|
Well, what about real life children that live in nudist colonies? They aren't allowed to have family pictures? "Obscene" is a very objective term to use for legal purposes, and is not well defined by the law. I have a professional photo studio portrait of my baby son, naked in a big egg. In two of the pictures you can see his butt. There are surely some folks, and probably some lawyers and judges, who would consider this "obscene". While most of you think the liklihood of getting prosecuted over such a thing is slim... it's surely not impossible. Sometimes, though, you just have to make a moral stand. (this goes both ways)
Yes, if he had real child porn, then he should be convicted, but it specifically says he was convicted WITHOUT pictures of real children. So I'm not sure who's lying, but the Department of Justice should know a good bit about the case. *shrug*
|