Landmark Sexting Case Set for Friday

Story here.

The controversy began in October 2008 when Tunkhannock school officials confiscated five cell phones and discovered the boys who owned them had been trading digital images of scantily clad females, including Miller, Kelly and Doe.

The image of Miller and Kelly shows the girls standing together in their bras. The image of Doe shows her just getting out of the shower, topless, with a towel wrapped around her waist.

Skumanick’s attorney, Michael Donohue of Scranton, said the case before the Third Circuit Court pertains only to Doe. That’s because Skumanick determined after the court challenge was filed that he would not seek to file charges against Miller or Kelly. He based the decision on testimony at the hearing on the restraining order.

Donohue said Skumanick has pressed on with the case because he believes strongly that “sexting” is dangerous.

“He was motivated by his desire to protect children. The transmission of photos of naked children draws predators,” Donohue said. “The entire basis of the juvenile code is to save children from their own bad judgment.”

Wrong. The juvenile code was developed so that prosecutors could have the option of treating those under 18 differently than adults when crimes are committed. If a 16 year-old kid is involved in a bank robbery, the law provides some basis for mercy, allowing for the consideration of mitigating circumstances, such as parental abuse, poverty, etc. The code also allows for the teen to be tried as an adult if the crime and circumstances are serious enough.

Juvenile codes are not written to make criminals out of kids who do not commit crimes and merely exercise bad judgment. Teens make bad decisions all the time, it's called "growing up".

Hopefully the judge will throw out this frivolous and destructive case.