Free Evan Emory

This is not child pornography. This is a PSA.

The ABA Law Journal reports  —

A singer and songwriter in Michigan is facing child pornography charges after posting a video he edited to make it appear that school kids were listening to him sing a song with graphic lyrics.

Evan Emory could be sentenced to up to 20 years in prison if he is convicted of manufacturing and distributing child pornography for posting the video on YouTube and showing it in a nightclub.

And a recent article in the New York Times, brings us the story of how these charges have divided the “economically-pressed” small town of Michigan where Mr. Emory grew up, and where he shot the film.

This case is a complete waste of time and resources.  Mr. Emory crossed the line, but his actions were not criminal.

The video he made isn’t child pornography.  It isn’t even virtual child pornography.

What he did amounts to a prank.  Or a joke.  And Michigan is a joke for going after him.

Prosecutors should go after actual child pornographers first.  Then, if they still have time and resources they can go after virtual child pornographers.  And then, and only then, if they still have some extra time, money and energy leftover (and no sense of humor) they should round up the pranksters.

Advertisements

~ by siouxsielaw on March 10, 2011.

3 Responses to “Free Evan Emory”

  1. This is completely stupid. But Michigan’s law on this stuff is super-broad. Here are some parts of MCL 750.145c, which is about child sexually abusive activity or material:

    “Child sexually abusive material” means any depiction, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, including a developed or undeveloped photograph, picture, film, slide, video, electronic visual image, computer diskette, computer or computer-generated image, or picture, or sound recording which is of a child or appears to include a child engaging in a listed sexual act . . . .

    Listed sexual acts include, among lots of other things, “passive sexual involvement”:

    (j) “Passive sexual involvement” – an act, real or simulated, that exposes another person to or draws another person’s attention to an act of sexual intercourse, erotic fondling, sadomasochistic abuse, masturbation, sexual excitement, or erotic nudity because of viewing any of these acts or because of the proximity of the act to that person, for the purpose of real or simulated overt sexual gratification or stimulation of 1 or more of the persons involved.

    Finally:

    (2) A person who persuades, induces, entices, coerces, causes, or knowingly allows a child to engage in a child sexually abusive activity for the purpose of producing any child sexually abusive material, or a person who arranges for, produces, makes, or finances, or a person who attempts or prepares or conspires to arrange for, produce, make, or finance any child sexually abusive activity or child sexually abusive material is guilty of a felony . . . .

    (3) A person who distributes or promotes, or finances the distribution or promotion of, or receives for the purpose of distributing or promoting, or conspires, attempts, or prepares to distribute, receive, finance, or promote any child sexually abusive material or child sexually abusive activity is guilty of a felony . . . .

    So . . . while I hope the charges don’t stick (and I don’t think any self-respecting prosecutor should pursue something like this), I could see this going somewhere. 😦

    • I get what your are saying. But as broad as Michigan’s law is, I still don’t think it reaches this far.

      Even for passive sexual involvement, you still need exposure to a sex act. Not exposure to some comedian singing a song about sex acts.
      Not to mention that from what I’ve read, Mr. Emory’s video had a disclaimer (at the beginning and at the end) that specifically said no children were actually used in the performance of this song.

    • Never underestimate the likelihood that a prosecutor will prosecute a politically popular case, even if there is little case there. Child porn is bad, so prosecuting child porn is good. The fact that no children were involved is irrelevant if it can gain votes.

      It is the same reason that swingers and goths and people into bondage are always an easy target. Remember the Duke lacrosse team prosecutions? The only thing different about the Duke case was that the prosecutor actually got called to task (and disbarred). Most times, no such luck.

      Lee

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: