I have previously been critical of the blind application laws on sending sexually explicit photos and other laws to teenagers. While purpose of these laws is laudable, we have seen various cases of teenagers facing ruinous charges over consensual exchanges. A case in point is Cormega Copening, 17, and his girlfriend, Brianna Denson, who were charged as adults in February for sending “sexually explicit” photos of minors. However, they are the minors. They were 16. However, in some twisted logic, prosecutors have charged them as adults . . . for sending minors these photos . . . when the minors are themselves and they are being charged as a adults.
Copening is a North Carolina high school quarterback but in North Carolina a 16 year old is treated as an adult, even though the crime is sending images to a minor. So he is legally an adult for the purposes of the charges but he is accused of a crime for sending such pictures as a non-adult (of someone under 18).
All of this makes sense to North Carolina police and prosecutors. Benson reached a plea agreement to avoid felony charges while Copening still faces two counts of second degree sexual exploitation of a minor and three counts of third degree sexual exploitation of a minor. Each count is a felony charge and a felony carries at least two years in jail.
Opening may also have to register as a sex offender.
What is also striking is that police and prosecutors threw the book at him after he and his mother cooperated with their request to examine his cellphone. He was not even a suspect in the investigation, which dealt with statutory rape. On the phone, they found five pictures of Cormega and his girlfriend. They were not sent to anyone else. They were consensual photos between two romantically involved teenagers.
Source: Fox
The Supreme Court is allowed, with impunity, to arbitrarily commingle the definitions of “state” and “federal” in its purely ideological and subjective decision to provide artificial support to the flawed and unconstitutional ACA.
This prosecutor has the same authority to ignore the letter and thesis of the law, Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights and arbitrarily and subjectively charge these innocent and hormonal teenagers with felonious crimes against children, even if they are the subject children, based on ideology.
If this sounds irrational and obtuse, sort of like charging a person that has committed suicide with murder (how often does that happen?), then the Supreme Court decision on the ACA is absurdly erroneous or politically malicious, and most certainly “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
NOTE:
When lifetime terms were established for Justices of the Supreme Court, the life expectancy of human beings was about 40 years.
I agree with BitchinDog way upstream. This is ridiculous overreach.
This needs to be taken up to the Supreme Court to determine the eligibility of the cases surrounding the sex offender registry.
I think this is taking it too far and encroaches on the liberties of all Americans, not just Blacks. That prosecutor needs to be prosecuted and then sentenced to jail. Too much power is given to prosecutors. If I were the prosecutor and I heard about two teenagers who were 16 at the time and were sexting without distributing photos on the internet, I absolutely would not charge them.
I’d drop the whole case altogether because they were romantically involved. There’s no intent to distribute pornography, exploitation of a minor, etc. TBH, I’d make a whole lot more sense than that prosecutor in office.
This case is getting a lot of attention except for the legal violations done by the law enforcement agencies.
Read Florida Action Committee take on this at http://floridaactioncommittee.org/17-year-old-faces-registration-for-victimizing-himself/
Sixteen at the age the pictures were taken and sent to each other.
He turned 17 and was arrested, She was sort of arrested, gender discrimination on charges.
If both did the same thing at the same age then why is only the male is to blame.
This is North Carolina and like Alabama’s 22 male to 1 female prison ratio.
The laws apply mostly to male offenders and not females.
However, these charges also are Ex post Facto used according to age.
How can you wait until a person is of age to charge them for a juvenile act.
Like with my friend Tim who was 14 in 1998 and then charged in 2006, under a new law and his age in 2006. This was in Alabama where Tim is serving 3 LIFE sentences that at the time they were done he could not be charged because he was under 16 and the other person was the same age as him. He was sentenced as if the age of the other person never changed, and his age at that time was his current age in 2006.
How can time be used in law like this without violating Ex post Facto?
Same goes for these two people.
What ever happen to the controlling factor that the date of the offense controls type of offense and punishment?
How can the state wait until a new law to come out and use it on an old offense?
Ex post Facto condition of law that violates every state and the US Constitutions.
