Sexting Girls Facing Porn Charge Sue D.A.

Underage Girls Launch Lawsuit Against Prosecution Over Allegedly Lewd Pictures Found On Classmates' Cell Phones

(CBS/AP)  One summer night in 2007, a pair of 13-year-old northeastern Pennsylvania girls decided to strip down to their skivvies to beat the heat. As Marissa Miller talked on the phone and Grace Kelly flashed a peace sign, a third girl took a candid shot of the teens in their white bras.

It was harmless, innocent fun, the teens say.

But the picture somehow wound up on classmates' cell phones, and a prosecutor has threatened to charge Miller and Kelly with child pornography or open lewdness unless they participate in a five-week after-school program followed by probation.

On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union asked a federal judge to block Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. from filing charges, saying that the teens didn't consent to having the picture distributed, and that in any event the image is not pornography.

"There was absolutely nothing wrong with that photograph," said Marissa's mother, MaryJo Miller, 44, of Tunkhannock.

"I certainly don't want pedophiles looking at my daughter in her bra, but I don't think that was the intention to begin with," she said in an interview with The Associated Press. "This is absolutely wrong on his part. It's abuse of his authority."

Marissa Miller, Kelly and their parents were joined in the lawsuit by a 17-year-old Tunkhannock girl from the same school who was photographed topless last year in a separate setting. The teen, also facing felony charges unless she takes the class, is called "Nancy Doe" in the lawsuit to protect her privacy.

Skumanick said he would fight the lawsuit.

Appearing on The Early Show, Wyoming County district attorney George Skumanick Jr. said that his office could have filed charges against the girls, ranging from "sexual abuse of children in Pennsylvania, criminal [use] of a communications facility, or open lewdness, and there were other possible charges also," but that his office decided to make an offer of limiting penalties to probation if they attend a sexual harassment program.

Responding to the lawsuit, Skumanick said that the actions of Miller and the other girls are not the issue being considered. "The issue before the federal court is whether or not the federal court has the right to interfere with the separation of powers of my office - and any district attorney across the country - from deciding when to file criminal charges," he said. "We could have taken the easy way out here and simply filed charges against these children, and we wouldn't have been here. We offered them a way out, a way to avoid charges."

Skumanick characterized the lawsuit as an effort to have a federal judge prevent local law enforcement from doing its job, which he warned would create a slippery slope:

"Basically what they're seeking is, they're seeking a federal judge to say whether or not I can file criminal charges against them," he said. "So frankly what they're asking the federal court to allow is, is to allow you to go out, commit a crime, run to the federal courthouse before you can be arrested, and file papers saying, 'Please don't allow them to arrest me, it's going to violate my civil rights.' That's not how the system can possibly work.

"To allow this type of action would allow anyone to plan a crime, commit it, run to the federal courthouse, and then file paperwork saying, 'My rights are being violated. Don't let them arrest me,' and then avoid arrest for years."

"It does seem like a case of kids just being kids and not realizing they were committing a crime when they did whatever it is they did," Early Show anchor Julie Chen suggested.

"Well, as you well know, ignorance of the law is not a defense," Skumanick said.

"What we elected to do, instead of around the country where they simply arrested these children, is to simply made them an offer to avoid prosecution, to avoid a criminal record of any sort, and developed an educational program to help them understand the true dangers of this and the long-term effects of this on them and their future."

When asked by Chen if he would order the arrest of Miller or the others for saying no to his offer, Skumanick said, "Well, actually, they never did say 'no.' They filed this lawsuit before they said no. I've never heard an official 'no' from them."

"Well, this is a case of young girls taking pictures of themselves in bras at a slumber party," said CBS News legal analyst Lisa Bloom. "To think they'd be prosecuted for child pornography, face years in prison, register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives - have we lost our minds?

"Teens have this brand-new technology. They're using it in foolish ways. It's bad judgment. I think parents and teachers should punish them. But to subject them to these harsh criminal penalties I think is very scary, and we as citizens all have to reconsider what we're doing with our laws, catching so many children up in these kinds of dragnets."


"Sexting" Confounds Parents, Educators And Law Enforcement

The photos at the center of this debate surfaced in October, when officials at Tunkhannock Area High School confiscated five cell phones and found that boys had been trading photos of scantily clad, semi-nude or nude teenage girls. The students with the cell phones ranged in age from 11 to 17.

Called "sexting" when it's done by cell phone, teenagers' habit of sending sexually suggestive photos of themselves and others to one another is a nationwide problem that has confounded parents, school administrators and law enforcement officials.

