Comic books with child porn - US Comic book collector gets convicted on Obscenity charges

[The Straight Story]

U.S. Manga Obscenity Conviction Roils Comics World

In an obscenity first, a U.S. comic book collector has pleaded guilty to importing and possessing Japanese manga books depicting illustrations of child sex abuse and bestiality.

Christopher Handley, described by his lawyer as a “prolific collector” of manga, pleaded guilty last week to mailing obscene matter, and to “possession of obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children.” Three other counts were dropped in a plea deal with prosecutors.

The 39-year-old office worker was charged under the 2003 Protect Act, which outlaws cartoons, drawings, sculptures or paintings depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct, and which lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Handley’s guilty plea makes him the first to be convicted under that law for possessing cartoon art, without any evidence that he also collected or viewed genuine child pornography. He faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.

Comics fans are alarmed by the case, (.pdf), saying that jailing someone over manga does nothing to protect children from sexual abuse.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/manga-porn/comment-page-1/

[TheMightyFavog]

1. I smell a test case for the SCOTUS

Is it really child pornography if the scene in question depicts drawing of a fictional character not drawn from a model(s)?

Tough question.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

3. Of course it's child pornography.

Whether the dude should go to jail for it is another question.

[TheMightyFavog]

6. Like I said.

Is there really any harm done if no actual children were used in the making of the work?

IIRC, wasn't the law this guy was convicted under passed as a knee-jerk reaction to a SCOTUS decision about some guy who was making simulated kiddie porn? (IIRC, he took 18 year old women built like Olympic gymnasts, and made them look 12 through the creative use of makeup and digital effects.)

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

11. Whether harm was done is irrelevant to the question of whether it is kiddie porn.

You certainly wouldn't want me to come to your house and play a DVD of anime tentacle porn to a five year old kid, would you?

Again, the question of whether it is kiddie porn is not the same question as whether this guy should be put in jail. But claiming that it's not porn because it's animation seems disingenuous.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. no it isn't.

And you are not free to come into my house and play anything.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

16. Are you suggesting that animation cannot be pornography? n/t

[The Straight Story]

17. I think the case is this:

A drawing is not human, so a drawing of a nude child does not harm a child. It can be considered porn because it depicts nudity.

[Warren Stupidity]

18. A perfect example of blurring the distinction between

sexual exploitation of children - the just reason for laws against the production and distribution of images of real children engaged in sexual activity - and pornography - art that is focused on sexuality. Animation can of course be pornography, but pornography is simply a form of artistic expression that focuses on sexuality. We should have laws against the sexual exploitation of children, but laws against the idea of children having sex are in the realm of thought crimes. A drawing of a cherub in a suggestive pose is not sexual exploitation of children, regardless of whether you consider it pornography that has a child in it or not.

[lumberjack_jeff]

21. The rationale behind a prohibition on child porn is that it protects children.

That logic is absent when the subject of the prohibition is animation.

The only defensible rationale for prohibiting certain kinds of animation is that certain thoughts should be prohibited.

[TheMightyFavog]

24. The olny time this would be an issue

Is if the guy was drawing from a live model, and said model was underage.

Damn. I think I just creeped myself out.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

26. The way things are going I am sure thoughts will be the next thing they prohibit n/t

[ContinentalOp]

35. Animation might be pornographic,

but a drawing is clearly not a child.

[slampoet]

22. This isn't Animation. If you don't know what Anime means why are opening your mouth?

[Warren Stupidity]

12. This is in the realm of thought crime.

With this sort of thinking reading and or distributing Nabokov's Lolita becomes a criminal offense, and the museums must be purged of all those naked underage images.

The original and just intent of child pornography laws was to criminalize the exploitation of children, as in living breathing human beings, who are deemed incapable of making an informed decision to display themselves naked or engaged in sexual activity. This has of course morphed itself into the criminalization of any depiction of children engaged in sexual behavior, even when no real children are involved, and the usual suspects will blur the distinction between a real child being exploited for sexual purposes and an imaginary child being depicted in sexual activity, and accuse all who defend the latter as pederasts.

[TheMightyFavog]

23. Don't forget rounding up and locking up everyone who owns a copy of Titanic

IIRC, Kate Winslet's Character is only 17.

[lumberjack_jeff]

25. OMG! I saw The Blue Lagoon!

I'm going to hell.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

28. Can we round up and lock up anyone found to be posessing or distributing...

...Celine Dion records?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

27. The law already makes a distinction between pornography and content like Lolita...

...so that is a false argument. Lolita isn't pornography.

This has of course morphed itself into the criminalization of any depiction of children engaged in sexual behavior

No it hasn't. That's why you won't get put in jail for reading or selling a copy of Lolita.

[Warren Stupidity]

30. The law merely allows for such a distinction to be made.

And also allows for the criminalization of the distribution and possession of Lolita, should it be found to lack artistic merit.

The sentence of mine you quoted is indeed inaccurate. The word 'potential' needs to be in front of 'criminalization'.

The distance between criminalization of manga and criminalization of Lolita is vanishingly small.

