Nude pics under 18 years old in Indiana

[Ohiogal]

Relevant law

§ 35-42-4-4. [Effective 7/1/2013 to 7/1/2014] Child exploitation; possession of child pornography; exemptions; defenses

That seems to be the law under which he could be prosecuted. It is a sex offense and can result in registration. Though the law is changing 7/1/2014. If it were 7/1/2014, he wouldn't be guilty of anything. Nor would this be an issue.

 

[Ohiogal]

Ok...I misunderstood where you were going on that part. I thought you were referring to her age. I didn't equate child pornography with a sex offense since I was under the impression that child pornography was a greater crime than a sex offense.

Okay. She is the age of consent. However if OP met her because she was his student or in another subservient position, there could be other issues.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Sorry I thought that what this forum was for, legal advice.

Here's some legal advice for you: Anything you say can be used against you.

So how many search warrants do you think have been issued recently in your state where the girl was 16 and the boy was 30?

Do you think the police will have a difficult time tying the your post to your case?

 

[CJane]

OP says HE is in Indiana. He doesn't say WHERE the girl is. He also doesn't say how old she was when she took/sent the pictures.

 

[quincy]

OP says HE is in Indiana. He doesn't say WHERE the girl is. He also doesn't say how old she was when she took/sent the pictures.

I noticed that, too, CJane. There may be computer crimes and federal laws to consider, not just Indiana laws. And there can be civil actions the parents of the girl can consider taking against 73transamsd.

Why people admit on a public forum to committing crimes is a puzzle to me.

 

[swalsh411]

Wrong.
A topless pic of a minor girl who has developed? We are not talking topless girl infant. Yeah... child pornography. There is no such thing as a tasteful nude of a teenager. It is all child pornography. It doesn't have to be sexually explicit.

Something is not a crime because you mistakenly think it is or are outraged because it is not. There is a very specific definition of child pornography under 18 USC § 2256. I'm not going to post it all here because it's disgusting to even think about, but a mere topless picture of a 16 year old girl does not fall under the definition. You can google it if you don't believe me.

Here's some legal advice for you: Anything you say can be used against you.

So how many search warrants do you think have been issued recently in your state where the girl was 16 and the boy was 30?

Do you think the police will have a difficult time tying the your post to your case?

And where the parents found out
And where the pictures were taken with a webcam
And where the computer was seized
And where the pictures were "hidden" on the hard drive but not encrpyted.

OP might have just as well posted his name.

His only hope at this point is that the pictures do not rise to the level of child pornography.

 

[CJane]

Okay. She is the age of consent. However if OP met her because she was his student or in another subservient position, there could be other issues.

She's of the age of consent to have sex. She's not of the age of consent to create pornography.

 

[Ohiogal]

She's of the age of consent to have sex. She's not of the age of consent to create pornography.

Yes, I agree -- should have continued the sentence to include have sex. Hence my posting of the statute of CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. However if it were 7/1/2014? Guess what? She would be.

 

[mmmagique]

Something is not a crime because you mistakenly think it is or are outraged because it is not. There is a very specific definition of child pornography under 18 USC § 2256. I'm not going to post it all here because it's disgusting to even think about, but a mere topless picture of a 16 year old girl does not fall under the definition. You can google it if you don't believe me.



And where the parents found out
And where the pictures were taken with a webcam
And where the computer was seized
And where the pictures were "hidden" on the hard drive but not encrpyted.

OP might have just as well posted his name.

His only hope at this point is that the pictures do not rise to the level of child pornography.

He basically did...

 

[dave33]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Indiana

I'm well over the age of 30 i have a girlfriend who is 16. She sent me nude photos using her webcam. I had those placed in an inconspicuous folder and her parents found out. The cops came and confiscated my computers and will find these photos. I live in indiana and I know the age of consent is 16 but nude pics you mustbe 18. I've never been in any legal trouble in the past so what kind of legal trouble am I looking at for this?

Hopefully several felony charges. "Well over the age of 30", sounds like an old man and a kid.

 

[davew128]

Love the fact that he is admitting that he is a sex offender. Prison time and registration is not far behind. Hope you didn't have a career where being a sex offender is an issue. Ummm, oh yeah. Hope you didn't actually have or want a career.

Morality issues aside, is possession of child (or in this case minor as I don't consider 16 a child) porn a sex crime? I didn't bother to confirm the age of consent in his state but if he was right, he wasn't committing a crime if he did have sex with his girlfriend.

ETA: Apparently this has been answered.

 

[LdiJ]

Morality issues aside, is possession of child (or in this case minor as I don't consider 16 a child) porn a sex crime? I didn't bother to confirm the age of consent in his state but if he was right, he wasn't committing a crime if he did have sex with his girlfriend.

Age of consent in Indiana is 16.

She did quote the statute further up and it does look like it could be considered a sex crime.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Even that law does not cover simply a minors breast. Nudist colony visitors take pictures of nude children and it is perfectly legal. It is a context thing. That said, one must wonder which of the teen girls in his online photos is the topless one. I'm sure their parents will wonder after a Google search. He apparently has an entire forum helping him assist one girl to build a bike. He sounds smitten in the posts there.

§ 35-42-4-4. [Effective 7/1/2013 to 7/1/2014] Child exploitation; possession of child pornography; exemptions; defenses

That seems to be the law under which he could be prosecuted. It is a sex offense and can result in registration. Though the law is changing 7/1/2014. If it were 7/1/2014, he wouldn't be guilty of anything. Nor would this be an issue.

 

[justalayman]

even in the new version of the law, this is part of the definition of sexual conduct:

(C) exhibition of the:
(i) uncovered genitals; or
(ii) female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple;
intended to satisfy or arouse the sexual desires of any

so,

(b) A person who:
(1) knowingly or intentionally manages, produces, sponsors, presents, exhibits, photographs, films, videotapes, or creates a digitized image of any performance or incident that includes sexual conduct by a child under eighteen (18) years of age;
(2) knowingly or intentionally disseminates, exhibits to another person, offers to disseminate or exhibit to another person, or sends or brings into Indiana for dissemination or exhibition matter that depicts or describes sexual conduct by a child under eighteen (18) years of age;

and there is much more. I don't see where both would still not be guilty under the new law.

 

[CJane]

The SENDER is guilty of distributing child porn, even if it is pictures of themselves.


possessing and/or distributing child porn is considered a sex offense for the purposes of being listed as a "sex offender" and requirements to register on the sex offenders lists.

Which is a good point. Depending on where OP's "girlfriend" lives, SHE could be facing criminal charges as well.