Comments on: Sexting Girls Facing Porn Charge Sue D.A.
Underage Girls Launch Lawsuit Against Prosecution Over Allegedly Lewd Pictures Found On Classmates' Cell Phones
Add a Comment See all 103 Comments
- "Skunkmanick" is another example of a political DA doing anything for publicity and promoting his sleazy career. This man should be removed from office, disbarred, and find a new career in the fast food business (you want fries with that?).
- Reply to this comment
- What is so wrong with morals and religion? Maybe if this country had more of both, "sexting" would not be an issue. Maybe if more parents cared these days, kids would get punished and learn right from wrong. It is THEIR job to teach that, but it has become everyone else's problem. I don't see what the DA's brother has to do with anything. I am not held accountable for what my brother does, and neither should he be.
I thought that was the purpose for the classes--SO THEY WOULD LEARN SOMETHING? How can sending those pictures be considered "making an uniformed error in judgement?" Kids are "tech savy" and know that stuff gets forwarded on and on and on........ - Reply to this comment
- Skumanick is just jealous cuz nobody wants to take a pics of his naked fat a$$.
- Reply to this comment
- For years George Skumanick has bullied and harassed everyone including his employees. No one is immune from his bullying and threatening. He truly believes he's beyond the law. It is true his brother is a sex offender. It's common knowledge in the community and it's common knowledge that he bent the law to get his brother off. I seriously believe the authorities should look closer at how he conducts business.
As for the school district, what happened that they had the right to go into these kids phones in the first place? Didn't they start the ball rolling by invading these kids privacy? Shouldn' t they have had a warrant? Were these kids First Amendment Rights violated?
From what I've been reading, those who say the kids should be punished so severely sound like moral crusaders or religious fanatics or are so totally uneducated they don't have a clue.
Did the kids do wrong? Yes. Should they have been punished? Yes. BY THEIR PARENTS!!!!
To me, it is wrong for anyone in a position of power to threaten extreme draconian consequences for a misdemeanor.
A UK reporter Rik Myslewski had a very insightful article on the situation. It was refreshing to get an objective viewpoint. In her article (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/26/sexting_lawsuit/print.html), she says "According to a study called Sex and Tech (http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/sextech/PDF/SexTech_Summary.pdf) (PDF) by the The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/), 22 percent of girls between 13 and 19 have shared or posted nude or semi-nude pictures or videos of themselves, and 36 per cent had sent suggestive text messages. Of those, 71 per cent sent them to their boyfriends."
She so appropriately ended her article saying, "Frankly, Mr. Skumanick, we don't care what makes you "sad." We care about the fair and rational application of the law, the ability of kids to make their own mistakes without paying draconian penalties, and the rights of parents to not have their children targeted by moral crusaders."
Read the entire article. To me, it's right on!!!
To any DA who has charged minors with heinous crimes for making an uninformed error in judgment....who died and made you God? What are you teaching these kids? How are you helping these kids LEARN what is appropriate and not appropriate? - Reply to this comment
- Thank goodness for the DA! This is such an evil act by these decadent children. What we should do is tie them up to stakes and burn them! What indecency they have shown! Baring their undergarments to the whole world to see. They deserve Hell and Damnation! Good for you DA! You are the purist that all of us should see and obey. I'm so happy that you see the world in Black and White. There is NO middle ground. These kids are GUILTY of being kids. Best they be banished forever from this world!
- Reply to this comment
- We offered them a way out, a way to avoid charges."
----
This guy Skumanic is a moron. Bras and panties reveal no more than a bikini.
And how a photo could be "sexual abuse" is beyond comprehension.
10 to 1 he's a tight-a$$ed bible thumper..... - Reply to this comment
- They either did "exploit themselves" or were exploited. Again, it all comes back to morals and self-respect, how they were brought up. I believe this is a little different than movies, catalogs, and commercials. Although the media could stand to "clean things up a bit." The DA was not looking to "put them in prison" or he would not have offered the classes. If I break the law speeding, I expect to pay the fine. If they break the law of sending immoral pictures over cell phones, they should expect to be punished. Let's stop slapping teens on the hand, and teach them something! What happened to the days when you got in trouble at school, you got it worse at home?? Now mommy and daddy only want to "fight the discipline rules" and make threats.
- Reply to this comment
- If child pornography laws are in place to protect a child from "being exploited" because children are unable to determine that for themselves, then how can the same "children" in turn, exploit themselves? Secondly, if this is "child pornography" then please tell me how Brooke Shields mother and various Hollywood production companies and Directors are NOT in prison for Brook Shield's movies like "Pretty Baby" and "Endless Love" where she appeared nude when she was underage and in the case of "Pretty Baby", pre-pubecent?
- Reply to this comment
- I guess Skumanick will be going after Sears, JCPenny's, and Victoria's Secrets next... If what the two girls did (picture in bra and panties) is porn, then these catalogs and commercials put out by these companies is also porn.
Skumanick needs to be disbarred period. - Reply to this comment
- What a bunch of idiots, a 17-year-old Tunkhannock girl from the same school who was photographed topless last year in a separate setting is also facing felony charges unless she takes the class, is called "Nancy Doe" in the lawsuit to protect her privacy. She sends out a photo of herself, thinks that no one else is going to see it, files a lawsuit in does this as "Nancy Doe" in order to protect her privacy, she has got to be kidding! She bares it all for the world to see and now she wants her "privacy", what a bunch of losers. It seems like some of our youth are becoming dumber and dumber, and I can understand why, they have stupid parents.
