Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter

dieinafire · 02-22-08, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter

POSTED: 8:19 pm CST February 21, 2008
UPDATED: 10:54 am CST February 22, 2008
[NEWSVINE: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter] [DELICIOUS: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter] [DIGG: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter] [FACEBOOK: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter] [REDDIT: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter] [RSS] [PRINT: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter] [EMAIL: Mother Accused In Porn Case Involving Daughter]
OMAHA, Neb. -- An Omaha-area mother is wanted by police on allegations child abuse and three child pornography charges after she allegedly posted child pornography on Web sites featuring images of her teenage daughter.

The Douglas County attorney filed charges against the 49-year-old woman on Thursday. Omaha police have a warrant for her arrest. She was not yet in custody Thursday night.

The woman's teenage daughter discovered photos of herself online in December 2006, while doing a Google search of her own name.
sponsor

The court affidavit said the girl discovered photos of her face morphed onto naked bodies in sexually explicit positions. The girl also said she found photos of her mother engaging in sex acts.

"It's disgusting because you think, who would ever do this to somebody? But then you find out it's your mom," said the girl, who's identified only as "Shannon."

Shannon said she was 15 and 16 years old when the photos were taken.

She said she recalled her mother talking pictures of her from many different angles when she visited the home of her mother and the mother's boyfriend. Shannon said she was never photographed nude.

Shannon told her father about the Web site, and together they contacted police.

"My daughter brought it to my attention that she had found photographs of her mother and more importantly of herself on the Internet--nude, graphic photos. The images of her mother appear to be valid, real photos. The images of herself are not of her body; they are of her face," said Shannon's father, James, who's divorced from the mother.

The affidavit said investigators contacted the Web site administrator and he was able to give police detailed e-mails from the suspect instructing him to post the photos.

"There's an outstanding warrant for her arrest. We've filed a complaint charging her with child abuse as well as certain sub-sections under the child porn laws," said Steve Gabrial, deputy Douglas County attorney.

The woman is charged with child abuse and child pornography charges because she allegedly placed her own child in a situation where she could be sexually exploited.

"How can you drive your daughter home, smile, and tell her you love her, when you're doing that to her? I don't understand it," said Shannon.

I don't even know what to say. What would possess a mother to do this to her kid? She is obviously a piece of shit mother, who deserves to rot in jail, but I just don't understand it.

PrincessT · 02-22-08, 07:59 PM

Thank goodness the dad has custody!

SlartyBart · 02-22-08, 08:03 PM

Weird. I wonder what the point was for the mother? Is it child porn or child abuse if the body isn't the child's? It would seem to defeat the main point of interest for those actually wanting to look at child porn.

dieinafire · 02-22-08, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlartyBart

Weird. I wonder what the point was for the mother? Is it child porn or child abuse if the body isn't the child's? It would seem to defeat the main point of interest for those actually wanting to look at child porn.

Who knows, this lady is probably completely crazy.

Nick Danger · 02-22-08, 08:07 PM

But it's not child porn. It's just creepy.

Mrs Danger says that a Supreme Court case ruled that artwork depicting child porn is not illegal, because no child is being harmed. She says that this also applies to posting a child's picture into porn. The best that Shannon can legally do is sue for unauthorized use of her likeness.

dieinafire · 02-22-08, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick Danger

But it's not child porn. It's just creepy.

Mrs Danger says that a Supreme Court case ruled that artwork depicting child porn is not illegal, because no child is being harmed. She says that this also applies to posting a child's picture into porn. The best that Shannon can legally do is sue for unauthorized use of her likeness.

It is still creepy. She should be banned from ever seeing her kid again.

pedagogue · 02-22-08, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick Danger

But it's not child porn. It's just creepy.

Mrs Danger says that a Supreme Court case ruled that artwork depicting child porn is not illegal, because no child is being harmed. She says that this also applies to posting a child's picture into porn. The best that Shannon can legally do is sue for unauthorized use of her likeness.

I attended a seminar put on by a gov't expert on internet predators and he talked at length about "it's only fantasy" defense....which seemed to be hit and miss for effectiveness. Typically where there was smoke there was fire, so they'd get busted on other charges.

Either way....down right creepy.

