claireanne

State	Age of Consent	Has Close-In-Age Exemption
Alabama	16	Yes
Alaska	16	Yes
Arizona	18	Yes
Arkansas	16	Yes
California	18	No
Colorado	17	Yes
Connecticut	16	Yes
Delaware	18	Yes
District of    Columbia	16	Yes
Florida	18	Yes
Georgia	16	No
Hawaii	16	Yes
Idaho	18	No
Illinois	17	No
Indiana	16	Yes
Iowa	16	Yes
Kansas	16	No
Kentucky	16	No
Louisiana	17	No
Maine	16	Yes
Maryland	16	No
Massachusetts	16	No
Michigan	16	No
Minnesota	16	No
Mississippi	16	Yes
Missouri	17	No
Montana	16	No
Nebraska	16	No
Nevada	16	No
New Hampshire	16	Yes
New Jersey	16	Yes
New Mexico	17	Yes
New York	17	No
North Carolina	16	Yes
North Dakota	18	No
Ohio	16	Yes
Oklahoma	16	Yes
Oregon	18	No
Pennsylvania	16	Yes
Rhode Island	16	Yes
South Carolina	16	No
South Dakota	16	No
Tennessee	18	Yes
Texas	17	No
Utah	18	Yes
Vermont	16	Yes
Virginia	18	Yes
Washington	16	No
West Virginia	16	No
Wisconsin	18	No
Wyoming	17	No

 

If you’d like to view the age of consent laws outside of the U.S., follow this link. It gives provides you with the region, country, and age of consent just like above.

2. Suicidal Intimidation

This is when the perpetrator threatens suicide if their demands aren’t met (“If you don’t do X, I’ll shoot myself/jump off of my balcony, etc.”). It’s a common manipulation tactic to guilt the victim into giving the perpetrator what they want. In almost all cases, the perpetrator has absolutely no intention of following through with their threats, and use this to get what they want.

3. Young love

Pedophilic behavior is usually justified under the pretense of a relationship. Phrases like “I’m your boyfriend, why can’t we do X?” and “Couples do X all the time, why can’t we?” come to mind. Pedophiles don’t love their victims. They love the idea of them. Pedophiles are attracted to children under the age of consent. So in other words, once you grow out of their attraction range, they will no longer be attracted to you and will break up with you/ghost you. Relationships with pedophiles can be some minors first relationships. They think they’re in love with their abuser, and stay with them because they believe they’re in love, or that they can’t get anything better. Both are a lie. There’s someone out there for everyone, and an abuser and a victim cannot have a healthy and loving relationship. Abusers abuse to get what they want. They don’t (or can’t) love their victims because they just see them as piggy banks of sorts.

4. Cheater cheater..

Pedophiles typically don’t focus on just one victim. They may have one or more other victims they are stringing along, either under the pretense of a relationship or just FWB (friends with benefits). If you aren’t providing the perpetrator with what they’re looking for, they are most likely getting it somewhere else.

5. Watch the warning signs

This is true with any relationship, but especially concerning a minor and an adult. If an ex or ‘other woman/man’ reaches out to you detailing their relationship, manipulative tactics the perpetrator uses and their intent, listen to them. They are most likely telling the truth. Pay attention to the ages of the other victims.. if they’re underage as well, chances are the perpetrator is targeting minors specifically.

6. So close yet so far away

Another tactic used is when the perpetrator will use phrases like “I can’t wait until you’re (insert age of consent here).” This is usually followed by an inappropriate comment, typically sexual in nature. This is a manipulation tactic to attempt to reinforce the idea that the perpetrator isn’t a pedophile, since they’re attaching the concept of sexual acts to the age of consent. However, the perpetrator is still relating these sexual acts to the minor, and may ask for nude photos afterwards.

7. PG please!

Conversations are often sexual in nature when dealing with pedophiles. Sexting (sending sexually explicit photographs or messages) is frequent. This is almost always followed up by a request or threat for nude photos, which ties into my next point.

8. Overwhelming pressure

Victims are (almost) always pressured into sexual activities such as sexting, sending nude photos of themselves, and in rare cases, engaging in sexual activity with them. How are the victims pressured? There are many different ways. They may use threats (“If you don’t do X I’ll share these photos/messages with Y and Z”), bringing up past actions (“You did it all these other times, why not now?”), trying to make you comfortable (“I want to get you out of your shell. It’s good to try new things!”), or using the relationship as justification (“I’m your boyfriend.. why can’t you just do X?”). Pressure comes in many shapes and forms. How can you tell if you’re being pressured? My own rule of thumb is that if you feel uncomfortable or don’t want to do something and the individual continues to try and get you to do it, it’s pressure. Saying no usually isn’t enough, and more preventative measures, such as blocking them, or confiding in a friend or trusted adult about the matter, may need to be taken. In some cases, legal action could be taken, which can prevent this from happening to anyone else. I urge you to report your experiences, even if you know the perpetrator won’t get caught: it will still (hopefully) follow them around. Having their legal full name is especially helpful in this regard.

