<< Blog Scan | Main | News Scan >>


Can a Cartoon be a Sex Offense?

| 0 Comments
William Saletan at Slate has this interesting post about a man convicted of possession of child pornography in Australia:

[T]he plaintiff was convicted ... of possessing child pornography contrary to s 91H(3) of the Crimes Act 1900 (the Act) and using his computer to access child pornography material contrary to s 474.19(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (the Code). The alleged pornography comprised a series of cartoons depicting figures modelled on members of the television animated series "The Simpsons". Sexual acts are depicted as being performed, in particular, by the "children" of the family. The male figures have genitalia which is evidently human, as do the mother and the girl.

Saletan prudently notes:

What's happening to child pornography is what's happening on the Internet and in software generally: Technology is blurring boundaries between action and thought, public and private, real and fake. On this point, the Australian court quotes the Supreme Court of Canada: "With the quality of contemporary technology, it can be very difficult to distinguish a 'real' person from a computer creation or composite."

Perhaps this is another reason to fear appeals to "international authorities" when thinking about U.S. criminal justice issues. Many sex offender policies are well intentioned and very misguided.   The upshot: tread very carefully. 



Leave a comment

Monthly Archives