Court rules it's ok to send sexually explicit emails to minors

spike

spike

New Member
ALBANY -- An appeals court decision to overturn the conviction of a Manhattan lawyer for sending sexually explicit e-mails to a minor because he didn't include pictures will make it much harder to convict pedophiles, prosecutors said Friday.

On Tuesday, the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court in Brooklyn tossed the conviction of Jeffrey Kozlow for disseminating indecent material to a minor because the law specifies the material must "depict" sexual conduct. E-mails sent by Kozlow to an undercover police officer he thought was a minor contained only words, not pictures, so they did not "depict" sexual acts, the court said.
http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=503801&category=STATE&BCCode=&newsdate=7/29/2006
 
spike said:
ALBANY -- An appeals court decision to overturn the conviction of a Manhattan lawyer for sending sexually explicit e-mails to a minor because he didn't include pictures will make it much harder to convict pedophiles, prosecutors said Friday.

On Tuesday, the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court in Brooklyn tossed the conviction of Jeffrey Kozlow for disseminating indecent material to a minor because the law specifies the material must "depict" sexual conduct. E-mails sent by Kozlow to an undercover police officer he thought was a minor contained only words, not pictures, so they did not "depict" sexual acts, the court said.
http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=503801&category=STATE&BCCode=&newsdate=7/29/2006
Click to expand...

Who gives a shit whether there were pictures in the e-mail or not? The e-mails were sent to an adult pretending to be a minor... they weren't sent to a minor. Therefore, no crime. :rolleyes:
 
Actually, you americans should be proud of this one. It's merely an upholding of an older ruling that supported an author's rights to write stories involving child sex, under the right of freedom of expression. Even drawings showing sex acts were permitted under that. Photos as art were still banned, since the photos was of a criminal act, and posession of that was considered accessory after the fact.

Of course, immediately after that a group of pedo-distributers on the Newsgroup servers ran their photos through software to introduce "marks" into them, making them appear drawn.
 
Inkara1 said:
Who gives a shit whether there were pictures in the e-mail or not? The e-mails were sent to an adult pretending to be a minor... they weren't sent to a minor. Therefore, no crime. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Nope, not going there. Been here, done this, ain't gonna do it no mo'.
 
Something I've noticed. The fagots on parade this year have slightly changed their 'nom-de-guerre'. It's not the Gay Pride parade anymore. It's the Pride parade. I wonder if they think they're fooling anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top