9. Practice good hygiene!

Grooming.. what is it? The act of grooming is becoming close with an individual, (in this case a minor), making them comfortable with your presence, and then exploiting that relationship for nefarious means. This is how many children are sexually abused, or in this case, targeted by pedophiles to extract explicit photos. A rule of thumb from me is generally, if you’re a minor, avoid getting close with individuals drastically older than you. If an adult tries to cozy up to you, they may have wicked intentions.

10. Ratted out

If a parent or legal guardian finds out about this relationship, the perpetrator almost always withdraws from the situation in fear of being caught. This is yet another red flag, but it’s too little too late. By then, the damage has already been done, and many pedophiles have gotten what they came for in the first place.

 

Next, I’d like to touch on the laws (in the U.S. and U.K.) concerning the possession of compromising pictures of minors, distribution of these pictures, and inappropriate conversations with minors. Remember, when reading, that age of adulthood and all laws regarding it are applied based on which state/country the victim is a legal resident of.

1. The laws in the United States protecting minors and regarding child pornography

   18 U.S.C. § 2251- Sexual Exploitation of Children (Production of child pornography)

   18 U.S.C. § 2251A- Selling and Buying of Children

   18 U.S.C. § 2252- Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors (Possession, distribution and receipt of child pornography)

   18 U.S.C. § 2252A- certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography

   18 U.S.C. § 2256- Definitions

   18 U.S.C. § 2260- Production of sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States

    

Images of child pornography are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age).  Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor.  Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child pornography are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.

 

Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity.  A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive.  Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal.

 

Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, reception, and possession of an image of child pornography using or affecting any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce (See 18 U.S.C. § 2251; 18 U.S.C. § 2252; 18 U.S.C. § 2252A).  Specifically, Section 2251 makes it illegal to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for purposes of producing visual depictions of that conduct.  Any individual who attempts or conspires to commit a child pornography offense is also subject to prosecution under federal law.

 

Federal jurisdiction is implicated if the child pornography offense occurred in interstate or foreign commerce.  This includes, for example, using the U.S. Mails or common carriers to transport child pornography across state or international borders.  Additionally, federal jurisdiction almost always applies when the Internet is used to commit a child pornography violation. Even if the child pornography image itself did not travel across state or international borders, federal law may be implicated if the materials, such as the computer used to download the image or the CD-ROM used to store the image, originated or previously traveled in interstate or foreign commerce.

 

 In addition, Section 2251A of Title 18, United States Code, specifically prohibits any parent, legal guardian or other person in custody or control of a minor under the age of 18, to buy, sell, or transfer custody of that minor for purposes of producing child pornography.

Lastly, Section 2260 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits any persons outside of the United States to knowingly produce, receive, transport, ship, or distribute child pornography with intent to import or transmit the visual depiction into the United States.

 

Any violation of federal child pornography law is a serious crime, and convicted offenders face severe statutory penalties.  For example, a first time offender convicted of producing child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2251, face fines and a statutory minimum of 15 years to 30 years maximum in prison.  A first time offender convicted of transporting child pornography in interstate or foreign commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2252, faces fines and a statutory minimum of 5 years to 20 years maximum in prison.  Convicted offenders may face harsher penalties if the offender has prior convictions or if the child pornography offense occurred in aggravated situations defined as (i) the images are violent, sadistic, or masochistic in nature, (ii) the minor was sexually abused, or (iii) the offender has prior convictions for child sexual exploitation.  In these circumstances, a convicted offender may face up to life imprisonment.

It is important to note that an offender can be prosecuted under state child pornography laws in addition to, or instead of, federal law.

Source

2.  The laws in the United Kingdom protecting minors and regarding child pornography

Indecent Images of Children– The Offences

The two main offense creating provisions are:

Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978 (PCA 1978); and

Section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA 1988)

 

Common Elements:

Both provisions create offenses in respect of:

indecent

photographs or pseudo-photographs of

A child.

 

“Indecent”

This is an issue for the tribunal of fact to decide in accordance with recognized standards of propriety (R v Stamford [1972] 56 Cr. App. R. 398).

 

Whilst members of a jury are representative of the public, it remains essential for them to consider the issue of indecency by reference to an objective test, rather than applying their wholly subjective views of the matter (R v Neal [2011] EWCA Crim 461).

 

The issue is not to be decided by reference to the categories of image identified for sentencing purposes.

The age of the child is a relevant consideration (R v Owen (1988) 86 Cr. App. R. 291). The Judge held that “indecent” qualified the words “photograph of a child”

 

The circumstances in which the photograph came to be taken and motive of the taker are not relevant; it is not the defendant's conduct which must be indecent but the photograph of the child which results from it (R v Graham-Kerr (1989) 88 Cr App R 302; R v Smethurst [2002] 1 Cr. App. R. 6).

