Dr. Strangelove Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 10 hours ago, SouthLincoln Husker said: Wrong, he has not been charged. It still under investigation. According to NBC Bay Area, where the story first broke, he's being charged with a misdemeanor and a felony. We'll see if those charges stick, but that's not a good look. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/University-of-Nebraska-Football-Player-Maurice-Washington-Faces-Revenge-Porn-Child-Porn-Charges-Over-Video-of-Bay-Area-Teen-505666711.html Quote Link to comment
Husker03 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 5 minutes ago, Moiraine said: I was under the impression we were similar ages. Did smart phones exist when you were 18? I am 100% sure I would have received dick pics from my 18 year old boyfriend when I was 16 if smartphones had existed back then. I didn’t have a smartphone but I did have a digital camera, computer, and internet and was willing to put some work in to attain 8.8/10 rating on ratemyrack.com. As I’ve said above, my 18-24 years would have been much worse had I come of age in 2010+. Quote Link to comment
Redux Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 5 hours ago, The Dude said: Case in point. Heh. I was 18 in the internet age. You know what the easiest thing in the world was? Not being in possession of child pornography. Did you ever save any picture you saw on the internet ever? You've been in possession of "child porn". Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Dr. Strangelove said: According to NBC Bay Area, where the story first broke, he's being charged with a misdemeanor and a felony. We'll see if those charges stick, but that's not a good look. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/University-of-Nebraska-Football-Player-Maurice-Washington-Faces-Revenge-Porn-Child-Porn-Charges-Over-Video-of-Bay-Area-Teen-505666711.html The case was referred to a judge in mid-December. Unless it happened recently, charges have not yet been filed. They're anticipating charges in that article, likely because a source in the DA has told them they're pending, but until the judge issues the order, no charges. Quote Link to comment
Dr. Strangelove Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Redux said: Did you ever save any picture you saw on the internet ever? You've been in possession of "child porn". Wut. The person has to be a minor. Quote Link to comment
Dr. Strangelove Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, knapplc said: The case was referred to a judge in mid-December. Unless it happened recently, charges have not yet been filed. They're anticipating charges in that article, likely because a source in the DA has told them they're pending, but until the judge issues the order, no charges. That's a fair point. Quote Link to comment
darkhorse85 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 4 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said: According to NBC Bay Area, where the story first broke, he's being charged with a misdemeanor and a felony. We'll see if those charges stick, but that's not a good look. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/University-of-Nebraska-Football-Player-Maurice-Washington-Faces-Revenge-Porn-Child-Porn-Charges-Over-Video-of-Bay-Area-Teen-505666711.html Girl: "Please don't use my last name." News channel: "No problem!" Girl: "Thanks!" News channel: *proceeds to paste her picture in the article* Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 1 minute ago, darkhorse85 said: Girl: "Please don't use my last name." News channel: "No problem!" Girl: "Thanks!" News channel: *proceeds to paste her picture in the article* She asked to have her photo in the article and she was interviewed on TV. Quote Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 There is something inherently wrong with considering one 16 year old in possession of another 16 year old's (their girlfriend or boyfriend) picture/video as being guilty of child pornography. We give these kids smart phones, oftentimes before they are even teenagers, and then some act shocked and disgusted and outraged when immature people do immature things with that technology. Yet some of these same people simply call laws against marijuana stupid and ill advised. Tar and feather one while ignoring/laughing about the other. I think I'll need a much taller horse to see the world the way some of you do. 5 Quote Link to comment
darkhorse85 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Moiraine said: She asked to have her photo in the article and she was interviewed on TV. Welllllllllll.....I like quite the fool then, don't I? Quote Link to comment
Hedley Lamarr Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 1 minute ago, JJ Husker said: There is something inherently wrong with considering one 16 year old in possession of another 16 year old's (their girlfriend or boyfriend) picture/video as being guilty of child pornography. We give these kids smart phones, oftentimes before they are even teenagers, and then some act shocked and disgusted and outraged when immature people do immature things with that technology. Yet some of these same people simply call laws against marijuana stupid and ill advised. Tar and feather one while ignoring/laughing about the other. I think I'll need a much taller horse to see the world the way some of you do. I have been having the same response when someone calls this child porn....a 60 yr old man can watch dirty videos of 18 yr olds all day every day and never have a legal issue but an 18 yr old senior in HS cant have a 15 or 16 yr old picture or video of his gf/ex or whatever. One seems way more disgusting to me. 5 Quote Link to comment
Cdog923 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 44 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said: I'm so happy none of you ever saw a nude teenager when you were a teen. Many of you lived very boring teenage years I've searched for an hour for the most appropriate eye roll gif to post in response to this, but there are too many, and they wouldn't fit the maximum size requirements. 2 Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said: I have been having the same response when someone calls this child porn....a 60 yr old man can watch dirty videos of 18 yr olds all day every day and never have a legal issue but an 18 yr old senior in HS cant have a 15 or 16 yr old picture or video of his gf/ex or whatever. One seems way more disgusting to me. I'm guessing many of the people throwing around the label trying to force it to tell the entire story are grown ups who watch 18 year old porn stars. If we're talking about morality, I don't see much of a difference. Quote Link to comment
Redux Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 11 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said: Wut. The person has to be a minor. In the infancy of the internet, I bet anyone who ever saved any "sensitive material" has been in possession of bad stuff that they weren't even aware of being bad. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.