Prosecutors in a number of states, including Pennsylvania, Connecticut, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin, have tried to put a stop to it by charging teens who send and receive the pictures.

In Tunkhannock, a town about 130 miles north of Philadelphia, Skumanick met with about 20 students and their parents last month and offered them a deal: The youths wouldn't be prosecuted if they took a class on sexual harassment, sexual violence and gender roles.

"If we were just out to be nasty about this, we would have just charged everybody," Skumanick said Wednesday.

Seventeen of the students accepted his offer.

But when MaryJo Miller protested to Skumanick that the photo portraying her daughter and Kelly couldn't possibly be considered child porn, he replied that the girls were posed "provocatively," according to the lawsuit.

"You'd have to see the photo and see the setting, which I'm not going to show to the public because I don't think it's appropriate," he said.

The year-old photo of Nancy Doe, meanwhile, shows her just out of the shower, with a towel wrapped around her waist and her breasts exposed.

Vic Walczak, legal director of the Pennsylvania ACLU, would not say who took the photo or whether she sent it to anybody. But he said she did not intend for it to be widely distributed.

"Our client has absolutely no idea how it ended up on strange people's cell phones," he said.

Under Pennsylvania's child pornography law, it's a felony to possess or disseminate photos of a minor engaged in sexual activity, "lewd exhibition of the genitals," or nudity that is meant to titillate. Open lewdness, a misdemeanor, includes any lewd act that is likely to be observed by others.

The ACLU's lawsuit claims both photos are protected First Amendment speech.

"One of the concerns all of these kids have is it's getting to be summertime, they're going to the beach and the pool, and do they need to be worried about taking photos of themselves swimming around?" Walczak said. "Who knows what he decides will be too provocative?"

Skumanick said swimsuit-clad kids have nothing to fear from him.


Prosecution And Legislation

Meanwhile, children in other communities are facing serious legal problems for creating or sending pictures of themselves.

A 14-year-old New Jersey girl has been accused of child pornography after posting nearly 30 explicit nude pictures of herself on MySpace.com.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children tipped off a state task force, which alerted the Passaic County Sheriff's Office.

The office investigated and discovered the Clifton resident had posted the "very explicit" photos of herself, sheriff's spokesman Bill Maer said Thursday.

The girl posted the photos because "she wanted her boyfriend to see them," he said.

"We consider this case a wake-up call to parents," Maer said.

The teen, whose name has not been released because of her age, was arrested and charged with possession of child pornography and distribution of child pornography. She was released to her mother's custody.

If convicted of the distribution charge, she would be forced to register with the state as a sex offender under Megan's Law, said state Attorney General Anne Milgram. She also could face up to 17 years in jail, though such a stiff sentence is unlikely.

The mother of the New Jersey girl whose death inspired Megan's Law is criticizing prosecutors who charge teenagers with child porn for distributing nude photos of themselves.

Maureen Kanka said Thursday that the prosecutors are harming the children more than helping them.

In Falmouth, Mass., police issued summons against a group of six teens, aged 12 to 14, who are accused of sending nude pictures of a 13-year-old girl through their cell phones. One of the teens had allegedly taken the photo of his 13-year-old girlfriend before sending it to others.

They are charged with possessing and distributing material of a child in a sexual act. They may face child porn charges as well.

In Syracuse, N.Y., police have charged a 17-year-old boy with messaging a sexually explicit video to a 13-year-old girl's cell phone after striking up a relationship on MySpace.com.

The 10th-grader faces charges of second-degree disseminating indecent material to a minor and endangering the welfare of a child.

In Ohio, Republican state Rep. Ronald Maag said Thursday that he plans to introduce a bill that would make it a misdemeanor for minors to send nude images over their cell phones.

Warren County Prosecutor Rachel Hutzel had asked legislators for changes in Ohio law. Currently, minors involved in sexting could face felony charges under Ohio's child pornography law.

Maag says prosecutors still could pursue harsher penalties if appropriate.

[gil600221]

In these cases that involve minors, the proper authorities should and need to go after the parents also, especially when these parents are condoning this outrageous behavior from their children!

[awall08]

I cannot believe this! These girls should not have to serve a probationary period +5 weeks of an after school program to dodge charges, there should BE no charges! A woman's bra (or a child's for that matter) covers more than a bakini top does, so by that logic, any girl under the age of 18 who has had her picture taken in a bakini should be charged with child pornography and lewdness. Well, there goes those years of family vacations to the Jersey shore or down to the keys! Cover up girls! For that matter, girls you might as well just not wear a bakini until your 18, period. You might accidentally be in the background of some family photo and the father will be charged with child pornography...as well as yourself! This is absolutely ridiculous!

