Ah, we've found the witch hunter general...

Reminds me of the 1700's when they used to use all kinds of punishments against people of this and older for doing anything vaugely un-churchworthy. It sounds like certain parts of the US have turned the clock back, or perhaps never moved forward although I always thought it was the south that was truly backwards.

They might also want to sue the school while they're at it for unlawful taking of the phones and when they win this, sue the DA for handling stolen goods. Not sure that'll go down too well in his re-election bid.

Either that or Barack - you've really gotta start sorting out the more insane bits of your country before it becomes more of a laughing stock than it currently is...!

Btw, wonder what happens if they move out of the state - can they still be "prosecuted"?

Politicians thinking process

"those "naughty" photos we found during our probably illegal confiscation and inspection have aroused me

We must punish these wicked girls and their parents"

"Will no one think of my erection, Ummm I mean election?"

So what did these kids reveal?

This is where we have a problem with child porn definitions. Not only are they wider-ranging than adult definitions of porn--swimsuit shots?--but once the allegation is made the images are hidden.

It's quite possible that these three sets of parents are being hassled over swimsuit shots, but how can we know?

And, with an election coming up, this District Attorney can describe the pictures pretty much as he likes.

I hope the pictures are just swimsuit shots, and I hope the DA loses big before the election. There could be all sorts of things wrong with the course, but the basic idea isn't so bad. The trouble is, he seems to be acting as if there are no limits to his power.

There's no checks on his actions short of a court case. And better this than risk your kids being convicted of sex felonies.

Corrupt

He probably gets a kick-back from whatever commercial outfit is running these "classes" for each "offender" that he sends.

You might think that sounds over-the-top, but there was a very recent case (not much reported here) where two judges were found to have received payments from a private prison company for sending them as many "offenders" as possible.

Like this case it was in Pennsylvania, and like this case it involved children. Here's the Times' coverage:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5864483.ece

Re-education

"the girls must discuss why their conduct was wrong and what it means to be a girl."

The DA can get some tips on how to do this from the Chinese - it was a standard trick during the cultural revolution, to indoctrinate and brainwash anyone who dared to disagree with the party line.

Scum-manic

Nuff said

It's too late anyway

3 perfectly innocent kids now have much less respect for the law, authority and their country; not that they're thinking about that as they try to handle their new found fame amongst their peers.

"America polices the world"- it shouldn't be allowed to police itself.

The guy's logic fails

". Frankly, it's sad to me that their parents don't realize this is wrong and they should be encouraging them to take the classes"

"Parents thinking their children's behaviour was wrong" is not equivalent to "parents thinking their children's behaviour is criminal" or "parents thinking their children's behvaiour means they need to attend a re-education program". It's very possible for their parents to be standing up for their kid's rights without them endorsing their behaviour, and well done to them.

Let's do the math

The USA has a population of 300 million of which - according to the census stats - about 32 million are juvenile females of the target age. If we assume that the number without camera mobiles is balanced by the number of teenage boys who receive this 'child porn' and 22% are into sexting, I make it about six and three quarter million juveniles that they need to lock up for seven years to, er, protect the children.

Better start building them prisons, because factoring in the juveniles under 10 who come into the target category means that the number will go up by 900,000 inmates per year until the time the first wave of juvenile child pornographers are released.

That will stop the little buggers from being disrespectful and playing on my lawn.

It's not just America...

Ok - it's barmy we know (though the girls and their parents probably don't think so). But things are getting just as mad here in the UK. It's not all that long since a 15 year-old boy was placed on the sex register for having sex with his similarly-aged girl friend. Not ideal certainly - but criminal?

If we read a few history books, we find one of the first moves towards a police state involves criminalising as many of the population as possible - for therein lies control. It used to be communism - these days it's terrorism and/or paedophilia - all cynically used to scare the population into accepting measures no-one would otherwise dare suggest. Both the USA and the UK have a long history of witch-hunts - the populations of both countries seem incapable of ever learning the lessons. Once again, they may well end up with the kind of government they deserve...

@Bend over country

It isn't about losing direction, it's about what's the expedient thing to do. Most want it all to go away as quickly as possible and are more than willing to be doormats for this bugger. Sadly he most likely won't see this as railroading a bunch of kids and their parents, only more proof that he was right and he gets another feather in his glory cap.

I'm surprised...

That no one has gone to the trouble of trying to set bastards like these up with "being in possession" of child porn. I think the best pics would be the under the skirt pics of a Catholic school girl or to have them in in a semi undressed state with the heads cropped. Of course you'd have to be sure to send the pics when these bastards are out it public and others can see them looking at their phone at the time, so that there are witnesses to the event. Shouldn't be too hard to do if you get his cell phone number and use a pay as you go phone. Just be sure not to send the pics from places you often go to or live at and not have the phone on in those places either. That way they should never be able to trace who did it.

Twisted old fuckheads

As a child I was talking to my best friend about another guy from school, I said there was something queer (meaning odd) about the third guy. My friends earwigging mother then threw a shitfit convinced the primary school was a hotbed of prepubescent sexual deviancy and in the process destroying any "innocence" we might have had (such as only knowing one meaning of the word queer). At the time I remember thinking "What a daffy old poisoned bitch" but now that I look back decades later I can see that she was just a daffy old poisoned bitch.