DVD Polizei · 02-22-08, 08:31 PM

The woman is charged with child abuse and child pornography charges because she allegedly placed her own child in a situation where she could be sexually exploited.

The mother may not even be convicted if these are the exact charges.

What you could nail her for, is violating 18 USC Section 2256.

the Web Admin/Owner should be charged as well.

gosabres1984 · 02-22-08, 08:35 PM

Pervs

True_Story1011 · 02-22-08, 09:04 PM

pics please!

J/k!...

sorta!

kvrdave · 02-22-08, 09:31 PM

While we all know this is wrong, was she the hot kind of 15 or 16 year old? Certainly makes a difference. Think about it.

tasha99 · 02-22-08, 09:49 PM

Did the mom get money? Why would she do this? It's so bizarre to me that I'm wondering if the daughter made it up to get back at her for something. Or if the dad had her do it for some custody reason. I know, I know, there are wackos in this world, but why? Why would you post fake porn of your own kid?

Nick Danger · 02-22-08, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dieinafire

It is still creepy. She should be banned from ever seeing her kid again.

Yep.

Maybe Mom's boyfriend had the hots for Shannon, and that was how Mom tried to defuse it.

Sorry. I just can't come up with a non-creepy reason for doing it.

mhg83 · 02-22-08, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick Danger

Yep.

Maybe Mom's boyfriend had the hots for Shannon, and that was how Mom tried to defuse it.

Sorry. I just can't come up with a non-creepy reason for doing it.

what about early porn auditions?

Giantrobo · 02-22-08, 10:06 PM

If this girl doesn't get some good therapy to work out this betrayal I predict she'll be on the stripper pole by age 25...

Mrs. Danger · 02-22-08, 10:07 PM

I don't see the appeal.

covenant · 02-22-08, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. Danger

I don't see the appeal.

omg....so wrong!

DVD Polizei · 02-22-08, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giantrobo

If this girl doesn't get some good therapy to work out this betrayal I predict she'll be on the stripper pole by age 25...

If I was her psychologist, I'd recommend posting pics of her mother's face on animals having hot kinky nasty sex. But that's just me. Of course, this could lead to other issues...

...nah, fuck it. I'd even pay for her Photoshop lessons.

dieinafire · 02-23-08, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. Danger

I don't see the appeal.

That's just downright nasty, I can't understand who would like this.

mhg83 · 02-23-08, 09:42 AM

A similar case:

Over at Xcritic forum some idiot posted a link in the harry potter thread that has Emma Watsons face photoshopped on some nudes and hardcore pics and videos. Now since she is also underage why hasnt the site been taken down and the creator been arrested too?

Giantrobo · 02-23-08, 09:48 AM

Because Emma's Hot?

Mrs. Danger · 02-23-08, 09:57 AM

Because it is NOT illegal. However, Emma, and owner of the copyright to the pictures her face was added to can both sue the pants off the site.

The picture I posted is fair use to make a point. However, if I posted it on my website for entertainment purposes, or to attract traffic, or if I made prints of it to sell, then I could get in trouble.

The face if off a passport photo that has been in the news lately.

The case this thread is about has other issues. The fact that the mother deliberately used her daughter's face for these pictures can be argued to be malicious intent. the fact that the mother used the daughter's REAL NAME could be evidence that the intent was to humiliate her.

If I was prosecuting, I would let the issue of whether or not it is really child pron remain unclear, and home in on the fact that the act was intended to hurt.

dieinafire · 02-23-08, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. Danger

Because it is NOT illegal. However, Emma, and owner of the copyright to the pictures her face was added to can both sue the pants off the site.

The picture I posted is fair use to make a point. However, if I posted it on my website for entertainment purposes, or to attract traffic, or if I made prints of it to sell, then I could get in trouble.

The face if off a passport photo that has been in the news lately.

The case this thread is about has other issues. The fact that the mother deliberately used her daughter's face for these pictures can be argued to be malicious intent. the fact that the mother used the daughter's REAL NAME could be evidence that the intent was to humiliate her.

If I was prosecuting, I would let the issue of whether or not it is really child pron remain unclear, and home in on the fact that the act was intended to hurt.

That would be genius, just the mention of it during the trial, even know it's not a charge would probably influence almost any jury.