I understand that there are real problems with sexting among teens and tweens, but these children (which is what they are, children, they are not adults yet) should not have their lives ruined by having to register as sex offenders because of a stupid mistake made as a teenager. It is scientifically proven that the part of an individuals brain that evaluates consequences for ones actions is not fully developed until the individual is, on average, into his or her early to mid 20's. I am not saying these children should not be held responsible, the consequences should just not be as harsh. Instead these children should be taught why acts like these (although I see nothing wrong with a bra picture as I have already demonstrated) can be dangerous.

I do agree with iroc2, we were all given endless pamphlets in school and lectures that droned on and on that we ultimately ignored. The inadequacy of the school to educate its students is not the fault of the students, but the administration! They need better, more involved ways to educate students about the dangers of the "real world". Students should not be penalized because their school is still living in the 20th century.

[ItWillBeAlright]

I believe that this is a situation gone completely out of hand. Child pornography, when presented to the mind, is a thought of a child being sexually abused or just being touched innappropriatly, unwillingly of course. Sexting does have a major negative side indeed. It has the risk of the pictures of the teen being distributed throughout cellphones and the internet none the less. I think the most the government should take this situation and every similar situation, shouldnt even involve the government at all. Just maybe a group to discuss and make teens aware of the dangers they might get themselves into just like they do with sex in schools. They teach teenagers all about sex in school. I would know, speaking I am a teenager myself of fourteen years. Infact, having sex is more dangerous then sexting.

For example:
- People can brag about having sex and maybe even sneak pictures of then while having sex and they can be distributed as well as pictures sent through sexting.
-People can over react about sex situations and commit suicide because simply the whole situation and/or mistake has gone out of hand, as well as sexting situations can get out of hand and cause the same result of a teenager taking his/her life into their own hands like that.

What sexting doesnt do that sex does:
-Sex might give you an STD/STI. Sexting doesnt.
-Sex might get you pregnant/make you a father. Sexting wont.

Let me ask you this; how often do you see a teenager,who has had sex with another teenager, introuble with the law like this? Unless it was a minor and a person over the legal age, you never see it!

STOP OVER REACTING!

And for those of you who are thinking 'How could she know anything? Shes just a stupid fourteen year old...', think about what I have said here.

This whole situation has gone completely out of hand and I say we do something about it. Copy and paste this to other sites if you are with me!

[simptechmike]

I for one believe children should be protected from those who prey on them. However, I do not believe sending sexually explicit photos of yourself (regardless if it is through a cellphone or over the Internet) should give anyone a "get out of jail free card". Age should not be used to protect those who commit crimes and I believe this type of activity equals committing a crime.

[iroc2]

Want to Stop Sexting, CyberBullying & Digital Disease?

The Institute for Responsible Online and Cell-Phone Communication has an effective method for dealing with the vast number of digital issues we are aware of (like the trend du jour known as "sexting"), and those that we will be aware of soon.

Despite this fact however, our nation and media seem to be content with treating these digital, 21st century issues, with an "old school" 20th century approach. Unfortunately, based on past headlines regarding "spyware" and "cyber bullying" and now with the national fixture of sexting in the news, it appears we are failing an entire digital generation.

Fortunately however, there is an effective way to save this new generation for those of us willing to listen. It is through The Institute for Responsible Online and Cell-Phone Communication's concept of "Responsibility 2.1C".

Think about it...

1: Can you honestly say that you have never been irresponsible either as a kid touching a hot stove, or smoking (underage), or drinking underage, or trying drugs?

2: Did you always listen to your parents, teachers or caretakers when they told you not to do these things and offered you a ton of information about why you shouldn't?

3: Have you ever been irresponsible or break the law as an adult (e.g. speeding, running a red light)?

4: Have you ever posted your status on Facebook as "On Vacation", "Traveling" or "Out"?

Well if you answered ?NO? to any of the questions above (even # 4), your life may have been over at a very young age (or it could be altered soon) as is the case for many people of today?s digital generation, because it only takes a few seconds of irresponsibility online to ruin your life.

