15 years jail for photos of legal girl friend

Zur Illustration der von der EU angedrohten Zustände ein Beispiel aus den USA:

You Can Have Sex With Them; Just Don’t Photograph Them

A former cop’s 15-year prison sentence illustrates the absurdity of federal child porn laws.

| February 28, 2011

In the spring and summer of 2006, Eric Rinehart, at the time a 34-year-old police officer in the small town of Middletown, Indiana, began consensual sexual relationships with two young women, ages 16 and 17. One of the women had contacted Rinehart through his MySpace page. He had known the other one, the daughter of a man who was involved in training police officers, for most of her life. Rinehart was going through a divorce at the time. The relationships came to the attention of local authorities, and then federal authorities, when one of the girls mentioned it to a guidance counselor.

Whatever you might think of Rinehart’s judgment or ethics, his relationships with the girls weren’t illegal. The age of consent in Indiana is 16. That is also the age of consent in federal territories. Rinehart got into legal trouble because one of the girls mentioned to him that she had posed for sexually provocative photos for a previous boyfriend and offered to do the same for Rinehart. Rinehart lent her his camera, which she returned with the promised photos. Rinehart and both girls then took additional photos and at least one video, which he downloaded to his computer.

In 2007 Rinehart was convicted on two federal charges of producing child pornography. U.S. District Court Judge David Hamilton, who now serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, reluctantly sentenced Rinehart to 15 years in prison. Thanks to mandatory minimum sentences, Hamilton wrote, his hands were tied. There is no parole in the federal prison system. So barring an unlikely grant of clemency from the president, Rinehart, who is serving his time at a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania, will have to complete at least 85 percent of his term (assuming time off for good behavior), or nearly 13 years.

Hamilton was not permitted to consider any mitigating factors in sentencing Rinehart. It did not matter that Rinehart’s sexual relationships with the two girls were legal. Nor did it matter that the photos for which he was convicted never went beyond his computer. Rinehart had no prior criminal history, and there was no evidence he had ever possessed or searched for child pornography on his computer. There was also no evidence that he abused his position as a police officer to lure the two women into sex. His crime was producing for his own use explicit images of two physically mature women with whom he was legally having sex. (Both women also could have legally married Rinehart without their parents’ consent, although it’s unclear whether federal law would have permitted a prosecution of Rinehart for photographing his own wife.)

via: human-stupidity.com

Advertisements

Recent Posts

Kategorien

RSS News from Mensactivism

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Fathers and Families

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS The Spearhead

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Men’s Rights – Reddit

  • Volunteer Position available in the Mens Rights Australia team: Father's counsellor
  • Does any one know any marches for November 19th?
  • 19 year old woman has sex with 14 year old boy, and suddenly the sex offender registry is a problem.
  • As a female who is subbed here...
  • Parent > Visitor. Socially Sanctioned Negation In A Nut Shell.
  • 2017 AAP Convention Circumcision Protests
  • 49 Year old rapist of 15 year old completes weekends only sentence after 2 years
  • Criminology student lied she was raped by a taxi driver after he refused to accept a kebab-soaked £10 note is jailed for 16 months
  • TIL The vast majority of men in the United States weren't allowed to vote until 1856.
  • The problem with how men perceive rape | Professional victim explains how her saying "yes" to sex and regretting it later is all men's fault because she has no agency and can't make decisions for herself. Thanks feminism.