"Sexting" Shockingly Common Among Teens

[MicroBalrog]

(CBS/ AP)  While it may be shocking, the practice of "sexting" - sending nude pictures via text message - is not unusual, especially for high schoolers around the country.

This week, three teenage girls who allegedly sent nude or semi-nude cell phone pictures of themselves, and three male classmates in a western Pennsylvania high school who received them, are charged with child pornography.

In October a Texas eighth-grader spent the night in a juvenile detention center after his football coach found a nude picture on his cell phone that a fellow student sent him.

Roughly 20 percent of teens admit to participating in "sexting," according to a nationwide survey (pdf) by the National Campaign to Support Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.

"This is a serious felony. They could be facing many years in prison," CBS News legal analyst Lisa Bloom said of the six teens in Pennsylvania.

But, Bloom added, "What are we going to do, lock up 20 percent of America's teens?"

Police in Greensburg, about 30 miles east of Pittsburgh, say the girls are 14 or 15 and the boys charged with receiving the photos are 16 or 17. None are being identified because most criminal cases in Pennsylvania juvenile courts are not public.

Police say they first learned about the pictures in October. They say a student had a phone turned on in class, a violation of school policy, which prompted an administrator to confiscate the phone and subsequently find the pictures, reports CBS station KDKA-TV.

© MMIX, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/15/national/main4723161.shtml

Micro Sez:

Now see, there are many questions I'd like to ask about this.

To start:

What are the long-term implications of a  conviction of this kind, if these young men and women are convicted (assuming they don't go to prison for some obscene period of time)? Would merely being convicted destroy their chances of a proper education etc. in the future?

How much leeway do prosecutors in PA get on these cases when they decide whether or not to prosecute them?

[Standing Wolf]

What are the long-term implications of a  conviction of this kind, if these young men and women are convicted (assuming they don't go to prison for some obscene period of time)? Would merely being convicted destroy their chances of a proper education etc. in the future?

In some states, juvenile felony convictions dry up and blow away at 18 or 21; in others...
If these are sex crime convictions, they probably fall into separate categories in lots of states. I'd guess there's a huge element of chance, and it doesn't hurt to have political connections and money to slip to high officials.

[taurusowner]

This is the inevitable result of "Zero Tolerance" thinking.  Which, is basically not thinking.  As a get older(I'm 25) I of course think with more and more disdain about whether if it was my daughter doing this sort of thing(if I had one).  But, I also know that a much younger me, had seen his share of 15-17 year old females in an indecent manner.  This is what young people do.  Phones haven't changed the behavior.  Those 2 males(and probably more than a few others) had already seen everything those females had long before the pictures, I guarantee it.  Is it stupid?  Yeah.  Is the law going to prevent it from happening again? Not a chance.  Do they deserve any sort of legal punishment?  Nope.  Not a even a legal slap on the wrist as far as I'm concerned.  This sort of thing has always happened, will always happen, and should be completely up to the parents to deal with.

[lupinus]

Do they deserve any sort of legal punishment?  Nope.  Not a even a legal slap on the wrist as far as I'm concerned.  This sort of thing has always happened, will always happen, and should be completely up to the parents to deal with.

I concur.  Of course, I would continue to say daddy should be open to equal lack of legal punishment for....explaining certain facts of life to little Johnny.  Namely my daughters skin is poison, you touch her, you die.

[slingshot]

I'd let the school deal with it as well as the parents.  Schools can really punish kids, especially otherwise good kids.  Repeat a year.... huge punishment.  I would not push criminal court thing.  More kids are doing this all the time.  Cell phones are just the new media and means to transmit it.  Do I think it's right?  NO  Good?  NO  Would I look if someone sent my cell phone a photo like this?  Probably.

[MicroBalrog]

These laws have a purpose. Namely to protect young children from the creeps that would sexually exploit them.

In other words, the legislator was thinking of Fred the 60-year-old pervert taking porn pics of six-year-old boys, not Samantha the 15-year-old cheerleader taking pics of herself and sending them to John the 16-year-old Football team captain. Using the law in this manner is a bad idea.

