"Licking Valley High School"? Seriously?

Girl labeled sex offender for nude phone pics of herself

NEWARK -- A 15-year-old girl is accused of distributing nude photos of herself to other minors, and one state legislator is questioning whether she should be labeled a sex offender.

The Licking Valley High School student was arrested Friday after school officials discovered the materials and brought in the school's resource officer for a police investigation. After spending the weekend incarcerated, she pleaded deny Monday to both charges: illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, a second-degree felony; and possession of criminal tools, a fifth-degree felony.

I'm guessing that by "criminal tools" they mean "cell phone"?

Licking County Assistant Prosecutor Erin Welch said Monday the investigation into the incident remains open, including exploring whether charges will be filed against the minors who received the photos. If the prosecutor's office elects to bring those teens into court, they could be facing a different section of the same charge pending against the sender of the pictures and classification as sex offenders, as well.

If the girl charged Monday is classified as a sexual offender, Brindisi said as a juvenile in this instance she would not be subject to publication on the public Web sites maintained by the Licking County Sheriff's Office or the state but would have to register for 20 years as the law states.

Tags: ,

36 Responses:

  1. bdu says:

    I'm guessing that by "criminal tools" they mean "cell phone"?

    No, they mean "underage boobs".

    • srcosmo says:

      And Flordia.

      But the real question is, as sex offenders, will the kids who downloaded the pics be prohibited from coming within 1000 feet of school? That's not all bad...

      • jwz says:

        It also sounds like you can DoS someone (Denial of School) just by texting them a picture.

        • keimel says:

          Yeah, that's pretty scary indeed. Actually, you could do it to anyone, including the neighbor you don't like. "Look, this picture of my child went out to these people - they're paedophiles! Arrest them" Instant neighbor-be-gone.


  2. enf says:

    "Licking Valley High School"? Seriously?

    Hey, you live in a city that has a Lick Old Ladies Home...

  3. netdud says:

    I'll just go ahead and do the obvious:

    Heh! Licking Valley High School--wonder what the mascot looks like!

    That's probably funnier than the idea of treating personality disorders with jail time.

  4. wisedonkey says:

    I wonder if that means masturbation is also a sex crime if performed by a minor? I mean we can't have anyone touching children in naughty places now can we? Think of the children!

  5. jkonrath says:

    This means I work for one of the world's largest manufacturers of criminal tools. Awesome!

  6. youngwilliam says:

    I wonder how they'd cover a 15 year old committing mundane indecent exposure, without the telecommunications aspect?

  7. xenogram says:

    Wot, no terrorism charge?

  8. 33mhz says:

    It should be pretty entertaining when the first batch of bored ornery teenagers gets wind of this and decides to engage in mass civil disobedience.

  9. jabber says:

    ABSOLUTELY she should be labeled a "sex offender".

    And the law enforcement people in possession of evidence should all be charged with felony possession of kiddie pr0n!

    • mhoye says:

      And then they could have her charged as an adult, and the whole thing would disappear in a puff of logic.

  10. giles says:

    The real question is whether she'll have to go around to all her neighbors and notify them that she's a sex offender.

    Anyone else picturing that kid from Animal House going "Thank you, God!" right now?

    • strspn says:

      As soon as she turns 18. Why do you think all those upright citizens have been clamoring for sex offender registries? They secretly need them to get hot offender action because they aren't getting enough at home.

  11. there's a really great essay (so great, it is included in the 2007 edition of Best American Essays) called "Afternoon of the Sex Children" by Mark Greif that examines this sort of thing (teenage sexuality and the weird simultaneous combination of zealous protection / reverence america has for it).

  12. curlyeric says:

    She has to register, but her name can not be published because she is a minor?

    so what's the point... jane doe ( minor ) is not very descriptive to the neighbors when she moves.

  13. korgmeister says:

    Well, this sort of legal snafu is pretty much inevitable given that are becoming sexually active earlier, pretty much all have cameras and child pornographer is defined as something along the lines of "anyone who takes sexually explicit pictures of an underage person".

  14. ghosthacked says:

    i forsee girls taking nudie photos of themselves and getting into trouble will be the new "hip cool arrest" to have on your record.

    Like protest arrests and being busted for throwing raves.

  15. bytehead says:

    I can't say that I'm surprised. Not that far from Columbus, yet they act like the farming retards they are.

    One of my own sons did the same thing himself with the web cam. He didn't get caught by the police, just by me.

  16. xoruglm says:

    Sounds like the South Park guys have the premise for their next episode.

  17. mcity says:

    Is it possible to have her just labeled "stupid" instead?