For Example: Lighting up a cigarette, or trying a beer at the age of 17 most of the time, will not instantly alter your life, or affect your loved one's lives, or the life or someone halfway around the globe. However, as we have read lately, in the time it takes a 17 year old to press the send button on a cell phone with a naked picture attached (less time to finish a drag of a cigarette or sip of beer) he/she could be placed in jail and registered as a sex offender.

Simply saying, ?don?t do that? to a kid or flooding them with "tip sheets" and facts did not work when you were one, so why would it work now? The real difference and alarming issue is that the digital technologies available to our youth deliver instant consequences that can alter their life. Fortunately, it appears that the Institute's concept of Responsibility 2.1C may just be the way to reach this new generation.

Richard Guerry, the visionary behind the concept of "Responsibility 2.1C" and co-founder of The Institute for Responsible Online and Cell-Phone Communication recently stated that "We as a nation need to provide direct proactive communication of Digital Responsibility (Responsibility 2.1C) to a new generation. We cannot be reactionary treating today's digital issues, and we cannot resolve them with 20th century threats, reprimand and curriculum." He went on to say, "The real problem is our youth has grown up learning what we call responsibility 1.0 or offline responsibility. They do not understand the scope of the repercussions when they invoke poor (digital) judgment because they have not been proactively taught digital responsibility or what we call, responsibility 2.1C. We cannot apply 20th century solutions to 21st century issues."

Find out more about how you can support The Institute for Responsible Online and Cell-Phone Communication and help them save your community by visiting www.iroc2.org or www.sextingisstupid.com

[Allthomas01]

You know, I believe that when laws are written, they have a purpose in mind. We ALL know that Megan's Law was written to protect innocent children from sexual predators, just like the child pornography laws. In this case, the laws are being used in a sinister way: to persecute minors who made a few stupid decisions with their cell phones. I feel TERRIBLE for these children! To have a lifetime sentence of being a registered sex offender for sending pictures of themselves in underwear to friends? You have GOT to be kidding me! That is a gross abuse of the laws.

The problem is, laws in this country are often to sloppily written and put together, that situations like this aren't taken into account before the bill is passed. Had these laws been written with these exclusions in the first place, this wouldn't be happening. Unfortunately, you get these I'll-Press-Charges-On-You-Now enthusiasts in the Prosecutor's Office, and these ridiculous charges are then passed.

I feel awful for these girls and their families. Good luck to all of you, and I hope these charges are dropped so that you can forget about all of this, go off to college, and live your normal adult lives.

[jennysusan]

As a 17 year old, I believe there is a fine line between what is right and what is wrong in this situation. Over my 3 years in high school I have heard or witnessed a countless number of sexting incidents. When I was a freshman I accepted these photos as self-conscious teenage girls who didn?t know any better. I was (am) a teenager too, but I guess I already knew better. Not saying that I am above my peers, all I mean is that I realized the consequences. Truthfully, before the first sexting incident I had never even thought that I, or any of my peers, would ever do such a thing. I believe that my thoughts and beliefs can be contributed to many influences in my life. First I grew up sheltered, and that was only by chance that I went to a middle school (out of the three in my district) that had the certain kids who didn?t fool around like that. Therefore I never experienced any of this until 9th grade. I don?t want to rant about all the influences on my life on this subject, but my point is that I don?t believe that we can blame the child, the parent, the school, or the internet. These variables are always changing and who has the authority to say who is to blame. We need to stop pointing fingers and just teach teens to understand what they are really getting themselves into.

[Slrman]

I think this A-H of a DA is so amazingly stupid that he should be sued and stripped of his post, his license to practice law and made to pay a huge restitution to the true victims here. This is one more outrageous example of a little mind with a huge ego running roughshod over common sense and common decency.

If these were my daughters, I'd probably be in jail for beating this idiot into a bloody bag of broken bones.

[boyer452]

this is one reason the country is the way it is when i was a child and a teen and an adult there was consequences for what you did if you messed up you had to pay. the gov took the powere of the parents and are now telling kids do what you want and nothing will happen to you by your parents or anyone else. this is why kids are killing kids.they should have been taught that for every action there is an oppsite and equal reaction.if the wrong person got these pics and went and found these girls got raped and then they would turn around and say i did nothing wrong the parents would be yelling pedophile and be looking to sue the state and police and everyone else for not doing anything look at the problem and maybe it can be fixed at home and school. too many kids want to have kids. if i talked and disrespected my parents the way they do now my face would have been on the other side of my head

[boyer452]

come on you fools if these pics were sent to a father of one of these kids they would be arrested for child porn and labeled as such the shoe should fit both feet not just one. if you took a pic of your baby and it got into the hands of some that thinks it is child porn you would be arrested to.

