NEWARK -- A 15-year-old girl is accused of distributing nude photos of herself to other minors, and one state legislator is questioning whether she should be labeled a sex offender.
The Licking Valley High School student was arrested Friday after school officials discovered the materials and brought in the school's resource officer for a police investigation.
After spending the weekend incarcerated, she pleaded deny Monday to both charges: illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, a second-degree felony; and possession of criminal tools, a fifth-degree felony.
The child pornography charge for a convicted adult requires a Tier II sexual offender classification, but for a juvenile of this defendant's age, the judge has flexibility, said Jennifer Brindisi, a spokeswoman for the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation.
"There's a part of juvenile section of Senate Bill 10 (Ohio's version of the federal Adam Walsh Act) that says if the child is a first-time offender and age 14 or 15 that the judge can decide not to make her register," she said.
State Rep. Jay Hottinger, R-Newark, wrote the state's Megan's Law bill, the predecessor of the Adam Walsh Act, and said this case was not something the legislature envisioned.
"Clearly it was in an illegal act," he said Tuesday. "Clearly it was an unacceptable act, and there needs to be consequences from that, but we need to make sure the punishment is a reasonable punishment."
Licking County Prosecutor Ken Oswalt, who declined comment ahead of a written statement to be released today, had been visiting high schools in the county and educating teens on the consequences of such an action. Licking Valley High School was one of those stops.
During assemblies, Oswalt talked about the dangers, both in personal embarrassment and contribution to child pornography on the Internet.
He said in April his office had received about 20 cases involving questionable cell phone pictures. None were charged pending their adherence to a plan crafted with their families.
Licking County Assistant Prosecutor Erin Welch said Monday the investigation into the incident remains open, including exploring whether charges will be filed against the minors who received the photos.
If the prosecutor's office elects to bring those teens into court, they could be facing a different section of the same charge pending against the sender of the pictures and classification as sex offenders, as well.
According to Ohio law, 2907.323(A)(3) states anyone possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is guilty of a fifth-degree felony. The violation also might qualify the juvenile as a Tier I sexual offender, which requires annual registration for a decade.
The section of the law the girl, who is a foster child, was charged with allows parents or guardians to take photos of their unclothed children for a list of acceptable purposes but does not provide an exemption for the child themselves.
Hottinger said the portions of the juvenile section of Ohio's Megan's Law, enacted in 2002 and replaced Jan. 1, were crafted to resemble their adult counterparts for good reason.
"What we're aiming at was a growing problem that we were seeing amongst juveniles and that was they were committing some very serious adult-like crimes," he said.
Brindisi said the Adam Walsh Act reduces much of the discretion allotted to judges in Megan's Law and transformed sex-offender classification to an offense-based system.
"It's pretty black and white," she said.
If the girl charged Monday is classified as a sexual offender, Brindisi said as a juvenile in this instance she would not be subject to publication on the public Web sites maintained by the Licking County Sheriff's Office or the state but would have to register for 20 years as the law states.
A status conference in her case is scheduled for Oct. 20. She is on house arrest and may not have a cell phone or access to the Internet without adult supervision and for no purpose other than school work.
Licking Valley Schools Superintendent Dave Hile said board policy calls for notification of certain staff members if a student or other individual labeled as a sex offender is on school grounds.
Calls to State Sen. Tim Schaffer and the girl's defense attorney were not returned.
Russ Zimmer can be reached at (740) 328-8548 or razimmer@newarkadvocate.com.
By: RedBeardedDevil
In: News
Tags: Nudity, cell phone, teen, sex offender
Marked as: approved
Views: 9435 | Comments: 37 | Votes: 0 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
Advertisement below
|
|
| Liveleak on Facebook | |
|
LIKE Liveleak.com |
-
Great cell phone commercial
-
No longer a registered sex offender, but the stigma remains
-
Kidnapping Victim Found After 18 Years, Police Say Man; A Registered Sex Offender, and Woman Arrested
-
TX - Sex offender crackdown in online realm
-
NE - Posters Hung Falsely Identifying Man as Sex Offender
-
Cell Phone Video Of Fake Arrest Released
-
Sex offender accused of harassing women at St. Petersburg Wal-Mart
-
Child ‘Enticer’ Nabbed After Sharp 11-Year-Old Girl Gets Him on Cell Phone Pic
-
Victorville deputy takes plea in Explorer teen sex case
-
Apparently Barak Obama is relevant to this sex offender case...
-
Sex offender cut off ankle monitor, tried to rob or kidnap San Diego-area women, girls




Another "zero tolerance" law from our brilliant leaders. :(
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bymorelman2 (927.32) 
morelman2 View Channel Send Message
(4)
Zero tollerance always means first time minor offenders get equally as screwed as repeat major offenders. It's a sick and twisted fundamental policy.
Posted Dec-16-2008 ByEntinlude (1588.00) Entinlude View Channel Send Message
(2)
She's a kid...kids do dumb things
Posted Dec-16-2008 ByPunch_The_Monkey (1159.98) 
Punch_The_Monkey View Channel Send Message
(4)
does that mean she will go to jail if she approaches herself? Can she be charged with interfering with a witness if she mulls this over in her own mind?
