Teen boy sends nude pic to girl. What law has he broken?

[Bigends]

We recorded at least four of these today -all nudie pics sent by teenage girls to someone who said they already had pics of them and would publish them if they didnt send more, None of the girls could be sure someone hadnt got hold of pics previously sent to boyfriends etc

[anonymous-user]

Rostfritt said:

robinessex said:

Well, if he got a bit excited about it all, then the picture WOULD be deemed indecent. Just nude wouldn't.

Not really considered that. Really the detail of the pictures are important to work out if they are indecent (not that I want to actually see them). Do they use the Mull of Kintyre rule that TV does?

It's not true. There doesn't need to be arousal. The lowest category, category 1 images, talks of 'images depicting erotic posing with no sexual activity'.

[otolith]

La Liga said:

t's not true. There doesn't need to be arousal. The lowest category, category 1 images, talks of 'images depicting erotic posing with no sexual activity'.

Could a stiffy be enough to make a picture into "erotic posing" which otherwise would not be?

[anonymous-user]

I'm not sure. A single solo-person photo which is around the level 1 area, such as what this one is likely to have been, will never see a court.

[jshell]

robinessex said:

Bigends said:

robinessex said:

Bigends said:

Aretnap said:

Context is important too. If a picture of my two year old in the bath was found in my collection of family photos I don't imagine anyone would bat an eyelid, let alone judge it indecent. But if it was found in my porn collection...?

Similarly the context in which the boy sent nude pictures to the girl (which we dn't know, but can speculate on) matters.

Context is unimportant in relation to recording this offence. It may count towards him not being prosecuted - if he sends her a photo via phone or online of himself naked - showing his bits and pieces then its an indecent image of a child and it gets recorded accordingly.

Wrong again

Really? Do explain

Posted by Silverfoxcc previously

robin
If it helps, When i worked in a camera the highlight of the year were the 'holiday'snaps.
We checked them 'just in case'
The lab didnt print or send out the hard core ones
BUT the rule was
Flaccid OK
Erect Nono
Open legs OK
Open legs and hand involved Nono
Genitals in close proximiy even if flaccid male NoNo
HTH And NO there are no examples

That's a pretty accurate statement. In the days when naturists used to take their holiday snaps to Boots, that criteria was applied, and I've never heard of any prosecutons resulting. naturist style pics were accepted for what they were, and no age criteria was ever applied. I rummaged in my old photo box last night, and found quite a few pictues of pictures of me, my sister, and quite a few cousins playing in the seaside edge, all of us starkers, when we were kids.

What happened with this public clusterfk then: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/julia-somerville...