It all seems to stem from getting your sexual mores from an invisible friend.

If they're going to think of the children...

If they're going to think of the children... (at least not in the pedo way), they could at least do it in a worthwhile way: http://whatstheharm.net/children.html

@So what did these kids reveal?

That was explained in the article, wasn't it? Two of them were shown from the waist up wearing bras, and the third was wearing a towel that (OMG!) didn't cover her breasts. Now I don't know Pennsylvania law, but that certainly doesn't meet the federal definition of child porn.

In fact I would hesitate to say there is anything wrong with teenagers taking and sharing pictures like that whatsoever. Yes it's "risky" (and risqué), but risky and wrong are two different things. People take lots of risks in their lives and quite often they never regret it.

And if the likes of Mr. Skum kept their noses out of this, the worst that could happen would be a little embarrassment later on.

P.S. I'm all in favor of bringing back tar and feathers for this guy.

Child porn ? Fuck off !

Let's make one thing clear : child pornography is when an _adult_ takes pics of minors in various states of undress or suggestive poses.

If the minor takes pics of him- or herself, it's no longer child porn ! It may be stupid, but it cannot be labeled as child porn.

This whole case reeks of zero-tolerance, overreacting do-goody twoshoes whose actions are way out of line with whatever the intent was. And I'd like to see a lawsuit come up to determine just how those pics were dug up in the first place.

After all, if American cops start random mobe searches in US universities and schools, I wager we'll hear a lot more about child porn soon, and possibly about regular porn as well !

i cant beleive nobody else hasnt posted this

Pics or it didnt happen

anon cause i m ight be called a kiddie fiddler for that Jesting comment

Who's wrong?

"Frankly, it's sad to me that their parents don't realize this is wrong"

To me, this quote sums up the problem with the whole saga. He has decided they are wrong, and is attempting to impose his morality and standards of behaviour on people who have different and more enlightened attitudes to it all. I'd be standing up and challenging him in court as well, just on principle. Although, the other option is to turn up to the classes and calmly challenge all the brainwashing attempts, but you probably have to be more mature, rational and self-confident than I remember being as a teenager to really succeed at that.

the whole

The whole child porn/child sex/peadophile roster of laws needs tearing up and writing by someone who is competent, sensible, not affected by the media , and not elected. These laws are for the most part badly written knee jerk bulls--- wide open to interpretation and abuse, and a large part are completly useless except for feel good factor and moral one up man ship.

But that'll never happen. I'm making a funeral fire over here for free will, choice, and justice if anyone has anything else to throw on it I'm sure it'll fit.

good for them?

I know it is an unusual opinion, but perhaps if teenage girls talk and share images of themselves with each other (in a non-sexual way) then they will have a more realistic about what a woman should like rather than having to only look at unrealistic media images of women???

Isn't this another issue that we hear talked about and here we have children fixing it better than any adult has so far!

@ Destroy all Monsters, @ John

"These "parents" must have lost all compass directions about the real world and think they are in some kind of dictatorship where Persons of State are to be unconditionally obeyed"

Or maybe they looked at the options and decided that the risk of having their child sent to juvie for 7 years and being on the sex offenders register was far too great given the alternative was 5 lots of 2 hour boring lectures. Principles are great, but it is one thing to stand up for yourself and another to fuck your child's life up big time - remember that it is legally arguable that the said offenses were committed. Absurd, but legally arguable (the next step obviously is to prosecute under 16s suspected of masturbating themselves for child rape).

However, an important question is that if said politician has children then surely there will be something in the photo album that constitutes child porn, babies in baths type of thing.

"It's not all that long since a 15 year-old boy was placed on the sex register for having sex with his similarly-aged girl friend. Not ideal certainly - but criminal?"

Yes, criminal. The age of consent in the UK is 16, therefore if you have sex with someone under that age or have sex yourself under that age it is an offense. Without some reference to the specific case you are talking about though it is impossible to actually decide if the punishment was appropriate or not (it may be the girlfriend was really 10, or he was a repeat offender or something else that makes it more than just a couple of teenagers shagging).

Like Mike Nifong

This guy Scum-anic is trying to get reelected using these girls, much like Mike Nifong tried to use the Duke Lacross players in his election. People who destroy other peoples lives for their gain should be sent to prison, and not the girls.

eh?

Yes there's a spectrum, but the foolish children featured surely haven't got anywhere near the criminal offence part. I'm sure the parents do think the girls were wrong, talk about sledgehammer to crack a nut!

@Mike Groombridge

I think you should stop your 8 year old posting under your account and also have a quiet word with his English teacher.

You send me yours.....

This is almost identical to the you show me yours, and I'll show you mine (which lets face it happens to humans of all ages once they realise there's a difference).

The big problem is that there is a permanent record of it, the kids were too stupid to realise that the pictures could exist forever*, they need to be told (just the once, probably by a parent) but not attending a course for weeks, that's lame.

*Imagine in 5 years time the 18 year old bloke looking back at a 13 year old girls naughty bits he got sent remembering how it was great to be a kid, maybe a little smile on his face (oh yea, that would make him a paedo, and nobody in their right mind could justify that)