As has been said and written many times: talking to and/or volunteering evidence to the police is always positively absolutely wrong, no matter how justified it seems at the time.
One of almost endless proofs that come to mind now: person X is accused of a crime that occurred in location Y. X says to the police: “I have never in my life been to location Y, ever!”
Two potential outcomes. One, you forgot that indeed you did once visit location Y. Your attempt to retract your earlier statement is impossible. Instead, you are charged with a separate crime of lying to the police, obstruction of justice, etc. And your “lie” (AKA mistake) confirms your guilt.
Two: the police locate a person who swears (wrongly) they have seen person X in location Y. This testimony helps convict person X of the original charge, plus now they add the new obstruction charge.
Also, if/when police arrive at your door, never ever in a million years open the door. Within the last couple weeks in Rohnert Park, CA, Person A lived this nightmare. Person A was alone in his home. Allegedly (more on this in a minute), a neighbor called the PD and reported a woman screamed in Person A’s home.
Person A sees many police officers, possibly with guns drawn, so when he opens his door (first and fatal error…talk to them through a window) he has his hands in the air to hopefully minimize being blown to a million pieces by stupid, ignorant, blood sucking lazy police. The PD justify handcuffing him because only a guilty person puts their hands in the air. He sits on his curb IFO his neighbors handcuffed. (Also see the FBI list of suspicious travelers which includes persons who act too casually and persons who fidget too much, IOW every activity deserves a body cavity search.)
Person B is co-worker with Person A. Person B was tying down his boat on his trailer parked on the street IFO his home in Rohnert Park. Someone called the PD for unlawfully parked car. A mental case homicidal PD officer appears. Cop sits in his car a couple minutes and appears to photograph Person B. Person B pulls out his phone and video records the cop. For absolutely no known or apparent reason except the cop is a homicidal mental case (a sleepy residential area I have visited often), cop pulls his gun and holds it with both hands in full metal jacket assault mode.
At Facebook, Person A posted negative statements about the RPPD. A couple days later, the alleged PD call from Person A’s neighbor, which call the RPPD will not release.
Another woman opened her door to police knocks. The pig outweighed the woman by about 150 lbs. Even though she stood in her door way the pig walked right through her into the home, where they tossed her house and demanded she turn over a wanted criminal (no warrant). The pig swears the woman “invited” them into her home, when she rather demanded they leave after they crashed her home.
Who do you think the DA supports in that case? You only get one guess.
Great living in a third world banana republic, no?
Never volunteer info to police. Never open your door to police (talk through a window, preferably on another floor).
BTW, my understanding is when not talking to PD, you must state, I invoke the 5th Amendment of the US Constitution.” If you do not, the courts have determined your silence can be equated to guilt.
This passes for logic in NC.
Y’all doan unnerstayan, it’s pawrt o’ thair ‘hair-ya tidge’
TinEar, you might think differently if your child was the one at risk. It is all very well to see the contradiction in the charge, but that does not ensure the will be tossed. When the prosecution offers a deal which does not involve a felony and registration and the charges could bring a felony conviction and registration, a gamble on good sense prevailing over literal statutory construction may not be as appealing. Bailers is right as to the potential effect of the registries (depending on the state). However, I think he’s wrong as to where the tyranny is. The tyranny rests with the public, who are so terrified for their children that they buy into this junk without every weighing the harm. It’s another form of the same tyranny that keeps children inside on their electronic devices instead of playing outside, and sends strangers baying after a parent who has made a decision based on actual knowledge about the conditions under which his child is competent to manage a particular task or activity on his own.
bettykath, There is racial inequality in our system. But, you show utter ignorance as to how bad prosecutors think. They are looking @ NUMBERS to enhance their resume. Do you remember Mike Nifong, a prosecutor in this same state of NC??? Those were WHITE/MALES railroaded by a white prosecutor w/ a black/female “victim.” You obviously were out of school when the Chicken Little and Boy Who Cried Wolf were taught!
Years ago it was hippies, flower children and greasers. Today it’s digital zombies with Smart Phones and social media.
Was there a revenue generating business to this scheme? Probably not. Press delete just in case.