[surrealAmerican]

31. Exactly.

It leaves the courts to decide what has "artistic merit" and what doesn't. The courts have never been a good arbiter of art. We don't want to have the government telling us what is art.

[90-percent]

2. Darn it

I thought he got busted for owning fifties era EC horror comics, or the soft porn BDSM comics done by the original creators of Superman! (learned about that recently on NPR, of all places!)

-90% Jimmy

[Forkboy]

4. lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Sounds like the GOP's motto.

[The Straight Story]

5. Now they just need to make it into a video game

;)

[TheMightyFavog]

7. I'm sure there's someone in Japan working on it as we speak.

:evilgrin:

[MetaTrope]

8. What's funny is, the biggest market for porn manga right now is

teenage girls

[Withywindle]

29. Yup, and this makes me wonder about fanart and doujinshi too.

Much of which is CREATED by teenage girls.

So is it a crime to possess or create comics showing 14-year-olds having sex if one is 14 years old oneself?

[aikoaiko]

9. I thought this was already settled law.

I thought SCOTUS found that simulated child porn (putting children's heads on adult models' bodies) was protected speech. If so, then drawings where no physical child was used as a model would seem to follow.

Maybe someone who knows more about the case law and precedents can comment.

[The Straight Story]

10. after scotus decision congress got involved - here is the code:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1466A.html

1466A. Obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children
How Current is This?
(a) In General.— Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) is obscene; or
(2)
(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A (b)(1), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.
(b) Additional Offenses.— Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly possesses a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) is obscene; or
(2)
(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A (b)(2), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.
(c) Nonrequired Element of Offense.— It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.
(d) Circumstances.— The circumstance referred to in subsections (a) and (b) is that—
(1) any communication involved in or made in furtherance of the offense is communicated or transported by the mail, or in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, or any means or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce is otherwise used in committing or in furtherance of the commission of the offense;
(2) any communication involved in or made in furtherance of the offense contemplates the transmission or transportation of a visual depiction by the mail, or in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer;
(3) any person travels or is transported in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of the commission or in furtherance of the commission of the offense;
(4) any visual depiction involved in the offense has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, or was produced using materials that have been mailed, or that have been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer; or
(5) the offense is committed in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in any territory or possession of the United States.
(e) Affirmative Defense.— It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violating subsection (b) that the defendant—
(1) possessed less than 3 such visual depictions; and
(2) promptly and in good faith, and without retaining or allowing any person, other than a law enforcement agency, to access any such visual depiction—
(A) took reasonable steps to destroy each such visual depiction; or
(B) reported the matter to a law enforcement agency and afforded that agency access to each such visual depiction.
(f) Definitions.— For purposes of this section—
(1) the term “visual depiction” includes undeveloped film and videotape, and data stored on a computer disk or by electronic means which is capable of conversion into a visual image, and also includes any photograph, film, video, picture, digital image or picture, computer image or picture, or computer generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means;
(2) the term “sexually explicit conduct” has the meaning given the term in section 2256 (2)(A) or 2256 (2)(B); and
(3) the term “graphic”, when used with respect to a depiction of sexually explicit conduct, means that a viewer can observe any part of the genitals or pubic area of any depicted person or animal during any part of the time that the sexually explicit conduct is being depicted.

[DJ13]

14. Whats next, arresting importers of Anime?

Some of the Japanese Anime cartoons on TV have female characters that are obviously underage, but built like Dolly Parton.

They're always paired with an older, scruffy guy in his 30's or 40's.

Would some TV executives face criminal prosecution under this interpretation of obscenity?

[proteus_lives]

15. This is Bullshit!

I collect comic books and manga, there are types of manga that make me ill but then I don't buy them or collect them.

The dude might (and I stress might because the article says a he collects all types of manga.) But this is no different then some porn site for the models pretend to be teenagers or simulated rape. Sleazy but not illegal.

It's censorship pure and simple.

[Deja Q]

19. Each country has its own customs - I wonder how people will take to a one world government,

if it adversely affects them... or how or if...

[Wizard777]

20. So they will tollerate this in the name of science, politics, and art?

So at least according to this law there are some valid and permissable uses of sexual child abuse and it's depictions. :wow: Oooooookay. But I guess Congress would need this exemption to view photo's of 17 year olds being sodomized at Abu Ghraib and other US Facilities.

[Codeine]

32. How can it be child porn

if there are no children even involved?! That's bizarre.

[marshall]

33. The cops often arrest pedophiles for setting up liaisons with fake children

Cops pose as children online and entrap would-be pedophiles. They are arrested and charged just as if they had been trying to meet up with children who actually exist.

[Warren Stupidity]

34. Which is borderline criminal absurdity.

Is it a crime for your adult sex partner to pretend to be underage? To pretend to be a penguin? A corpse?

[marshall]

37. Same as someone ranting about blowing up a building or killing somebody

Even if they have no way intention or means of carrying it out, they will still be arrested for blowing off steam.

[chrisa]

36. WTF is "Manga?"

Sounds like a tropical fruit.

And why would anybody want to have cartoon pictures of a kid getting raped? I don't think he should go to jail for more than a year, but what an idiot.