sexting....illegal or not?

Daniel2oo9

I know someone who is 18 and has been sexting a girl who is 17 (he never told me much but I expect pics are involved) am I right in saying this is legal as the girl is over 17?
Any reply would be appreciated

Victor

Any person sending an obscene telecommunications message may be committing an offence. If I'm correct 'obscene' is a community standard, i.e. you'll need a jury to decide, not the recipient.

With someone under 18, one would need to be careful.

Daniel2oo9

Victor wrote: »

Any person sending an obscene telecommunications message may be committing an offence. If I'm correct 'obscene' is a community standard, i.e. you'll need a jury to decide, not the recipient.

With someone under 18, one would need to be careful.

I read a similar thread on this site before where the law confines children as someone under the age of 17 so I cant see how this would be exposure to a minor.

Absoluvely

She's breaking the laws on child pornography by creating it and he is breaking them by possessing it.

Daniel2oo9

Absoluvely wrote: »

She's breaking the laws on child pornography by creating it and he is breaking them by possessing it.

Technically child pornography is under the age of 17 in this country I read that on a legal forum.

Absoluvely

Daniel2oo9 wrote: »

Technically child pornography is under the age of 17 in this country I read that on a legal forum.

You're probably right. I assumed there was a kind of universal minimum age of 18 for porn but it's not mentioned here: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/criminal_law/criminal_offences/law_on_sex_offences_in_ireland.html

Daniel2oo9

Absoluvely wrote: »

You're probably right. I assumed there was a kind of universal minimum age of 18 for porn but it's not mentioned here: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/criminal_law/criminal_offences/law_on_sex_offences_in_ireland.html

So I assume what these two are doing is completely legal?

spurious

If it involves sending photos, it may not be, depending on what is in the photos.

Daniel2oo9

spurious wrote: »

If it involves sending photos, it may not be, depending on what is in the photos.

A child in irish law is defined as someone under the age of 17 so this cannot be named as child pornography.

Tar.Aldarion

Both adults at that stage, so same as any two adults doing it I guess. I'm sure people who actually know will chime in

Daniel2oo9

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Both adults at that stage, so same as any two adults doing it I guess. I'm sure people who actually know will chime in

Hopefully!

Absoluvely

Are they both in Ireland?

Pro Hoc Vice

So much misinformation on this thread.

A child is by law under 18 so for many purposes a 17 year old is a child.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0024/sec0003.html#sec3

I say many because for some purposes lesser ages apply, for child pornorgaphy it's younger than 17.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1998/en/act/pub/0022/sec0002.html#sec2

This is an example where the same word can have different meanings depending on which Act it is being used in.

Pro Hoc Vice

Daniel2oo9 wrote: »

So this means neither party can be accused of such a crime of possesing or distributing child pornography.
Are any other laws being broken?

A solicitor in possesion of all the facts could give an answer to that question.

better call saul

I think you should send me the photos and I will be able to advise more

Daniel2oo9

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

A solicitor in possesion of all the facts could give an answer to that question.

Can anyone here give an answer to that question is my question.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Pro Hoc Vice

Daniel2oo9 wrote: »

Can anyone here give an answer to that question is my question.

No,and anyone who claims they can answer such a vauge legal question is talking through their behind. If the law wasas simple as that then why have lawyers.

Daniel2oo9

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

No,and anyone who claims they can answer such a vauge legal question is talking through their behind. If the law wasas simple as that then why have lawyers.

That's true.

Pro Hoc Vice

Daniel2oo9 wrote: »

Both are over the age so I presume nothing could come of this legally.

Do you mean legally, data protection, what about assault what about many of the telecommunications Actis the adult exercising undue influence, was any of the pictures taken with out permission, did either party show to a third party, legally is a broad concept that requires context.

The relevant law re porn has bee quoted if you want a rock solid answer on that or any other point get a degree in law or pay a solicitor, not being smart just setting it out,

In relation to porn was either part aware of the real age did either party say or believe the other person was in fact below 17, lots of questions.

Little CuChulainn

Probably worth pointing out that child pornography does not necessarily require the person to be under 17. It also includes images were they are represented as being under 17.

Gatling

How sure are you the girl is 17 and not younger

Bepolite

While I appreciate the question my be of academic value, at that age they really can be left well alone. It's always surprised me exactly how conservative this country is in this area. Teenagers will do what teenagers have done since, well forever. Technology just makes it even more cringe worthy in years to come. If no one is being exploited leave it be IMO.

AndonHandon

"Someone" OP

Peregrinus

Under Post Office Amendment Act 1951 s. 13 it's an offence to send a message (including an SMS) by telephone "that is grossly offensive, or is indecent, obscene or menacing". A sexy text or pic is unlikely to be menacing but, depending on the content, could be grossly offensive, indecent or obscene. The offence is not dependent on the age of either the sender or the recipient.

Of course, unless the recipient complains there's unlikely to be a prosecution.