Girls in cell-phone photos sue DA ove...

Girls in cell-phone photos sue DA over threatened porn charges

There are 29 comments on the GoErie.com story from Mar 26, 2009, titled Girls in cell-phone photos sue DA over threatened porn charges. In it, GoErie.com reports that:

One summer night in 2007, a pair of 13-year-old northeastern Pennsylvania girls decided to strip down to their skivvies to beat the heat.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at GoErie.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Chandu

Hudson, OH

#1 Mar 26, 2009
This DA is a Republican and a Delegate to their convention as well. Not surprising he's obsessed with a picture of teenies in their skivvies. That's their finest tradition, isn't it?

BeckyKnapp

Bolivar, OH

#2 Mar 26, 2009
Oh, please. You see worse than this walking around out on the street! A couple of 13-year-olds in their bras at a slumber party? Why aren't they filing charges against the JC Penney's catalog, too? This is porn? This is ridiculous.
mad taxpayer

United States

#3 Mar 26, 2009
BeckyKnapp wrote:
Oh, please. You see worse than this walking around out on the street! A couple of 13-year-olds in their bras at a slumber party? Why aren't they filing charges against the JC Penney's catalog, too? This is porn? This is ridiculous.
This goes to your loose morals becky ,HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.H e is an authority figure, like should set a good example.
BeckyKnapp

Bolivar, OH

#4 Mar 26, 2009
mad taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text> This goes to your loose morals becky ,HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.H e is an authority figure, like should set a good example.
WHO should have known better?? Did you even read the story??? I don't know what you're even talking about ... but then again, I NEVER do.
Hap

Mason, OH

#5 Mar 26, 2009
Where's Bill O'reilly on this?
TWTL

Edinboro, PA

#6 Mar 26, 2009
BeckyKnapp wrote:
<quoted text>
WHO should have known better?? Did you even read the story??? I don't know what you're even talking about ... but then again, I NEVER do.
The mad taxpayer is simply "mad" as in out of her mind!!! Their comment is hilarious!
Apparently they think thhe can figure out you're on the wrong side of the discussion just be reading the first comment and misinterpreting Chandu's point.

What a fool!!!!! What an ignorant fool!!!!
TWTL

Edinboro, PA

#7 Mar 26, 2009
History repeats itself. Here come the Puritans again!
Realist

Pittsburgh, PA

#8 Mar 26, 2009
So you have no problems with underwear shots of 13-year-old girls being sent by cell phone to anyone? How open-minded of you. They're being required to take a 5-week course to essentially teach them appropriate behavior. They'll have no criminal record. They consented to having their photos taken in a medium that could easily be spread. They do share responsibility.

Although it looks like the ACLU wants them to be able to plead stupidity to get out of any trouble.

If you read the news, these "sexting" cases are increasing all the time. I think that the law enforcement officials involved in these cases are trying to protect children from those who prey on them. Is that such a bad thing?
Penny from Tenney

Edinboro, PA

#9 Mar 26, 2009
13 year olds DO NOT need a cell phone. I hope the parents of these children took away the cell phones.
citi

Erie, PA

#10 Mar 26, 2009
Penny from Tenney wrote:
13 year olds DO NOT need a cell phone. I hope the parents of these children took away the cell phones.
What a shocking reaction! It's so reasonable and practical. God, I hope you don't start something Penny! lol...

:) citi
mad taxpayer

United States

#11 Mar 26, 2009
BeckyKnapp wrote:
<quoted text>
WHO should have known better?? Did you even read the story??? I don't know what you're even talking about ... but then again, I NEVER do.
I was being sarcastic to you about your stooooopid jc pennys comment, these girls need to be aware that their behavior is out of control, and shame on the DA he shold have not got after them you are the nut not me, i was being sarcastic to you. I made sense you just didnt get it, like always. you need a mature brain to keep up with me.
Smitty

Pittsburgh, PA

#12 Mar 26, 2009
did anyone prosecute Emily Mateson or Kim Thomas when the nude cell phone pictures went around town last summer?
K Mac

United States

#13 Mar 26, 2009
The person who sent the pictures should be prosecuted, and anyone who saved them to their phones should be considered in possession of child pornography. The people in the picture, however, should not suffer.
Smitty

Pittsburgh, PA

#14 Mar 26, 2009
None of these kids, not the girls in the pic or the one who took it, need to be charged with anything. They are 13 year old kids and don't know any better. They need to be taught why this is dangerous, because there are creapy disgusting adult males out there that get there jollies off on this kind of thing but to charge them with some kind of crime, come on. As technology advances parents need to advance with it and teach there kids where the trouble lies with it.
mad taxpayer

United States

#15 Mar 26, 2009
K Mac wrote:
The person who sent the pictures should be prosecuted, and anyone who saved them to their phones should be considered in possession of child pornography. The people in the picture, however, should not suffer.
Well said maybe becky needs some of your wisdom.
K Mac

United States

#16 Mar 26, 2009
Smitty wrote:
did anyone prosecute Emily Mateson or Kim Thomas when the nude cell phone pictures went around town last summer?
Were they minors?
Smitty

Pittsburgh, PA

#17 Mar 26, 2009
No but they were totally nude. I obviously see the difference in the ages, it was just a question. What if these girls were in bikinies while sun bathing, would that be different? I just don't see how prosecuting a 13 year old girl for taking a picture of her friends in there bras is the way to go. At some point common sense needs to step in here and take over. They are 13 and hopefully still innocent enough to not know any better.
Politico Crapo

Erie, PA

#18 Mar 26, 2009
You would think that Kim and Emily would have known better being that they are reporters.
Chandu

Hudson, OH

#19 Mar 26, 2009
Could we coin a phrase like "Girls just wanna have fun!" Or "Girls will be girls!" Or pervy DA's just wanna lust after girls in their training bras!?

If a 13 year old in a training bra makes the DA's Johnson 'move' he needs to register himself.
Politico Crapo

Erie, PA

#20 Mar 26, 2009
Remember all the stuff being said about Theresa Mertland?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Tunkhannock Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
I Hate Gin's Tavern (Feb '09) Jun 25 Hello 23
meshoppen pa (Dec '06) Jun 13 Darlene 12
Debate: Marijuana - Tunkhannock, PA (Sep '10) May '15 eric 10
looking for her May '15 you know 1
Harveys Lake officials to look into vicious dog... May '15 Shawn 1
David, Mike, Rhonda, Debby , Cindy Smith. Apr '15 Kathy Galloway Sh... 3
Katherine, John, Eugenia, Sonya Helvig. Apr '15 Kathy Galloway Sh... 1
More from around the web

Tunkhannock People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Tunkhannock Mortgages