Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (15196)	12/21/2006 4:43:14 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Since he wasn't actually communicating with a 13 year old girl, but rather just someone posing as a 13 year old girl, the charge would have to be based on the fact that he thought he was trying to have sex with a minor. The laws have generally been changed to allow for such a prosecution, otherwise you wouldn't be able to have these stings (or the stings efforts would have to include actual 13 year olds) I wonder if he, or someone else in his position, was careful to not send (or even have) any underage pornography, as we careful to say things like "I know your not really underage" or "I know your and adult but pretend your 13" in the chat, whether prosecution would be difficult. In practice I imagine it would not be, as most of these people would have child porn on their PC, and generally wouldn't be consistently careful. Also its possible that even if they did a perfect job they might get convicted despite these legal points, esp. if they didn't have a good lawyer.