[Guitargod1985]

I concur.  Of course, I would continue to say daddy should be open to equal lack of legal punishment for....explaining certain facts of life to little Johnny.  Namely my daughters skin is poison, you touch her, you die.

Yeah, I'm sure little Johnny physically forced young Sally to send him those terribly explicit photos. I hate to use the cliche, but it takes two to tango.

[De Selby]

These laws have a purpose. Namely to protect young children from the creeps that would sexually exploit them.

In other words, the legislator was thinking of Fred the 60-year-old pervert taking porn pics of six-year-old boys, not Samantha the 15-year-old cheerleader taking pics of herself and sending them to John the 16-year-old Football team captain. Using the law in this manner is a bad idea.

There's a longstanding principle in the common law that you don't convict people using laws that were designed to protect exactly those people.  In other words, you don't charge an underaged girl with being an accomplice to a statutory rape because the whole point of the law was to protect her in the first place.

Prosecutors are not required to press charges.  There is also a legal basis (stronger than "this is bad policy) for refusing to press charges in these cases.  It happens because of a distorted picture of what it means to uphold the law.

The US also needs widespread reform of its age of consent and youth sex laws.  It's unrealistic and unnatural to pretend that human beings are only ready to engage in that behavior at 18.

[lupinus]

Yeah, I'm sure little Johnny physically forced young Sally to send him those terribly explicit photos. I hate to use the cliche, but it takes two to tango.

Of course it does, and her behavior would be corrected accordingly.  But, as it takes two to tango and it's my theoretical daughter, you keep your damn hands off.

[Strings]

It depends on locality and the DA (or ADA). I know my local ADA who handles most of the sex crimes wouldn't prosecute: she actually has a brain, and thinks "outside the box". Unfortunately, many don't...

[MicroBalrog]

Of course it does, and her behavior would be corrected accordingly.  But, as it takes two to tango and it's my theoretical daughter, you keep your damn hands off.

If I had a theoretical son, I would resolve this situation rapidly and surely.

[Cromlech]

I can't speak for the Americans, but as a 23 year old I can tell you that some of you parents really don't want to know what 14-25 year olds get up to these days. I know a few who have liked to have little orgies since they were 15/16. No wonder there are so many STDs about.

[Strings]

You can threaten the boys all you want. But if the girl says "hey, let's!", your threats will be forgotten rapidly...

[MicroBalrog]

You can threaten the boys all you want. But if the girl says "hey, let's!", your threats will be forgotten rapidly...

And as  I started pointing out, if the boy's parents are of the "understanding" type, your threats will be useless at best.

[freedom lover]

If these are sex crime convictions, they probably fall into separate categories in lots of states. I'd guess there's a huge element of chance, and it doesn't hurt to have political connections and money to slip to high officials.

In NY 17 year olds are tried as adults if they commit sex crimes.

[Fjolnirsson]

In some states, the people involved are legally able to have sex within age of consent laws. Yet, if either of them take pictures of the act, it's a Federal crime. Hmm, that doesn't make sense. Aren't we supposed to be protecting children for predators? Isn't there a better use for our time? Nope, guess not. Let's just lock Johnny up for life and make him one of the new breed of perpetually quasi free people once he gets out. Yeah, that makes sense.  :|

[Strings]

The problem is, the laws were written before the digital age. The laws need to be revisited, with an eye towards updating them to deal with current technology...

Oh... for what it's worth: here in Wisconsin, ANY penetration below the age of 16 is a felony...

[KPT]

Its funny now that the media found out about it there is a word for it. I'm sure as soon as a camera was built into a cell phone someone was "sexting". I'm 27 and have had those kinds of pics and videos sent to my phone before it was known as sexting but now won't someone think of the children.

Why the hell was the football coach going through the eighth graders phone? Mind your own damn business.

I don't think it should be illegal if both parties are under 18. Shouldn't be either if she was 16 and he was 18.

[taurusowner]

I agree with KPT.  Consensual activities between 2 minors should have no legal aspect.

[Strings]

Well, two issues there.