[jimmv]

I do not think the teens should be charged as sex offenders, but I do think they need to be reprimanded, educated and at least do some type of communty service since the photos went that far. My first thought: if the photos weren't so bad, then why didn't CBS show the photos. The one photo CBS showed was a small part of the girl's face, and that's it. I would like CBS to comment as to why it did not show the entire photo. What was wrong with the photo then? It's interesting to me that TV and radio have a watchdog like the FCC, but why doesn't the Internet and even texting have that? Or is it getting to that? You basically can use vulgar language, post awful, horrific photos, say whatever you want and get away with it - without even having to acknowledge yourself. Even here, they say you must be age 13 to sign up for an account - just like MySpace and those other sites - when kids are lying about their age so they can register online. It's ridiculous and a travesty. Would Don Imus still have been working if he made his insensitive remarks about the Rutgers women's basketball players on a blog, instead of his talk radio show. There is good on the Internet, but there is also a lot of bad, and we need to improve on curbing the bad. If TV and radio have an FCC, then the Internet and the texting should be under those same type of guidelines. I just hope it gets better for the kids, instead of worse. We should all treat freedom as a privilege, not as a right.

[wakeupamerica]

I don't think their is anything wrong with what these girls did. Not even the 17 year old who's picture was taken topless. Sex is a part of the natural order of life and humans are not immune to it nor are persons under the age of 18. What about a picture of a person under the age of 18 standing naked doing nothing, is that child porn. Heck NO! Thats just plain stupid arogance and to try and procecute a person under the age of 18 for having a picture of themselves naked is crazy. I guess we need to take all the abused 5-9 year olds and procecute them too because their pictures were placed on the internet by some pervert. The naked body is not some disease but we as a society have turned it into one. The human body is a natural normal thing and we should teach our children tolerance and understanding. Stop quoting the Bible and religion saying that we must hide our shameful selves. God said we are created in his image. If this is true then by saying the human body is shameful and disgusting then we are saying God is also shameful and disgusting. As far as that 17 year old who was topless is concered; if a man can go around topless then so can a woman. Women don't have to cover the entire breast or cleavage would be illegal and women should be arrested for having it. The only difference between a man and a womans nipple is the size. So if you see a woman topless or breast feeding grow up and get a life. A study came out about children and nudism. This was done because many people think that anyone under the age of 18 shouldn't go to a nudist resort or be nude ever. It found that these children were less likely to have eating disorders, be more tolerant of others, less likely to be homosexual amount other things. I'm not saying we should all become nudist just follow their idea that the body is ok.
What these girls did wasn't smart but it is the parents who should have taught them that if they pose naked or allow someone to take pictures of them in a pose that could be considered "close to the Imagination" those pictures regardless of intention could lead to embarrasing consiquences.
Personally this guy is a disgrace to America. We need to start charging parents who change diapers of babies in public cuz that must be child porn. We need to charge pregnant teens cuz they obviously got naked infront of someone. We need to charge any child who has a wordrobe malfunction. We need to charge any underage who has a picture of themselves in a bikini or swim suit. Don't forget all the high school and under athletes who workout with sports bras. Give me a break.

[17leagues]

"This is absolutely wrong on his part. It's abuse of his authority." Here the mother has the crux of the matter. Officials abuse of authority and power is to be abhorred. This is our sick society. Or are there some empty spaces in the local Jail?

[livefree7]

The reason prosecutors are so, so EVIL is because they have to be. It's their job to prosecute. They have to have enough work to stay busy, so when work is slow they turn on teens.

registering the kids as sex offenders might even be something they wouldn't otherwise do if they had enough work to stay busy

They know they can't go after the games these teens have that have topless or bra-wearing girls so they try other things that are equal in content but less protected.

[author20]

Former DA Mike Nifong was not only unethical (evil); but he was arrogant too. He tried to frame affluent college youths, who had strong defenses to his trumped up rape accusations. Mike Nifong was exposed as a fraud, removed from office, disbarred and charged with crimes himself. He is now bankrupt finacially and has been disgraced as the most evil District Attorney in modern times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Nifong

Thousands and thousands of local and state prosecutors have jailed and executed tens of thousands of innocent Black men and women since the mid-1800s. DNA technology has revealed a justice system in America that allows corrupt officials to build careers by destroying lives and knowingly allowing the real murderers, rapists and child molesters to go free. Nobody -- not Amnesty International, the ACLA, the NAACP -- has ever made much of a stink about the mass corruption in state and local prosecutors. The Jena 6 is an example of terrible corruption and injustice -- yet who talks about them?

