HS QB & GF CHARGED as ADULTS for "sexting" each other

[Deleted]

High school quarterback and his girlfriend both CHARGED by cops for privately sharing nude photos of themselves
KELLY MCLAUGHLIN
5 September 2015



A North Carolina high school quarterback is facing felony charges after allegedly exchanging nude photos with his girlfriend.

Cormega Copening, 17, and his girlfriend, Brianna Denson, 16, were charged as adults in February for sending 'sexually explicit' photos of minors - themselves, when they were 16 years old - to each other's cellphone.

Denson reached a plea deal in July, but Copening has a court appearance next month and if convicted, he will have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

It is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to send or receive sexually explicit photos with a cell phone in North Carolina. A person can be charged with both sending and possessing photos.

The age of consent to have sex in North Carolina, however, is 16 years old, which means the couple could have sex with one another, but could not sent nude photos to one another.

...



More here: WEBPAGE LINK - DailyMail.com

[Deleted]

Wait.

What?

They can have sex with each other. They can see each other naked. But they can't send pictures of themselves naked to each other... as they are "under age"... yet they are being charged as ADULTS?


WTF?

I think I have whiplash.

[alabamagal]

They should have just done the deed.

This is just ridiculous.

[Tennesseer]

Stupid to keep pictures on your phone like those that got these teens in trouble for various reasons. If the photo(s) were seen by just each other then I don't really see a major problem. Best to send the pictures to your PC and get it off the phone. Print the picture out if you need to use it for your one-handed private business.

[Deleted]

How can you be charged as an adult for a crime that is only a crime if you are a minor? 

[whoisjohngalt]

May be charging them as "adults" is an over reach, but they should get in trouble on some level, for sure!

[Deleted]

Why? 

[Deleted]

Sept 7, 2015 7:58:10 GMT -5 whoisjohngalt said:

May be charging them as "adults" is an over reach, but they should get in trouble on some level, for sure!

For what?

If they can legally "bump uglies" what would they see in a sexting that they couldn't see IRL? Why should they "get in trouble on some level"?

Personally I think the "age of consent" is too young at 16 (not to mention the "any age as long as the partner is 4 years or less older" "Romeo & Juliet" exception that NC has)... but as long as it is what it is, this is just idiocy at it's finest.

[Deleted]

There are real children and women being exploited in this country right now.... Wasting resources on teens sending private pictures to one another frankly pisses me off. 

[whoisjohngalt]

Sept 7, 2015 8:12:10 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 7, 2015 7:58:10 GMT -5 whoisjohngalt said:

May be charging them as "adults" is an over reach, but they should get in trouble on some level, for sure!

For what?

If they can legally "bump uglies" what would they see in a sexting that they couldn't see IRL? Why should they "get in trouble on some level"?

Personally I think the "age of consent" is too young at 16 (not to mention the "any age as long as the partner is 4 years or less older" "Romeo & Juliet" exception that NC has)... but as long as it is what it is, this is just idiocy at it's finest.

For stupidity?

It's not about them seeing anything, it's about the rest of the world seeing them.  It only takes one little fight for that pic to go from "cutsy BF/GF exchange" to child pornography distribution if one of them sends it to the 3rd person.  

[Deleted]

The rest of the world didn't see them.

If we are going to throw people in jail or fine them for outright stupidity, we might as well just make this a police state... we already have more prisons than anyone else in the world.

[GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl]

Sept 7, 2015 10:02:36 GMT -5 oped said:

The rest of the world didn't see them.

If we are going to throw people in jail or fine them for outright stupidity, we might as well just make this a police state... we already have more prisons than anyone else in the world.

[


I worry about my kids doing something completely and utterly stupid every day.

The teenage frontal lobe is so underdeveloped that kids are lucky to survive the teen years, never mind escape without having made some big mistake along the way.

The stupidity of it all is that the laws don't seem to reflect this very real cognitive disconnect.

[zibazinski]

Idiots. You'd have to be an absolute moron to not know that stuff is not private. Paying the stupid tax at their age might make them a little smarter in the future. Btw, I think having sex might be against the law at their age as well. Just a thought.

[billisonboard]

Sept 7, 2015 10:53:57 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

... Btw, I think having sex might be against the law at their age as well. Just a thought.

The age of consent to have sex in North Carolina, however, is 16 years old, which means the couple could have sex with one another, but could not sent nude photos to one another. (From the OP)

[zibazinski]

Good grief.

[Green Eyed Lady]

The thing that should upset parents with boys (other than the stupidity of texting the stuff in the first place) is that she got some sort of "deal" and he very well may have to register on the sex abuse registry. 

[whoisjohngalt]

Sept 7, 2015 11:12:24 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

The thing that should upset parents with boys (other than the stupidity of texting the stuff in the first place) is that she got some sort of "deal" and he very well may have to register on the sex abuse registry. 

I wonder if it's bc of his gender or bc of his age, as he is older. 

[zibazinski]

The thing that also should upset both sets of parents is that their "children" didn't get the message that sexting isn't private.