First off, we (Americans) still have LOTS of hang-ups about sex and sexuality. So of course you're going to have many folks flipping out over stuff they would've done themselves (or, in some cases, actually did) when they were that age.

Second off: who deals with the consequences? Yeah, Johnny Footballer can hook up with Suzy Cheerleader and "fold tab A into slot B", the equipment works, but what about the original biological function of that act (procreation)? Maybe we could try some fairly blunt information about sex and sexuality, and ways to avoid pregnancy and STDs (besides the "abstinence plan")? Oh yeah... we run into the above issue...

[FTA84]

Roughly 20 percent of teens admit to participating in "sexting,"

Why the hell was the football coach going through the eighth graders phone? Mind your own damn business.

About 20% of my highschool was the football team and the most likely guys to which girls were willing to "sext".

Seems like there is a near 100% chance of any good looking football player having pictures of girls from the halls.

[RevDisk]

"This is a serious felony. They could be facing many years in prison," CBS News legal analyst Lisa Bloom said of the six teens in Pennsylvania.

But, Bloom added, "What are we going to do, lock up 20 percent of America's teens?"

[Snip]

How much leeway do prosecutors in PA get on these cases when they decide whether or not to prosecute them?

The law in PA is that the age of consent is 16.  Also, it is legal to have sex with a person below the age of 16 if you are within 4 years of the person.  If two 15 year olds have intercourse, they can't both be charged with statutory rape.

However, there is no exemptions whatsoever for child pornography that I am aware of.   Suppose a young man has relations with a young woman.  Supposing the ages were ok, that would be legal.  If the young man drew a portrait or sketch of the young lady naked, he has committed a felony.  If either of them take a naked photo of themselves, they have possession of child pornography.  If they mail it to their partner, that's distribution of child porn.

So yes, 20% (or more likely, higher) of teens have committed multiple felonies.  If they are caught, they can do hard time.  In many locations, they can be branded for life as sex offenders. 

Prosecutors here in PA have enough leeway that they can decline to press charges.   But, for many, why wouldn't they?  If the case is an easy win and the law is very clear, why not?  Mind you, these kids ARE committing real felonies as the law currently stands.

Not saying I like it or agree, I think it's beyond ridiculous, but that's the law as it currently stands. 

[MicroBalrog]

See, here's the problem, in my mind:

On one hand, we tell our teenagers that it is okay for them to have the desires adults often have - to want to get laid, get drunk, etc. etc. On the other hand, we withold from them both the freedoms and responsibilities that adults have.

The result is madness, rather than Sparta.

[Cromlech]

That's the problem that teenagers have had for decades now.

In adolescence, the Brain is not fully developed, and teens cannot reason or empathise as well as adults, yet they have just as strong emotions, if not stronger because they are fuelled by so many hormones.

They get told to be responsible, but are not allowed the same priveleges as adults. They of course cannot understand, or will not understand that their parents have their best interests at heart. Hormonal teens (and we have all been one) don't always take kindly to discipline and following and elder's lead.

[MicroBalrog]

I disagree emphatically with the previous poster.

I certainly do not remember being dumber than my elders when I was 17.

Remember that previous societies allowed the young to take up a variety of responsibilities at a much earlier age than we do today - the famous example is that of Judaism, which expects boys to take moral responsibility for their actions since the age of 13, but there are other, less famous examples (David Farragut,  David Porter, Thomas Edison, Harmodius etc.). Now, I am not saying we should be returning to that fashion of doing things, but I think there's a matter of self-definition here.

If you expect people to be worthless, irresponsible, and childish, and tell them that it is normal for them to be irresponsible and childish, then they will act in this manner.

The whole thing is schizophrenic, really. On one hand, we have a culture that (correctly) informs 16-year-old boys that their desire to have sex with girls of their age is morally acceptable. We have tons of movies and TV shows and magazines that "sexualize" the 16-year-old. On the other hand, we have (in the same culture) an ideology that tells us that when 16-year-olds actually go out and have sex, it is a problem that has to be fixed. Sometimes, we're willing to be accepting of the act itself, but God forbid they do something kinky like take pictures of themselves doing it.

Something has gotta break.