There are some who won’t be happy until there’s a mugshot for almost every American.
2 more A-As in the system.
I would take this to a jury trial. On the jury selection phase one of my first questions would be:
“How many of you folks on the panel had sex before you were 18?”
“How many of you would want to be on a sex offender registry for life for having done so?”
“Before you answer those two questions you must realize that the prosecutor might prosecute you for having had sex when you were under age 18.”
“Lets see a show of hands for those who think that the prosecutor needs to go to prison.”
It’s time to put the blame on the technology companies like Apple that ushered in the age of “sexting” and have sold us devices for childen that are neay impossible me for parents to monitor and control — due “privacy concerns” which really means, consumer preferences. Of course consumers of all ages want to sext! To what extent does the common good ever control what global multi nationals want to sell? Rarely it seems. The common good is unknown in America the land of “individualism” ‘ “freedom” & all that crap.
I may have missed it but how did law enforcement get on to this couple if they exchanged the photos only with each other? What statutory rape investigation? Something is missing here.
The laws need to catch up with technology and our new hedonistic culture.
“The RSO registries make sense when it comes to child molesters, but for many others they have gone too far and become a crippling life sentence that pretty much destroys any chance of employment, education, or living a normal, productive life.”
They don’t make sense for anyone, anywhere, at anytime. They’re unethical and immoral. And they stand in contrast to everything that the Constitution is supposed to protect. Thanks to Judge Stevens for falling prey to the hysteria and bad numbers pushed by zealots.
50 years from now we’re going to look back at these registries with the same horror that we do today with the inquisition. Because that’s really what it is. No judge with a straight face and honest heart can possibly believe the registries are about treatment. They’re about punishing someone after they’ve served their time. It’s unheard of for anyone to be successfully treated and removed from the registry. There’s no evaluation of risk and danger. No separation of the truly bad from people like these two poor kids are going to be.
In the old days the terrorists in our midsts wore white robes. Increasingly today they wear black ones.
If these were my kids I would not agree to any plea deal. I would choose to fight the charges at a higher level, as the theory of the prosecution is contradictory on its face. Clearly, this prosecution does not serve the ends of achieving justice and suggests some other motive. Also, since registering as a sex offender is, in reality, a life sentence that will preclude the teen from most jobs and college campuses, I would never agree to that. My parents have a neighbor who was convicted and served time for having sex with an intoxicated woman at a party when they were both in their early 20s. That was 15 years ago, and because he is a Registered Sex Offender he can’t even get a job at Walmart or the local gas station. He was taking an art class at a local community college, but was kicked off campus after they learned of his RSO status. So he is reduced to living with his mother and mowing lawns for a living. The RSO registries make sense when it comes to child molesters, but for many others they have gone too far and become a crippling life sentence that pretty much destroys any chance of employment, education, or living a normal, productive life.
prosecutors should be removed or fined heavily…….
This allegedly seems like what could be considered a continuing criminal act for this one purpose alone. We had a case in WA (I believe), unfortunately for our purposes here I cannot remember off-hand when or the case citation), where a Vehicular Assault case against a passenger in a crash (who the state argued contributed to the collision) could not be charged with a crime since she was a victim, she was injured and therefore a victim, of the driver’s criminal act. As a victim, she was not criminally liable.
In our case here, both teens are co-victims of the others’ actions. One could argue that they could be separated where the sender became the suspect and the other the victim and charge separately. But the particulars indicate this was a continuing series of events. In my belief that should preclude criminal liability if that state is similar in its common law to ours. But I don’t know if this state considers these crimes as such that a victim is not required, however.
On another note I believe this is truly an artifact of conflicting laws and changing times. It is rather remarkable how the two could have actual sexual intercourse with each other just as long as they do not film it. One would think that in another example actual raping of a child is worse than taking photographs of this, but for the these two teens the photos are worse than the sexual intercourse.
Unfortunately I suspect it is going to be up to the courts to strike down these type of prosecutions because politicians are not going to want to touch this one, even if it is more just.
The prosecutor needs to be sent to prison. This is why God made rifles.