This latest insanity is the end product of America which ignored lynchings of Blacks, was silent at the scapegoating of Jews, condoned the beating of Rodney King and was silent at the false prosecution (and over-charging) of tens of thousands of Black men and women. OJ may have been guilty all along -- but white women took pride in convicting him before his trial while white men and women killers were given acquittals or at least the benefit of the doubt (Lawrence Singleton, Robert Blake, Cong. Gary Condit, Phil Spector, Menendez (first trial), the pretty killer, Susan Smith (until she was found out). Now that prosecutors feel they can frame anybody -- they are going after white teens.

I think this is an opportunity for America to start examining and purging our local and state governments of people who use the law to destroy innocent people so they can be the next Nancy Grace. Wonder what her take will be on this. Funny -- she and her ilk are the reason D.A.s are going insane.

[NZ-AH_JD]

Where are parents' responsibility in these situations? Do you not monitor what your children are doing and who they're doing it with. Have you tried to lead your children down the right paths of becoming an adult? Some examples would be what is morally, ethically, and what good taste, "class, not trash", really is, as well as a little religion along the way? If a sexual predator got a hold on one of your children, you would want the police, DA and everyone doing everything in their power to return your children to you, hopefully unharmed. Everyone should know to monitor computer activity , but what about
cellular activity. Cell phones can give as much personal info as the user wants to give and the idea that these kids are forwarding this info and pics to their friends and random
numbers is just asking for BIG TROUBLE!!!!!!!!!! I personally feel if children are engaging in this type of activity, they may be starving for parent, guardian attention and guidance. I"ve always heard that children want parents to set restrictions, house rules, whether they know it or not at the time. They will eventually realize those parents love and are concerned for their wellbeing whether they agree with it or not at the time. I agree that cell phones are a privilege and can also be taken up by the parents; parents, you're only going to have the usual teenage resistance as you would in other areas.

[NZ-AH_JD]

There are many issues here...First it could have been completely harmless in taking the photos of the girls, but when they became public, that is a different story. Where were
the "responsible" parents when this activity was going on? I wouldn't want semi nude or nude photos of my 13 year old daughter splashed all over the internet or over everone else's cell phones! The general public wants perverts that target young children and adolescents caught and punished 'til the end of time and erradicated whether it be via
internet or in your own neighborhoods! The same type of information found on the internet can be found on cell phones via sexting! What if the sexting got in the wrong
hands or in a highschooler's hands that was already going down the wrong path of life
already, regardless of sexual preference. You wouldn't want the DA or police fired or
suspended then, would you, if it or something worse happened to your own child, would you? In the case of the adolescent posting questionable photos of herself on MySpace, doesn't her "responsible" parent/s love her enough to monitor her computer activity or is it another "toy" to get the child out of the parent/s hair? There are also drug deals, kids
reaching up under bathroom stalls snapping picturesof others, self mutilation and God knows what else being made! In our school system, cell phones can be carried to school, but not seen in the buildings. If so, they are taken up and for repeat offenders, taken up until the end of the school year. Children that are caught in some of the examples above are suspended/ exspelled from their regular school and sent to an alternative school for the rest of the year, if not longer. I do not claim to be the perfect parent, but the the responsibility for raising children and guiding them down down the right paths of life is ultimately the parents responsibility, not the public schools, police, DA
etc. Then, we may not be seeing as many problems with our children as we currently do.
Just food for thought........

[candyjane00]

A blog about this story:

http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-big-questions/200903/my-1st-bra-my-1st-sexual-offense

In 25 yrs of watching the news, it is about time that someone asks some hard questions. Julie I am really impressed with what you did. Keep this up & you will make my hero list. Of course this may have all been scripted, but I'll give you the benifit of the doubt. What law did they break... awesome. Now I wonder how come the same charges are not brought against the airport x-ray photos. Now * Those* are sick porn. But nothing will probably come of it because if blackmail is legal, the sky is the limit for our overlords. :)

[Acetertrix]

hopscotch23 you said "(And NO, it is not normal behavior, as some folks would have us believe for kids to act like this)".

It is absolutely normal behaviour (maybe not politically or morally correct, but normal just the same), consult an expert any expert you will find they all know and confirm it's normal childhood behaviour.. If you think this is not normal because maybe you never had a similar experience, then perhaps you need to consider you don't fall into the normal category.