17 year old porn - is it the sites or your responsibility?

[peteyt]

Sorry couldn't think of a fitting title that didn't sound too weird ha but I was having a chat with some friends the other day about something.

Basically if a website hosts porn with a girl who is under-age e.g. 17 but her appearance makes her look 18 can a viewer be done even if they didn't realise it.

The law classes any pornographic videos with people under the age of 18 as child porn. Some websites do state that all models in videos are of the legal age, but a lot of these sites include uploads from users and so age checks aren't always possible.

Just find it interesting. It's well know that all males have probably watched porn at least once in their life, most on a regular basis and with a lot of user generated content I do wonder how many have watched illegal videos without actually realising.

Moved by JerseyShore (Forum Moderator): From 'Health, Life and Relationships' as I feel it's more suited here.

[Chippiewill]

As I understand it you'll never be arrested if you unwittingly watched Child Porn.

[RyRy]

I'm pretty sure you can be arrested yknow. Even is it is unwittingly, your IP address gets noticed if its a site that the police have access to, and track you downnnnn.

[wixard]

pyroka that's only if you go on SEXY TEEN GIRLS.COM or whatever

if you went on something like youpom (i didn't actually say name so cant warn me) and you viewed a video with the same title it would be fine, as you're ASSUMING that they're of age & because it says they are

[JerseySafety]

Would be a good debate, anyways. isn't only if you're actively involved in the publishing of child porn?

Surely if you watch someone who looks 20, and they're only 17 you can't get in trouble for that.

[FlyingJesus]

If it's presented on a porn site the upload will have been accepted only with the uploader's express statement that all persons involved are consenting and of age - if this statement is a lie then it's the fault of the uploader not the viewer for falsely advertising the content of the video.

If you buy a tin of beans then get home and inside it actually has soup it's the shop that's at fault, not you

[Kardan]

If it's presented on a porn site the upload will have been accepted only with the uploader's express statement that all persons involved are consenting and of age - if this statement is a lie then it's the fault of the uploader not the viewer for falsely advertising the content of the video.

If you buy a tin of beans then get home and inside it actually has soup it's the shop that's at fault, not you

This. I always understood the law to be that you get into trouble if you go actively searching for such content.

[Inseriousity.]

what have you been watching peteyt?? :O

lolol yeah I wouldn't say it's the viewer's fault. there are examples where porn stars have lied about their age and actually been underage when they first started but if you're unaware of that then I don't see the problem.

[lawrawrrr]

Well if the 'actress' lied about her age too then technically you watched child porn, but because you didn't know then you won't be arrested. I'm pretty sure you can only be arrested for looking at porn that is marketed as being with someone under the age of 18...

[peteyt]

what have you been watching peteyt?? :O

lolol yeah I wouldn't say it's the viewer's fault. there are examples where porn stars have lied about their age and actually been underage when they first started but if you're unaware of that then I don't see the problem.

Lol there's lots of websites out there that have teen stars and claim their all legal. Some people have said that even if the site claims to be legit users have to also take some responsibility.

I always presumed they just went went for the bad cases but its something I've never seen asked really.

[Metric1]

sites. i've looked like i was 18+ since i was 15.

[Special]

well known porn websites such as ******* & pornhub will monitor what type of porn gets uploaded & chosen for their website, they're establish companies basically so they'll be the ones who get done

if you go on a website that isn't known or something obvious such as 16andunder you're going to be at a bigger risk of watching under age porn

[Richie]

child porn is illegal?

[peteyt]

pyroka that's only if you go on SEXY TEEN GIRLS.COM or whatever

if you went on something like youpom (i didn't actually say name so cant warn me) and you viewed a video with the same title it would be fine, as you're ASSUMING that they're of age & because it says they are

The problem with teen sites is 18/19 are still teens and are legal. A teen site can say its only 18+ but it might not be 100 percent true.

[Stephen]

all the most known porn sites are full of crap cheesy porn *plays my guitar in the background of a milkman and policewoman having sex*

does anyone actually watch that

[FlyingJesus]

That's only if you don't know how to use search features

[GommeInc]

Basic principles of a crime: actus reus and mens rea.

Watching under aged porn (e.g. 17) (the guilty act) without intent (mens rea) means you are not guilty of the crime because you cannot commit an offence on an action alone. However, if you watching child pornography without intent and the actors/actresses are obviously under aged you could be considered knowingly or recklessly guilty. Ultimately, it is the Studio who hired the actors/actresses who are guilty or the uploader if it's one of these YouTube like file sharing sites.

If you are watching under aged pornography by searching "17 y/o gives guy hand shandy" then you're intently looking for under aged pornography and, if you watch the video, you have committed an offence. However, if you search for it, but do not watch it, you are not guilty of an offence because a guilty act has not happened. It's a bit like thinking "I want Simon Cowell to die. I wonder if axing him down will be fine?" That's not a crime, however saying it out loud and in front of him would be if I whole heartedly went into the details of it as it comes under a whole range of "threat related" laws. It also has to fulfil a list of criteria but that's not the point of this thread :P

EDIT: One case I recall is the case of Brent Corrigan who appeared in adult films when he was under aged. He faked his I.D. and deceived the Studio but the porn company were completely at fault and were fined millions and eventually closed down. It's probably on Wikipedia somewhere, but that's usually a case that sums up what happens with pornography cases like the ones you're debating. If he was a lot younger then there would be harsher penalties.