02-22-08, 07:59 PM	#2
PrincessT DVD Talk Special Edition Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 1,838	Thank goodness the dad has custody! __________________ "Go take a shit, you'll feel better." ~ William Shatner Wii Code: 3634 4474 0968 4351

02-22-08, 08:07 PM	#5
Nick Danger DVD Talk Legend Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 14,453	But it's not child porn. It's just creepy. Mrs Danger says that a Supreme Court case ruled that artwork depicting child porn is not illegal, because no child is being harmed. She says that this also applies to posting a child's picture into porn. The best that Shannon can legally do is sue for unauthorized use of her likeness. __________________ Originally Posted by TallGuyMe: hoorah for Nick!

02-22-08, 08:31 PM	#8
DVD Polizei DVD Talk Hero Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Overpricedville, OR Posts: 36,753	The woman is charged with child abuse and child pornography charges because she allegedly placed her own child in a situation where she could be sexually exploited. The mother may not even be convicted if these are the exact charges. What you could nail her for, is violating 18 USC Section 2256. the Web Admin/Owner should be charged as well. __________________ Blu-ray Titles: ~380 \| HD DVD Titles: ~323 "I don't sell airplane parts. I've never sold airplane parts."

02-22-08, 09:31 PM	#11
kvrdave DVD Talk God Join Date: Aug 1999 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 79,182	While we all know this is wrong, was she the hot kind of 15 or 16 year old? Certainly makes a difference. Think about it. __________________ Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

02-22-08, 10:06 PM	#15
Giantrobo DVD Talk Hero Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: TORRANCE, CA Posts: 48,303	If this girl doesn't get some good therapy to work out this betrayal I predict she'll be on the stripper pole by age 25... __________________ XBOX Gamertag: Giantrobo On my 4th 360 as of 3.26.10

02-22-08, 08:03 PM	#3
SlartyBart Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 266	Weird. I wonder what the point was for the mother? Is it child porn or child abuse if the body isn't the child's? It would seem to defeat the main point of interest for those actually wanting to look at child porn.

02-22-08, 08:35 PM	#9
gosabres1984 Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 118	Pervs

02-22-08, 09:04 PM	#10
True_Story1011 DVD Talk Special Edition Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Wild Wonderful... Posts: 1,750	pics please! J/k!... sorta!

02-22-08, 09:49 PM	#12
tasha99 DVD Talk Ultimate Edition Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: the North Posts: 4,723	Did the mom get money? Why would she do this? It's so bizarre to me that I'm wondering if the daughter made it up to get back at her for something. Or if the dad had her do it for some custody reason. I know, I know, there are wackos in this world, but why? Why would you post fake porn of your own kid?

02-22-08, 10:07 PM	#16
Mrs. Danger Suspended Join Date: May 2005 Location: With Nick Danger Posts: 15,192	I don't see the appeal.

02-23-08, 09:42 AM	#20
mhg83 DVD Talk Hall of Fame Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 7,903	A similar case: Over at Xcritic forum some idiot posted a link in the harry potter thread that has Emma Watsons face photoshopped on some nudes and hardcore pics and videos. Now since she is also underage why hasnt the site been taken down and the creator been arrested too?

02-23-08, 09:48 AM	#21
Giantrobo DVD Talk Hero Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: TORRANCE, CA Posts: 48,303	Because Emma's Hot? __________________ XBOX Gamertag: Giantrobo On my 4th 360 as of 3.26.10

02-23-08, 09:57 AM	#22
Mrs. Danger Suspended Join Date: May 2005 Location: With Nick Danger Posts: 15,192	Because it is NOT illegal. However, Emma, and owner of the copyright to the pictures her face was added to can both sue the pants off the site. The picture I posted is fair use to make a point. However, if I posted it on my website for entertainment purposes, or to attract traffic, or if I made prints of it to sell, then I could get in trouble. The face if off a passport photo that has been in the news lately. The case this thread is about has other issues. The fact that the mother deliberately used her daughter's face for these pictures can be argued to be malicious intent. the fact that the mother used the daughter's REAL NAME could be evidence that the intent was to humiliate her. If I was prosecuting, I would let the issue of whether or not it is really child pron remain unclear, and home in on the fact that the act was intended to hurt.