 

“Photographs and Pseudo-photographs”

Section 7 PCA 1978 defines photographs and pseudo-photographs. See this section for the variety of images that are caught by these terms. These definitions also apply to offences under section 160 CJA 1988 (s.160(4) of the CJA).

 

See guidance on Prohibited Images, below, for the types of material that are not caught by the provisions under the PCA 1978.

“Child”

A child is a person under 18 (s.7(6) of the PCA).

 

A person is taken to have been a child at any material time "if it appears from the evidence as a whole that he was then under the age of 18" (s.2(3) of the PCA; s.160(4) of the CJA).

 

The age of a child is a finding of fact for the jury to determine. Expert evidence is inadmissible on the subject as it is not a subject requiring the assistance of experts (R v Land [1998] 1 Cr. App. R. 301).

 

If the "impression conveyed by a pseudo-photograph is that the person shown is a child" then it shall be treated for the purpose of the offence as showing a child. This is so where the predominant impression is to this effect notwithstanding some of the characteristics shown are those of an adult (s.7(8) of the PCA).

 

“Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978”

Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978 is an either way offence punishable on indictment with a maximum of 10 years imprisonment.

 

There are four sub-paragraphs under section 1(1) describing the conduct that is illegal in respect of indecent images of children.

 

Section 1(1)(a) to take, or permit to be taken or to make.

These words are given their natural and ordinary meaning. ‘Make’ is defined as “to cause to exist, to produce by action, to bring about” (R v Bowden [2000] 1 Cr. App. R. 438).

 

This section requires that there must be a deliberate and intentional act, done with the knowledge that the image is, or is likely to be, an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child

 

“To make” has been widely interpreted by the courts and can include the following:

 

Opening an attachment to an email containing an image (R v Smith [2003] 1 Cr. App. R. 13)

Downloading an image from a website onto a computer screen (R v Jayson [2002] 1 Cr. App. R. 13)

Storing an image in a directory on a computer (although depending on where that image is stored, this could also be a possession charge under s. 160 CJA 1988) (Atkins v DPP; Goodland v DPP [2000] 2 Cr. App. R. 248)

Accessing a pornographic website in which indecent images appeared by way of automatic “pop-up” mechanism (R v Harrison [2008] 1 Cr. App. R. 29)

Section 1(1)(b) Distribute or show any such photograph
A person is to be regarded as distributing indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs if he parts with possession of it to, or exposes or offers it for acquisition by, another person (s.1(2) of the PCA 1978).

The placing of an order in response to an advertisement offering the supply of indecent photographs of children did amount to incitement to distribute such images under common law despite the willingness of those making the offer to supply them (R v Goldman [2001] EWCA Crim 1684). This was so even if the order was processed automatically by means of a computer for such computers merely facilitated the operation of a business by human beings (R (on the application of O'Shea) v Coventry Magistrates Court [2004] EWHC 905 Admin). The same would apply now for offences under sections 44 and 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2007.

In R v Price [2006] EWCA Crim 3363 the Court of Appeal was "quite satisfied" that it was Parliament's intention to create offences of strict liability under this sub-paragraph subject to the statutory defence under section 1(4)(b) of the PCA 1978 (which applies to s.1(1)(b) and (c) only). It should be noted that the suspect does have to be in possession of the images to be able to distribute or show them. ‘Possession’ does have a mental element that needs to be proved.

Section 1(1)(c) Have in his possession any such photograph with a view to it being distributed or shown by himself or others.

"Possession" involves both a physical and mental element. The physical element is that a person must have custody and control of the photographs in question. The mental element is knowledge – a defendant must knowingly have custody and control of the photographs. It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the defendant knew photographs in his / her possession were indecent photographs of a child. See section on possession under section 160 of the CJA 1988 for more detail.

The words "with a view to" requires that the distribution or showing must be at least one of the suspect’s purposes, but not necessarily his primary purpose. In R v Dooley [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. 21 a member of a peer-to-peer file sharing network downloaded images from the network and then placed them in a folder on his computer from which they could be accessed by other members. Mere knowledge that others could or were likely to see them was not enough. He was only guilty if at least one of the reasons for him placing them there was for that purpose.

A person who stores indecent photographs on his computer and enables others to view them via the internet by the provision of a password does possess them with a view to them being shown (R v Fellows and Arnold [1997] 1 Cr. App. R. 244).

The anticipated showing must to be to a person(s) beyond the possessor of the photographs (R v T (1999) 163 JP 349).

Section 1(1)(d)  Publish or cause to be published any advertisement likely to be understood as conveying that the advertiser distributes or shows any such photographs or intends to do so.

