Greenleaf Introduces Legislation Addressing “Sexting” by Minors
State Senator Stewart J. Greenleaf (R, Montgomery, Bucks) has introduced legislation in response to recent incidents of “sexting” by minor children in Pennsylvania. Sexting is a combination of the words texting and sex, and refers to the transmission of sexually explicit images and videos using a telecommunication device.
There have been many incidences of sexting in Pennsylvania by minors, and district attorneys have struggled with finding the appropriate offense for this inappropriate activity. Teenagers have been charged with everything from disorderly conduct to child pornography. The proposed legislation would provide guidance for law enforcement, and an alternative to seeking a conviction for a more serious crime.
Senate Bill 1121, now before the Senate Judiciary Committee, establishes the criminal offense of “dissemination of prohibited materials by a minor” (sexting), and prohibits a person under 18 years of age from using a computer or telecommunication device to knowingly transmit or distribute a photograph or other depiction of himself or herself or of another minor who is at least 13 years of age, in a state of nudity, to another person who is not more than four years younger or more than four years older than the person transmitting the photograph. The offense of sexting is graded as a summary offense and the offender will be eligible for a diversionary program which will include an educational component.
“We need to find ways to deter young people from engaging in this behavior,” said Greenleaf. “I also believe that we need to begin having thorough discussions about the legal and non-legal consequences of using a computer or a telecommunication device to share sexually suggestive materials.”
The legislation targets sexting between young people of roughly the same age (no more than four years younger or four years older). If a person disseminates a photograph of a young child (under 13 years of age) in a state of nudity or disseminates a photograph of himself or herself or of another minor who is at least 13 years of age, in a state of nudity, to a person more than four years younger or four years older, the offense may be treated much more seriously. In addition, if the photograph depicts sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sadism, masochism or masturbation, the offense would be treated as a more serious offense than sexting.
In drafting this legislation, it was noted that the juvenile courts do not have jurisdiction over summary offenses. As a result, a juvenile who is charged with a misdemeanor or even a felony and adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court may be treated less harshly than a juvenile found guilty of a summary offense before a magisterial district judge. In addition, the records of a juvenile who is adjudicated delinquent are protected while the records of a juvenile found guilty of a summary offense are public. Finally, expungement of a juvenile’s record is easier than expungement of a summary offense.
While giving the juvenile courts jurisdiction over summary offenses would overwhelm those courts, making them less effective, some changes are necessary to make the treatment of juveniles more equitable regardless of whether the juvenile is before a magisterial district judge or a juvenile court judge. As a result, the legislation establishing the criminal offense of sexting will include changes to the Juvenile Act. While summary cases involving a juvenile would continue to be heard by a magisterial district judge, these changes will apply many of the same protections that are available to juveniles adjudicated delinquent to juveniles found guilty of sexting or other summary offenses.
“Sexting has become a disturbing trend and must be addressed,” said Greenleaf. “In the future, I hope that we are better prepared to educate all young people about the dangers of this kind of behavior and why it is wrong.”
e-mail from Greenleaf's office
There have been many incidences of sexting in Pennsylvania by minors, and district attorneys have struggled with finding the appropriate offense for this inappropriate activity. Teenagers have been charged with everything from disorderly conduct to child pornography. The proposed legislation would provide guidance for law enforcement, and an alternative to seeking a conviction for a more serious crime.
Senate Bill 1121, now before the Senate Judiciary Committee, establishes the criminal offense of “dissemination of prohibited materials by a minor” (sexting), and prohibits a person under 18 years of age from using a computer or telecommunication device to knowingly transmit or distribute a photograph or other depiction of himself or herself or of another minor who is at least 13 years of age, in a state of nudity, to another person who is not more than four years younger or more than four years older than the person transmitting the photograph. The offense of sexting is graded as a summary offense and the offender will be eligible for a diversionary program which will include an educational component.
“We need to find ways to deter young people from engaging in this behavior,” said Greenleaf. “I also believe that we need to begin having thorough discussions about the legal and non-legal consequences of using a computer or a telecommunication device to share sexually suggestive materials.”
The legislation targets sexting between young people of roughly the same age (no more than four years younger or four years older). If a person disseminates a photograph of a young child (under 13 years of age) in a state of nudity or disseminates a photograph of himself or herself or of another minor who is at least 13 years of age, in a state of nudity, to a person more than four years younger or four years older, the offense may be treated much more seriously. In addition, if the photograph depicts sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sadism, masochism or masturbation, the offense would be treated as a more serious offense than sexting.
In drafting this legislation, it was noted that the juvenile courts do not have jurisdiction over summary offenses. As a result, a juvenile who is charged with a misdemeanor or even a felony and adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court may be treated less harshly than a juvenile found guilty of a summary offense before a magisterial district judge. In addition, the records of a juvenile who is adjudicated delinquent are protected while the records of a juvenile found guilty of a summary offense are public. Finally, expungement of a juvenile’s record is easier than expungement of a summary offense.
While giving the juvenile courts jurisdiction over summary offenses would overwhelm those courts, making them less effective, some changes are necessary to make the treatment of juveniles more equitable regardless of whether the juvenile is before a magisterial district judge or a juvenile court judge. As a result, the legislation establishing the criminal offense of sexting will include changes to the Juvenile Act. While summary cases involving a juvenile would continue to be heard by a magisterial district judge, these changes will apply many of the same protections that are available to juveniles adjudicated delinquent to juveniles found guilty of sexting or other summary offenses.
“Sexting has become a disturbing trend and must be addressed,” said Greenleaf. “In the future, I hope that we are better prepared to educate all young people about the dangers of this kind of behavior and why it is wrong.”
e-mail from Greenleaf's office
.jpg)
Comments