posted
6 months in prison... charged with Child Molestation... that must have been hell... inmates are not kind to those charged.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Makes me wonder what the photo looked like. It's a 2D image, so depending upon how it was shot, it *could* have looked really bad. There must be more to this story than what was in that article.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeap, otherwise it sounds kind of incredible... I mean, really, who would convict someone for a picture like that?!
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok... I'm really not familiar with how the legal system works. But then how can they keep him in jail for 6 whole month?! I mean, he was charged, but does that mean he is to be kept in jail during the trial? Or was it because of the nature of the charges?
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've worked in film & photo development before. I just want to say that this sort of thing is not because of "nosy busybodies" - there were rules for mandatory reporting of pictures depicting sexual contact with underage children.
Jeniwren already pointed out the key issue here, we don't know what the picture looked like. If you could tell in the print that he was kissing the baby's tummy, I doubt anyone would have thought twice about printing it. If it was from a different angle and it looked like the man's mouth was between the baby's legs, I definitely would have reported that, and I think most people here would too.
I agree its sad that this resulted in jail time and 6 months separated from their child. But if this had been a case where there was child molestation going on and being photographed, people would be bemoaning "Why didn't anyone SAY anything? How could they print those awful pictures without calling child services?"
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
