PA: Text messages are not “material”
A very interesting decision was handed down in a Pennsylvania Superior Court, this week. A man convicted of, among other things, “disseminating explicit sexual material to a minor” had his conviction overturned after a three judge panel found that text messages do not constitute “material”.
The court reasoned, “Here, even assuming that Alexander’s texts were obscene under the Miller test, private and consensual text messages between two adults are not ‘material’ within the meaning of subsection 5903(b),” Pellegrini said. “For the purposes of the statute, ‘obscene material’ unambiguously refers to content made for public dissemination. This is clear from the definition of ‘material,’ which encompasses ‘any literature, including any book, magazine, pamphlet, newspaper, storypaper, bumper sticker, comic book or writing.’”
A copy of the decision can be found here: https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-S17041-21o%20-%20104819877139092537.pdf?cb=1
So it’s just an issue of statutory definition, which PA legislature can fix.
Or am I misreading?
It’s a bit more nuanced. In this case, specifically, he was acquitted of some of the charges so for purposes of the “obscene material” it was construed no differently than if it were sent to an adult.
The problem with many laws is that they are enacted and not updated to account for new technology.
Obviously, the guy could be charged with other things, especially if he sent dirty selfies. If these were merely text messages, then you can see how the court would view this. Pictures, probably not gonna get the same result or you’re going to have another charge. I think that this decision will be “clarified” by a higher court at some point. What is encouraging is a court that’s actually making a decision of this type that seems at some level to actually favor the defendant. That’s kind of rare with sex offender cases. Of course, I’m sure most of us have noticed that.
According to the ruling “… [Alexander] admitted to sending nude pictures to the other phone number…”. But “… he was [only] found guilty of one count of obscenity in violation of 18 Pa.C.S. § 5903(a)(3)(i)based on sexually explicit text messages he sent to an unidentified recipient.” He WAS NOT found guilty of anything else. The only charge he was found guilty of is the obscenity count, which the Superior Court overruled.
Text messages are not material. If thats the question than the text I laid out waas sure graphic in essence. This scheme was wsanting me to come down and talk dirty to this person. So instead of going down their the first night I texted dirty to them. Question is why one did go down the first night. Why did law enforcement induce the second night? And why did they cut in on me chatting to another person.
When law enforcement do these operations one never know’s who’s on the other end of that screen which is entrappint in itself. They have the motive. And yes their motive was to get their if you want to say it their “high five” in this entrapment process. It is more leading the wittness and leading the conscious in this sexual type of encounter. When they ask for anymore pictures than an orginal picture of oneseelf that is a give away right from the get go.
I had nothing on my computer that was incrimating or did a past president say on TV once… one can grab them by the …….. . I would say that their is right action and wrong action and law enforcment need to understand that these registry issues are leading and misleading.
Now if one was writing a sexual graphic book for publication one can understand more but the purpose. Even the ordeal is a vain type of justice of a devilish nature. Now when using the sword the sword is justice and a lot of this registry is to sham or shame others with this type of torture.