- Reply to this comment
- If an adult receives these photos, they would be charged and if these young ladies wish to fight the DA, then go for it and then when the DA and the state win, these young ladies and their family can foot the legal bill for the cost of this. The law is the law, no one is above the law. NO ONE and this is another group of dumb girls with their dumb families who try to excuse this horrible behavior. There is no excuse for this type of behavior from a young respectible girl, no excuse whatsoever and if you think it's OK, what about it if your daughter decided to do this, is she to young at 14, 13 or maybe even 10 years old?? Think about this and no wonder these girls are like this, they have parents that are even dumber and without any morals. Apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
- Reply to this comment
- Don't be so hard on the DA. I think he offered them a way out to help them learn a lesson, but they are fighting it. Seems funny that 17 out of 20 accepted the deal, but three are bulking. Kids need to wake up and see what they are doing. If we go on letting them float through without consequences, how are they going to learn? I work in Education and have seen the decline of morals!! It is very sad! Doesn't anyone have self-respect anymore? If we keep going like we are, this country will be in sad shape. Wake up kids---get the message. What harm is a class? Parents need to stop "dreaming" that their kids are perfect! I have 2 daughters and would hate to have their pictures floating around--even with a bra on!
- Reply to this comment
- The girls SHOULD be charged. The teens need to know there are consequences for their actions. Taking pictures in bras at 13? What is next stripping at 15? The families obviously have not instilled any morals in the children and that is what is wrong with America (this is why Miley Cyrus should not be a role model) People are okay with children being ****** ******. What is wrong with people today?
- Reply to this comment
- this is unbelievable.. the prosecutor is a ******* retard. If a kid takes a picture of themselves with a bra and underwear on, its not porn. Its like saying then kids have to dress like muslims now, because if they show ANY skin its pornographic. Hell mister prosecutor you might as well charge every kid under the age of 18 with showing any type of skin at all. And forget kids going to the beach or swimming anymore, according to this guy that should be out of the question. The prosecutor reminds me of the Westboro Church. Seriously there economy is doing bad and we are busting down on kids for DOING NOTHING WRONG? seriously learn to let some **** go america, not everything is a big deal
- Reply to this comment
- The DA is doing his job. . .?
What? Making teens sex offenders for the rest of their lives because someone took a picture of them in their bra?
Wow. I feel safer already knowing that we are no longer worried about gang wars, drug deals, wife abusers, or out-of-control cops! At last the world reduced to it's simpliest element: prosecute teenage girls and we can all sleep safer at night.
You go girls. Sue the idiot. If you win, maybe the next 'I've got a case I can prosecute and win for me re-election campaign' DA will consider actually trying to be an agent of justice. - Reply to this comment
- The nasty little tramps need to spend some time in jail. Sending naked pics of yourself is immoral and will haunt them the rest of their little lives. They should be used as an example.
The DA should sue them. - Reply to this comment
- I applaud the DA for doing his job! He cares about these teens and gave them a reasonable choice to go through a program. Has our society forgotten there are consequences to doing wrong? In response to a previous comment about the DA viewing the cell phones and making a name for himself. Ridiculous! This unfortunate situation happened and he was informed and acted as a DA should not backing down or say that's okay just don't do it again. The ACLU has brought in the media not the DA. May these families realize the severity of what their teens did and make them to through this program.
- Reply to this comment
-
- Please, tell me what the HELL these two kids did wrong. Tell me what law was broken? A Picture of someone in their Bra? So, pictures of Bikini swimwear should be porn too right? They cover the EXACT same amount (usually less with a bikini...) Get off your moral high horse, and actually READ the damn article. If you think sentencing two CHILDREN to a LIFETIME of having to register as a sex offender, a LIFETIME of never being able to stop being ridiculed, a LIFETIME of being an outcast.... over a damn picture of them in a bra.....
YOU ARE WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY, YOU ARE THE REASON THAT THE USA IS BECOMING IRAN, YOU ARE THE REASON ABORTION SHOULD BE LEGAL.
- Please, tell me what the HELL these two kids did wrong. Tell me what law was broken? A Picture of someone in their Bra? So, pictures of Bikini swimwear should be porn too right? They cover the EXACT same amount (usually less with a bikini...) Get off your moral high horse, and actually READ the damn article. If you think sentencing two CHILDREN to a LIFETIME of having to register as a sex offender, a LIFETIME of never being able to stop being ridiculed, a LIFETIME of being an outcast.... over a damn picture of them in a bra.....
- Talk about wasting tax dollars, get rid of this guy. We need more people that just use common sense rather than trying gain fame. DA in this case stands for dumba**
- Reply to this comment
- [George Skumanick, Jr is up for relection. Vote for any body but George Skumanick, Jr on May 19, 2009 ]
[Posted by ChrisZChris at 10:48 AM : Mar 27, 2009]
ahh ... enter the reason for the draconian approach ... very popular with the voters. - Reply to this comment
- DA's do not have immunity when they act with malice and/or file false charges and are corruptly violating civil rights.
- Reply to this comment
