Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB
Actually it IS a 2257 case and NOT a CP case. In order to prove it's CP don't have to prove the "child" in question is actually a child? In America proof of guilt not proof of innocence. The burden is on the GOVERNMENT to prove it's case. Now obviously if the girl looks very young or looks like small child then that makes it easier for the prosecution. But you have a girl that COULD be 16 or she COULD be 19, well I'm not sure how you get 12 people to put a guy away and then be listed a sex pred because he forgot to cross his T's and dot his I's.
|
What prosecutors have been doing is hiring an "expert" who testifies that the model in the images or video is definitely under 18. A few lucky souls have managed to find the models and have had them contradict the "expert" by proving to the court they were over 18 when the material was shot. I'm sure others haven't been so lucky... who's a juror more likely to believe: an expert medical witness or a pornographer/porn consumer charged with being involved with kiddie porn?