Man convicted of sending "obscene" e-mails and drawings

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Father Time, Jun 19, 2009.

  1. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +438

    Sharing an obscene sexual fantasy over e-mail is a federal crime that enjoys no protection under the First Amendment, a federal appeals court said Monday, in a decision that drew sharp dissent from one judge and potentially set the stage for a Supreme Court appeal.

    In a 10-1 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to rehear the case of Dwight Whorley, a Virginia man whose criminal trial marked two firsts for the American justice system: the first conviction for possession of obscene Japanese manga, and the first for authoring pornographic fiction and sending it over e-mail.
    Gregory says feds trying to control thoughts

    U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Roger Gregory warns of "government regulation of private thoughts."

    “Whorley violated criminal statues regulating obscenity,” Judge Paul Niemeyer wrote for the majority, “and his convictions may not be forgiven because his conduct was prompted by his sexual fantasies.”

    But in a lengthy dissent, Judge Roger Gregory urged the Supreme Court to take up the case and reverse it.

    “I am hard-pressed to think of a better modern day example of government regulation of private thoughts than what we have before us in this case: convicting a man for the victimless crime of privately communicating his personal fantasies to other consenting adults,” Gregory wrote.

    Whorley was convicted in 2006 and sentenced to 20 years in prison, in part for possessing genuine child pornography. But the Justice Department — perhaps sensing a chance to smuggle bad law onto the back of an unsympathetic defendant — also charged Whorley for having unsavory manga under the recently-enacted Protect Act, which outlaws obscene cartoons depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

    More surprisingly, prosecutors charged him under an older statute outlawing the possession of “any obscene, lewd, lascivious or filthy book, pamphlet, picture, motion-picture film, paper, letter, writing, print or other matter of indecent character” as defined by a jury. That violation was for writing out his sexual fantasies involving children, and e-mailing them to like-minded internet friends. Though Whorely is apparently a pedophile, the law applies to any obscene content.

    A three-judge panel voted (.pdf) 2-1 to uphold the manga and e-mail convictions last December, with Gregory dissenting (.pdf) . The judge repeated and expanded on his dissent this week, when the full court rejected Whorley’s rehearing request.

    Gregory, a President George W. Bush appointee, also argued that it was wrong to convict a man for manga art depicting children having sex. Obscenity laws, he wrote, should not apply to “images of purely imagined children.” But he was particularly alarmed over the e-mail convictions.

    In 1969, the Supreme Court ruled that Americans have the right to possess obscene material in the privacy of their own homes. But trafficking in such goods through interstate commerce — which today includes the internet — is illegal under that ruling.

    Gregory argued that the law has not kept up with technology and should be changed.

    “This is a difficult case. The e-mails were admittedly transmitted and received through channels of interstate commerce and were found by a jury to be obscene,” Gregory said. He added that, “In today’s world, our e-mail inbox, just as much as our home, has become the place where we store the memorabilia of our thoughts and dreams.”

    Following Whorley’s conviction, federal authorities convicted an Iowa man last month of possessing manga art depicting children having sex. But unlike Whorley, the defendant did not also have any real, obscene pictures of nude children having sex.


    Appeals Court Backs Prison for E-Mail Obscenity | Threat Level | Wired.com

    Personally I think making a drawing illegal (much less a fictional story) is oh so much bullshit. Nobody gets harmed if I put pen to paper and draw a kiddie being scathed in acid and run over (no matter how much detail I use), likewise nothing happens if I draw them getting fucked.

    Also the year before the Protect act was signed into law, the Supreme Court had all ready ruled that virtual child porn was protected by free speech.

    Stupid activist judges.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2009
  2. RodISHI
    Offline

    RodISHI Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    10,392
    Thanks Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,047
    Thoughts are not regulated yet actions are. The guy should have kept his filth concerning children to himself.
     
  3. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +438
    He made up a fantasy e-mail and sent it to a friend of his. That's a private letter and yet the government is prosecuting him for it because they thought the contents of the text were obscene.

    Sounds dangerously close to thought crime.

    Why can't the government just keep it's claws out of private affairs that don't harm people? What's next government prosecuting people for profanity in private e-mails? Either we have the freedom to express vile twisted thoughts to each other (at least in private) or we don't have free speech. It's that simple.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2009
  4. RodISHI
    Offline

    RodISHI Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    10,392
    Thanks Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,047
    People have been prosecuted for profanity in the past. The law is written to protect others that simple. You are not by law allowed to just call me on the phone and use profanity either. You can be prosecuted for sending me a threatening email or letter.

    If your claim was true that email only went to his friend then law enforcement would not have been able to prosecute the man.

    Why can't people keep their lewd acts private? Emails, mail and telephones are not private. Once you release any information by wire you released it and it can be used to prosecute you. Uses of email, mail, telephone and wires are an exchanged between two or more people which is governed by law.
     
  5. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    If I write a letter to tell my brother that you have a nice ass I can be arrested ??? :eek:
     
  6. RodISHI
    Offline

    RodISHI Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    10,392
    Thanks Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,047
    Only if I was under age and you included a more descriptive information on what you planned to that "nice ass".
     
  7. Tinktink
    Offline

    Tinktink Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    418
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +23
    We all know the internet is a international means of communication and there is no real privacy when it comes to that. He should have drawn a picture and delivered it in person.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2009
  8. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +438

    I know profanity's been prosecuted in the past and it was disgusting in my opinion. There's a difference though between harassing someone on the phone and free speech. If I purposely bother you on the phone constantly it doesn't matter what I say you could get me in trouble, possibly a restraining order. This person was not being prosecuted for harassment he was being prosecuted for the content of his text and his fictional drawings, the law he was charged under applies to all communications dealing with that.

    Also from what I understand most of the internet is privately owned so the government shouldn't be allowed to regulate it.
     
  9. RodISHI
    Offline

    RodISHI Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    10,392
    Thanks Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,047
    As far as I am concerned the areas highlighted from the OP covers it. The guy should remain locked up. That is the law if you want to live under a nation of laws then you follow these laws or take that chance of going to jail.
     
  10. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +438
    He should be punished for posessing actual child porn but as far as I'm concerned the laws banning virtual child porn and 'obscene' text stories should be struck down and he shouldn't be punished for them.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page