Quote:
Originally Posted by david_e
I'm not sure if the gray areas exist in the actual laws or just in my mind when it comes to the fictionalization of sexual situations of what would be, were they flesh and blood, minors. Anyone clarify?
|
In my state, the original statute said that the prosecution had to prove that a real human child (under 16yo) was depicted.This turned out to be nearly impossible. Cases were acquitted and the amount of child porn available grew. Now with "virtual" porn it's even harder to determine real from fake. NJ Congressmen were given several pictures to see if they could tell which of them were real. They could not. Now the law was changed with the state Supreme Court's approval that a jury can be used ( in certain circumstances) to determine whether the pictures are of real children or not using all available evidence and testimony. Since then arrests and convictions have risen considerably. We just recently had a lawyer plead guilty to possession. The reasoning was the law now slyly and indirectly puts the burden of proof on the defendant to prove the images are fake since a jury probably will not be 100% positive the pics are real or not.