The statutory defence under section 1(4)(b) of the PCA 1978 does not apply. Therefore, by analogy with section 1(1)(a), it must be proved that the defendant published the advertisement intentionally and knowingly.

 

“Section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988”

Section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 is an either way offence punishable on indictment with a maximum of five years' imprisonment.

 

“Possession”

Possession is not defined in the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the Protection of Children Act 1978 or the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Its definition has been developed through case law.

 

The most recent case and authority on possession is R v Okoro (No. 3) [2018] EWCA Crim 19. The case clarified and affirmed previous case law in relation to the issue of possession. The test to determine possession was set out in the following terms:

 

The images must be in the custody or control of the suspect i.e. so that they are capable of accessing, or in a position to retrieve the image(s); and

The suspect must have known that they possessed an image or group of images on the relevant device/devices. Knowledge of the content of those images is not required – the statutory defences deal with that.

The following considerations are particularly relevant in relation to deleted images (R v Porter [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. 25; R v Leonard [2012] 2 Cr. App. R. 12):

 

Where the photos are stored on the device

The means by which they could be retrieved in the sense set out above

Whether the suspect has the wherewithal to retrieve them i.e. the technical knowledge/software/equipment required to do so.

Source

3.  What about the Romeo and Juliet law?

 

Teenage couples before either participant has reached the age of consent, or after one has but the other has not, may engage in consensual sexual conduct as part of an intimate relationship. In such cases, the older of the two participants is technically guilty of rape as any consent between partners, even if freely given, does not meet the standard of law as it is given by a minor. "Romeo and Juliet" laws, serve to reduce or eliminate the penalty of the crime in cases where the couple's age difference is minor and the sexual contact is only considered rape because of the lack of legally-recognized consent.

The Florida Romeo & Juliet Law passed in 2007 is designed to protect individuals from the sex offender list. The victim in the case must be between 14 and 17, a willing participant in the sexual activity and no more than four years younger than the offender. The offense must be the only sex crime on the offender's record.This law does not make it legal to have sexual relations with minors, but merely stops the accused from being held out as a sex offender in society.

 

The following states have implemented the Romeo and Juliet law. Also included are the age differences that will prevent the perpetrator from being charged with statutory rape:

Alabama, 2

Alaska, 3

Arizona, 2

Arkansas, 3

Colorado, 4

Connecticut, 2

Hawaii, 5

Iowa, 4

Louisiana, 3

Maine, 5

Maryland, 4

Minnesota, 2

Mississippi, 2

New Jersey, 4

New Mexico, 4

North Carolina, 4

Oregon, 3

Pennsylvania, 4

South Dakota, 3

Tennessee, 4

Texas, 3

Washington, 2

West Virginia, 4

Wyoming, 4

 

States who have laws similar to the Romeo and Juliet law:

Oklahoma: In Oklahoma, there is a Romeo and Juliet exemption for consensual sex between two persons who are at least 14 years old but younger than 19.

This only relates to physical relations, not the exploitation of minors. Unless you’ve had sex, this cannot be used as an excuse/defense in court. Federal law overrides state law, especially in child pornography cases.

Sources: 1, 2.

4.  What about the U.K? Do they have a Romeo and Juliet law?

 

The short answer is no. More information is below if you’re interested.

 

The Age of Consent in United Kingdom is 16 years old. The age of consent is the minimum age at which an individual is considered legally old enough to consent to participation in sexual activity. Individuals aged 15 or younger in United Kingdom are not legally able to consent to sexual activity, and such activity may result in prosecution for statutory rape or the equivalent local law.

 

United Kingdom statutory rape law is violated the United Kingdom's member countries and territories each have local laws regarding the age of consent. In all of these areas, the age of consent is currently 16.

The United Kingdom does not have a close-in-age exemption. Close in age exemptions, commonly known as "Romeo and Juliet laws" in the United States, are put in place to prevent the prosecution of individuals who engage in consensual sexual activity when both participants are significantly close in age to each other, and one or both partners are below the age of consent.

 

Because there is no close-in-age exemption in United Kingdom, it is possible for two individuals both under the age of 16 who willingly engage in intercourse to both be prosecuted for statutory rape, although this is rare. Similarly, no protections are reserved for sexual relations in which one participant is a 15 year old and the second is a 16 or 17 year old.

Source

 

Again, this only relates to physical relations, not the exploitation of minors. Unless you’ve had sex, this cannot be used as an excuse/a defense in court.

 

To conclude, BE SAFE. Be cautious of who you open up to and share personal information with, and be on the lookout for these red flags. I wish you all the best!

 

Thank you!

A HUGE thank you to Flamboyant & Pun (for helping me get this reviewed), Whiplash (for supporting this post), Parkins (for editing) and AlphaMoist (for giving me information I missed and reviewing this post as well as spreading the original document) for helping me out with this. ❤️ you guys