Letters to the Editor
This letter is associated with the following article:
-
Of course, absurd
Noting the above definition of 'enticement' it is unproven he engendered her directly to provide the materials. He could be said to be guilty of such distribution by posting on the internet, but if she provided the materials (having reached the age of 16 or not), she, herself, is guilty as purveyor of child pornography indeed.
In fact, I have heard of young people male and female being charged for this, unfortunately.
I would think harassment would be a better charge in this for him, as he clearly is a complete jerk.
You know who else is? This agressing healthyred, who clearly has no perspective or experience as a flawed youth.