Maestro, you are 100% correct about everything you say here!
I live in one of the four states (Iowa, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware) that declares the child pornography label applies to non-graffic semi- or fully-nude, no lewd and lascivious poses, no close-ups of private areas, no real or simulated sex acts, nor anyone being molested depictions of persons under the age of 18. Not only that, but in my home state of Pennsylvania there is an ambiguous part of the statute that declares that it is assumed that the person who created such depictions did so to entice sexual gratification because of how they were depicted, so the legislature could separate that from charging a dad from taking a picture of mom bathing their new born infant in the kitchen sink for the first time and the picture or video not being child pornography because it wasn’t the intent of the person taking the picture to sexually stimulate anyone with it! But how do they REALLY know what the dad or mom were thinking?
Of course this is how I ended up on the registry for a 10-year sentence. I also served 22 months probation. I got two felonies (possession of child pornography and criminal use of a communication device) for my error in not understanding an ambiguous statute, which back in 2005 our old PA Supreme Court in a 4-3 decision said isn’t ambiguous ( and I had worked in the courts over 20 years and have a master’s degree in the Administration of Justice), I and didn’t understand the language, so imagine the others who have been convicted of the same thing (and there have been several here in PA.) I really did not know (which is never an excuse) that downloading non-graphic, no close ups or focus on private areas, no sexual situations or real sex, or no one being molested is the same thing as child pornography in PA. It is not an excuse, but it is a reason I did it. The law in 46 states and federal law declares that what I had was not child pornography.
The thing that gets me, Maestro, is that I could have had thousands of real depictions (I didn’t even have adult pornography on my computer) of 18 year old girls doing the most disgustingly disturbing sexual acts and situations, and I would have been within the law! I had predominantly semi-nude modeling pictures and a few fully nude modeling pictures of developed females under age 18 and thus I’m a convicted felon, on a state and national shaming list like I’m a real danger to society for 3 more years. No one would hire me once they did the background check and I ended up starting my own business to get work, which has been very good. Thank God my wife has also seen this as absurd and never stopped supporting me, and she has a very high paying career to take care of us. Neither have any family or friends thrown me under the bus after they heard my story and it was confirmed by a forensic analysis of my computer. Only one local newspaper had the guts to write what I had was depictions of semi and nude underage females in non-sexual poses. The other three insinuated that I had kiddy porn!! Of course! It sells!!
Yes, Maestro, the politician mind readers all think one size fits all, and anyone who committed a crime that the state calls a sex crime is automatically a sex offender that should be feared by the general public … until hopefully it happens to their son or grandson. Watch how quickly they will do a 180!!
I have always said I’d like to hook up police and DA’s to polygraph machines and see how they’d react to the sight of a semi- or fully nude developed female under age 18, and then when she turns 18 two weeks later, see if it is any different.
The registry is a joke. It protects no one. It just ostracizes people for life no matter what they did as long as the government declares it a sex offense. No one should be on a public registry. There are ways to protect the public, including children, once a real violent sex offender finally makes parole after many, many years. It didn’t have to be an online publication.