you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Would that be considered child pornography?

[–]Nemacolin[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Yes. If the prosecutor wanted to take that line, yes

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I mean because it's just topless and not a picture of a sexual act. Famously, there's a topless scene of a 15 year old in the 1968 Romeo & Juliet that is exempt from child pornography laws.

[–]Nemacolin[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Many people have had to tell that to the judge.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Seems an odd thing to brand a person a sex offender over, a nice pair of tits.

[–]Nemacolin[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I am not sure that is a smart thing to say to the judge.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're probably right.