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bygandalf11 (162.06) gandalf11 View Channel Send Message
(3)
To carry that further... if she touches her self and feels guilty about it and confesses, can she be arrested for molestation? Seems to be in the same line of thinking.
Posted Dec-16-2008 ByRedBeardedDevil (13.56) 
RedBeardedDevil View Channel Send Message
(1)
Seriously, we have probs here in Australia smiliar to this, so you US guys this isn't aimed at yo. it's at ALL ourleaders..... WTF is going on, leaders, see the bottle on shelf that says 'chill', please take a couple of these pills..
If a girl want to send naked pictures of herself to her mates, 'so be it'.. If her mates upload it etcshe might regret it, but it was her choice...
Calm down world, sheeesh..
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bysmeblee (11080.40)

smeblee View Channel Send Message
(2)
Prosecutor MUST have had a bad "you show me yours and I'll show you mine" experience. Was probably met with a HUGE amount of laughter and never got to see hers. Can anyone honestly say they never did things like that at that age or even younger? Completely normal. Kids just have tech now, JEEESH!! Stupid, stupid, stupid. The exact same kind of stupidity and utter ridiculousness as Bigs.
The world has gone mad.
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bydad61 (2240.04) 
dad61 View Channel Send Message
(1)
I am going to disagree with you this time Smeblee.
I think a 15 year old is old enough to start to learn right from wrong and take some responsibility for her actions. Sure she made a dumb mistake like many other teenagers and I would hate to see her labeled as a sex offender and put on to a registry at this young stage of her life. But like I said she has to take responsibility for her actions and become accountable.
There are too many young girls out there that are creating more sex offender More..
Posted Dec-16-2008 ByPro-Logical (677.02) Pro-Logical Send Message
(0)
I need a Licking Valley t-shirt.
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bywags (210.12) 
wags View Channel Send Message
(2)
That prosecutor is an asshole to go after a foster kid who probably has no money to hire a good defense team.
Posted Dec-16-2008 BySteve677 (410.56) 
Steve677 View Channel Send Message
(2)
this is stupid, its like we've lost our common sense. kids will do dumb things, live with it!
Posted Dec-16-2008 Byngatik (51.20) ngatik View Channel Send Message
(2)
yup
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bylasrever (5356.20) lasrever View Channel Send Message
(0)
Blanket laws like this and many others(including the ones getting Biggles9 into trouble) are just a way of letting those responsible for good sense decisions get away without thinking. Why bother to do a case to case review when you can just sweep everyone up automatically? It is much easier to create a blanket law that requires no thinking and collect your check at the end of the week. And some of these laws need to be changed with the times. You can't have 1800's thinking and reasoning in 2008 More..
Posted Dec-16-2008 ByRedBeardedDevil (13.56) 
RedBeardedDevil View Channel Send Message
(1)
Ok this is a bit too much. Its dumb.
A good sense judge will dismiss the case, considering the victim is the perp, which is a no-case.
Kids don't need more protection from imaginary harm, kids need PARENTS that teach them good judgement. How can you expect a kid that is not taught to think critically to think critically and consider the possible outcomes of their actions? Good judgement starts at home.
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bycab10886 (25.34) 
cab10886 View Channel Send Message
(0)
What dumbasses. Wow. Let her do it. I did it and had it done when i was her age. If cops bust down my door and find a video of me banging my GF while we were both 16, i got child porn?! But other hand, this makes it easier for sick pedos to get thier hands on the goodies.
Posted Dec-16-2008 ByNemesis2747 (173.24) 
Nemesis2747 View Channel Send Message
(0)
In a place named Licking Valley, you would think anything goes.
The world's gone mad.
BTW - I remember some naughty pics of 'occurences' in the girls hotel room going round my school a few years back, taken during our school trip to France, and they were just laughed off (I was young once!!)
Mmmmmm..... wonder what happened to those pics.
And NO, Queensland Argos, I don't have them.
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bypheasantplucker (1415.72) 
pheasantplucker View Channel Send Message
(0)
It's only a matter of time until parents have to close their eyes when they change babies diapers. I better burn those baby pictures my parents took of me.
Posted Dec-16-2008 Byzone_d (132.04) 
zone_d View Channel Send Message
(0)
Typical example of not using common sense. Perhaps take the phone away from the girl, ground her for 6 months, send her to theropy, get her involved in church, there are many ways to respond to what she did besides branding her as a sex offender (which she isn't).
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bypbusby (54.26) pbusby View Channel Send Message
(0)
give all those pictures to the police i'm sure it'll stay in the evidence room where it belongs
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bylasrever (5356.20) lasrever View Channel Send Message
(0)
This could have been handled in a much better way. Hell even sitting the girl down and explaining the consequences of her actions probably would have been enough, but having her tried and registered as a sex offender will fuck her over for life.
If you think this is outrageous, you can contact the prosecutor in the case here:
Licking County Prosecutor's Office
20 S. Second St, Newark, Ohio 43055
Hours of Operation (M-F, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.)
General Telephone number: (740) 670-5255 - Fax 74 More..
Posted Dec-16-2008 Bycrimsonshdw (16.82) crimsonshdw View Channel Send Message
(0)