defined as pictures of children engaged in sex acts. For all the hardcore pedophiles that the current laws have jailed, you get these cases where some idiot takes a picture that he shouldn't have taken in the first place, or you get cases of malicious people who exploit the laws to screw somebody else over.