[NastyWoman]

Do they only have sex with their eyes closed in the dark in North Carolina? That would be the only thing that would make any sense in this case. The fact that they charge the kids as adults for something that is only illegal for juveniles gives this whole thing the feel of an episode of the Twilight Zone

[alabamagal]

Sept 7, 2015 10:22:48 GMT -5 GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl said:

Sept 7, 2015 10:02:36 GMT -5 oped said:

The rest of the world didn't see them.

If we are going to throw people in jail or fine them for outright stupidity, we might as well just make this a police state... we already have more prisons than anyone else in the world.

[


I worry about my kids doing something completely and utterly stupid every day.

The teenage frontal lobe is so underdeveloped that kids are lucky to survive the teen years, never mind escape without having made some big mistake along the way.

The stupidity of it all is that the laws don't seem to reflect this very real cognitive disconnect.

My 2 boys both got in trouble as teenagers for doing stupid things on the computer. They went to a very strict private school and both got suspensions. In 7th grade one posted that a teacher was stupid and hoped she would die. The other one created some type of countdown to the end of the world.

They are both very well adjusted young adults, now 21 and 23, but there is just something about the teenage brain that makes them do stupid stuff.

[joemilitary]

I'm wondering why the police confiscated his phone in the first place for the other investigation?

I guess they were able to get a warrant for it?

And in the course of looking up whatever they were looking for in that case they stumbled on the nude pictures?

[Green Eyed Lady]

From what I'm reading, they are being charged with sending sexually explicit photographs of minors (themselves). Adults can also be charged with sending sexually explicit photographs of minors. It is not a crime that can only be committed by a juvenile.  

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sept 7, 2015 16:57:43 GMT -5 joemilitary said:

I'm wondering why the police confiscated his phone in the first place for the other investigation?

I guess they were able to get a warrant for it?

And in the course of looking up whatever they were looking for in that case they stumbled on the nude pictures?

Only guessing, but I'm betting a parent saw the pics - or maybe another person - and that parent/person called the police. Again, only a guess.

[Deleted]

Sept 7, 2015 16:59:09 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

From what I'm reading, they are being charged with sending sexually explicit photographs of minors (themselves). Adults can also be charged with sending sexually explicit photographs of minors. It is not a crime that can only be committed by a juvenile.  

If they at minors in the photo, how are they adults outside the photo? Consistency please.

[billisonboard]

Sept 7, 2015 17:00:26 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

...
Only guessing, but I'm betting a parent saw the pics - or maybe another person - and that parent/person called the police. Again, only a guess.

Why guess when you could read and know:

Officers said the sexting charges came about when police took Copening's phone while investigating another incident.  

'We seized his phone and while our investigators went through the phone they saw there were photos of himself and another person on the phone,' Swain told WTVD

(From the link in the OP)

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sept 7, 2015 17:12:14 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Sept 7, 2015 17:00:26 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

...
Only guessing, but I'm betting a parent saw the pics - or maybe another person - and that parent/person called the police. Again, only a guess.

Why guess when you could read and know:

Officers said the sexting charges came about when police took Copening's phone while investigating another incident.  

'We seized his phone and while our investigators went through the phone they saw there were photos of himself and another person on the phone,' Swain told WTVD

(From the link in the OP)

Ah.  I didn't read that.  Thanks.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sept 7, 2015 17:10:32 GMT -5 oped said:

Sept 7, 2015 16:59:09 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

From what I'm reading, they are being charged with sending sexually explicit photographs of minors (themselves). Adults can also be charged with sending sexually explicit photographs of minors. It is not a crime that can only be committed by a juvenile.  

If they at minors in the photo, how are they adults outside the photo? Consistency please.

It is perfectly consistent.  Juvenile are charged as adults all the time.  They are minors in the picture but that does not mean they have to be tried in juvenile court - or whatever it's called.  Juveniles are charged/waived to adult court all the time.  There is no inconsistency here.  Some states only require that the child be 14 to be tried in adult court.  I don't know what the age is in their state. 

I get what you are saying - if they are minors...they are minors - and I agree.  That's just not the way the law reads.

[joemilitary]

That's why I am wondering what the "other" investigation was?

[Deleted]

So at the same time you are bound both by the laws of a minor and an adult...

If they are too young and need to be protected by the law, then they need to be charged as if they were too young as well.

Sounds to me like they couldn't build a case on what they wanted to charge him on and grasped at anything they could get. A misuse of resources to pursue this, I feel. And it carries a fishy smell.

[Deleted]

Sept 7, 2015 17:23:40 GMT -5 oped said:

So at the same time you are bound both by the laws of a minor and an adult...

If they are too young and need to be protected by the law, then they need to be charged as if they were too young as well.

Sounds to me like they couldn't build a case on what they wanted to charge him on and grasped at anything they could get. A misuse of resources to pursue this, I feel. And it carries a fishy smell.

That's what I was thinking. There has to be more to the story.