ownership of photos on the internet

[insomnia47]

alright, well, heres the deal

i am 15 years old, and i recived pornographic photos of someone from my school (recieved them online) these pictures were originally distributed by her to someone, which sent them to someone else, who sent them to me. and i made them publicly available through a website, which has been shut down, the thing is, she doesnt want this to go further, she wants it to end now, with an apology and no more, BUT her parents want to press charges (shes 16 years old), and i wanted to know if they have a case against me?

ive been reading this thread http://www.thelaw.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1645 and according to whats been said, it seems as if the pictures were sent by her, originally and thus became property of the reciever, and posting them online is simply a matter of freedom of speech? is this correct?

EDIT the pictures do not show her face, if that changes anyything

EDIT2 well seems that they've pressed charges her parents dont know the pictures are of her, and so im getting fined for aggravated harrassment IF i plee guilty, anything to helpo would be awsome thanks

 

[Michael Wechsler]

Well, a criminal attorney familiar with your case would know best how to handle the matter. To begin, I'm wondering how you are being charged with aggravated harrassment based upon the definition of the crime. It might be a difficult case to make. I'll post a sample statute, but this would all depend upon the state within which you are being prosecuted.

Originally posted by insomnia47
alright, well, heres the deal

i am 15 years old, and i recived pornographic photos of someone from my school (recieved them online) these pictures were originally distributed by her to someone, which sent them to someone else, who sent them to me. and i made them publicly available through a website, which has been shut down, the thing is, she doesnt want this to go further, she wants it to end now, with an apology and no more, BUT her parents want to press charges (shes 16 years old), and i wanted to know if they have a case against me?

ive been reading this thread http://www.thelaw.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1645 and according to whats been said, it seems as if the pictures were sent by her, originally and thus became property of the reciever, and posting them online is simply a matter of freedom of speech? is this correct?

EDIT the pictures do not show her face, if that changes anyything

EDIT2 well seems that they've pressed charges her parents dont know the pictures are of her, and so im getting fined for aggravated harrassment IF i plee guilty, anything to helpo would be awsome thanks

 

[Michael Wechsler]

Arizona Penal Law

13-2921. Harassment; classification; definition

A. A person commits harassment if, with intent to harass or with knowledge that the person is harassing another person, the person:

1. Anonymously or otherwise communicates or causes a communication with another person by verbal, electronic, mechanical, telegraphic, telephonic or written means in a manner that harasses.

2. Continues to follow another person in or about a public place for no legitimate purpose after being asked to desist.

3. Repeatedly commits an act or acts that harass another person.

4. Surveils or causes another person to surveil a person for no legitimate purpose.

5. On more than one occasion makes a false report to a law enforcement, credit or social service agency.

6. Interferes with the delivery of any public or regulated utility to a person.

B. A person commits harassment against a public officer or employee if the person, with intent to harass, files a nonconsensual lien against any public officer or employee that is not accompanied by an order or a judgment from a court of competent jurisdiction authorizing the filing of the lien or is not issued by a governmental entity or political subdivision or agency pursuant to its statutory authority, a validly licensed utility or water delivery company, a mechanics' lien claimant or an entity created under covenants, conditions, restrictions or declarations affecting real property.

C. Harassment under subsection A is a class 1 misdemeanor. Harassment under subsection B is a class 5 felony.

D. This section does not apply to an otherwise lawful demonstration, assembly or picketing.

E. For purposes of this section, "harassment" means conduct directed at a specific person which would cause a reasonable person to be seriously alarmed, annoyed or harassed and the conduct in fact seriously alarms, annoys or harasses the person.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

Looking at this statute, which is lesser than a charge of Aggravated Harassment, I'm really not sure how you could be convicted on your single act alone (are there other parts to this story we have not been told about yet?) and might be a scare tactic because what you did was not morally correct although there might not be appropriate legal redress. She committed a senseless act by distributing the pictures herself and that is a good place to start a defense. A defense attorney specializing in defending such charges might be useful.

Note that I would want to claim that the pictures sent were only for viewing purposes and were not sent for ownership. With intellectual property there is a right to possess and also a separate right to distribute. What else have you been told? Are you being charged with any other offense in distributing the pornographic material?

I would not confuse the 'freedom of speech' here with the issues. What "speech" here is being restrained?

Let us know how things turn out and best of luck to you...