This whore seems a lot more credible and intellectual when she wears these geeky black horn-rimmed glasses, huh

[Leucosticte]

nationalreview.com/videos/culture-with-kat-timpf-16-year-old-girl-shouldnt-face-child-porn-charges/

Btw, what's happening to those others who shared SK's vid? Are they getting prosecuted for child porn too? And is this chick going to advocate that they also be spared child porn charges, just like the whore who took the vid of herself?

Oh, she says SK is the only one facing charges. That's odd.

Yeah, well -- an argument she's making here is that SK's act wasn't illegal, but it was the taking pics of it that was illegal. That's nothing new; if a kid pulls his pants down and starts stroking his dick, that's totally legal too, but would be illegal to photograph because it's "sexually explicit conduct".

I don't know what the point of prosecuting her is, though, since it won't unsuck that boy's dick. However, they say they want to have her psychologically evaluated. I wonder what they would diagnose a chick for, if she's making child porn of herself? What would that even fall under, given today's zeitgeist of sexual liberation?

 

[ww3]

https://www.mdcourts.gov/data/opinions/coa/2019/41a18.pdf

Further, applying CR § 11-207(a) to minors is consistent with achieving the goals of the juvenile justice system. The State argues that the juvenile justice system can provide resources for minors engaging in “self-harm.” Further, when a minor produces or distributes images, a permanent record is created that could be shared beyond the potential intended recipients. The State argues there is a potential for the image to fall into the hands of adults who traffic in child pornography. The State also turns to legislative history to support its plain meaning argument. It believes the legislation shows an intention to eradicate any child pornography regardless of who may be the distributor.