Need some Legal Analysts for this prop...

Sunde91 · 07-14-10, 02:50 AM

Guys, we can bury SBR..call your lawyers up for this to give us a winner..

Mr Windy City · 07-14-10, 02:53 AM

Perez finally crossed the line into child porn, and lawyers say his fate is grim. Tuesday gossip could go to jail for photoshopping a vagina.

Last night was full of BIG BREAKING NEWS: Perez Hilton tweeted a Miley Cyrus upskirt picture, and it showed a vagina. The image has since been scrubbed from the internet because Miley is seventeen, which means the image is child pornography. Salon interviewed a child porn defense attorney who said tweeting Miley's cooch was "suicidal for [Perez]," and "we're not talking about a misdemeanor." Perez's intent doesn't matter, nor does the veracity of the image. Photoshopping vaginas onto children is illegal, too: "Under the law, that is still a crime and it is punishable just the same. If you were to take the face of an 8-year-old and put that picture on the nude body of even an identifiable, fully-developed adult porn star, it is child porn punishable identical to if you took a photo of the actual child." How messed up is humanity that we even have laws for this? Though it apparently doesn't matter, I suspect the image was photoshopped, because censored versions show it's from this video shoot, and in every other photograph she appears to have panties on. (And even if the picture was of "form-fitting panties," Perez could still be prosecuted.) IN CONCLUSION: Perez Hilton could go to jail for cut-and-pasting a picture of a vagina

Sunde91 · 07-14-10, 02:54 AM

^

Will the judge protect him though so as to not upset the queer community

Mr Windy City · 07-14-10, 02:57 AM

yea now I found this one.

First the facts: Perez recently posted—then removed—a paparazzi photo of Cyrus exiting a car in a too-short white dress. The photo seemed to depict the 17-year-old without underwear, though other photos taken around the same time indicate she did, indeed, have underpants on. Either way, how much jail time is Perez likely to get for this possible child porn? Well ...

... likely, none, defense lawyers tell me.

"This one image of a 17-year-old, even if it were technically child porn, is not a very big child porn case," criminal defense attorney Christopher Leibig tells me. "Usually child pornography cases involve multiple images, including children being photographed—in a private setting and performing sexual acts—by perpetrators for profit."

The Cyrus photo, while invasive, may simply not meet that standard, especially for a prosecutor, Leibig explains. Yes, if Perez, aka Mario Lavandeira, knowingly posted a photo of Cyrus exposing her nether parts, that could technically qualify as a crime punishable by 10 to 15 years hard time, Leibig says.

"But it just doesn't reach the same evil that these laws were intended to prohibit," Liebig adds. In fact, he says, most prosecutors probably wouldn't be interested in pursuing Perez.

For the record, I haven't seen the Cyrus photo in question, and to be honest, I'm not all that interested in tracking it down.

I think we should take the value in No just based on the fact that a.) he's a queer. b.) he's a celebrity, and c.) he has money.

Let's break this down and come up with an answer before we go to sleep. I'm gonna see when his court date is, don't wanna tie up points for months.