Are we in danger??

[AppleBiter]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't sodomy still illegal in some states? I can't remember.

Okay. Looked into it. According to this supreme court case, Lawrence vs. Texas: Click me!, sodomy laws were declared by the US Supreme Court to be unconstitutional in 2003.

 

[jeninflorida]

Hum...not sure yet. Personally, I never write about characters under 19...just to be safe. NC and the other gray area's - this might be come an issue...slipperly slope falicy. fiction is fiction, and most will never act things out...maybe with a loved one, but what two or three people do, in his or her bedroom is not a matter for the goverment or church.

Pa. woman indicted on obscenity charges

PITTSBURGH - A woman who authorities say ran a Web site that published graphic fictional tales about the torture and sexual abuse of children has been indicted on federal obscenity charges.

"Use of the Internet to distribute obscene stories like these not only violates federal law, but also emboldens sex offenders who would target children," U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said Wednesday in announcing the charges against Karen Fletcher, 54.

Excerpts of her stories were available to all visitors to her Web site, while others paid to read whole stories, prosecutors said.

Fletcher was indicted by a federal grand jury Tuesday on six counts involving six stories about the kidnapping, torture, sexual molestation and murder of children 9 and under. The charges carry five years in prison each.

Fletcher, in a telephone interview with The Associated Press, said Wednesday that federal authorities "didn't like my site." She had no other comment on the charges.

In court papers, the FBI said Fletcher told agents she wrote most of the stories and posted contributions from other people.



Does this stop and make you wonder if idiot's like this sick woman will impact and ruin sites like Literotica?? Hmmmm?

 

[angelicminx]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't sodomy still illegal in some states? I can't remember.

If ya wanna get real technical, it's illegal in Alabama to own a sex toy.

 

[angelicminx]

As to the rest, I'm scared. While I don't believe the woman should have allowed those types of stories on her site, what's to stop the government from bringing any of us up on obscenity charges?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

As to the rest, I'm scared. While I don't believe the woman should have allowed those types of stories on her site, what's to stop the government from bringing any of us up on obscenity charges?

Well, if you don't believe the woman should have been allowed to post fictional stories, why should U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan believe you should be allowed to post yours?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

If ya wanna get real technical, it's illegal in Alabama to own a sex toy.

In light of Lawrence vs. Texas, those laws are likely to be invalid now and unenforceable.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Okay. Looked into it. According to this supreme court case, Lawrence vs. Texas: Click me!, sodomy laws were declared by the US Supreme Court to be unconstitutional in 2003.

Oops, didn't know you had already noted that. Dead right, though I wonder now about the new Court with Roberts and Alito.

 

[S-Des]

Well, if you don't believe the woman should have been allowed to post fictional stories, why should U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan believe you should be allowed to post yours?

Exactly. The age of consent in the US ranges from 14-17. So if I'm in Utah, I'm allowed as a 40 year-old man to have sex with a 14 year-old girl, but if I write about it I've committed a felony. That is the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard.

Some of the really sick pedo stories are virtually impossible to defend, but I would guess that most of us here had some sort of sexual contact while we were underage. So if we thought it was beautiful (like when at the age of 12 I had my first 'threesome' with two neighbor girls my age), we wouldn't be able to describe it without breaking the law? Obviously pictures of underage children is a different matter because they are harmed (at least some of them are) by taking the pictures and then having to live with them being in circulation for the rest of their lives.

Stories are fictional and have been around for as long as time. There has never been a study to prove any link between people reading them and it causing them to want to do bad things (although sick people do read stories to get off, no one can say if it actually makes them more likely to offend). As Og said, there are plenty of stories sold in books right in your local store that vividly describe vile acts commited against minors, but it's Ok because the author tells you it's bad (even though he/she goes to great lengths to describe every sight, sound and smell...naw, there's no chance they were doing it to titilate...right?).

 

[Stella_Omega]

And the irony is, if Lit goes away, websites who stole the stories and are based overseas, will still provide the stories to the same readers.

But- mostly- not complete stories. They tend to rip-off the first page only...

 

[joeys-game]

But- mostly- not complete stories. They tend to rip-off the first page only...

Hey Stella, how you doing darlin? ((((hugs))))

 

[cloudy]

I believe it is.

Not anymore. The last of the holdout states with sodomy laws still on the books abolished them around 2002/03 (I think - don't hold me to that date).

So.....you can't buy sex toys in Alabama, but you can have all the buttsex you want.

edited to add: yep, saw where Applebiter said the same thing.

So I'm slow this morning, so shoot me.

 

[Alessia Brio]

Did someone say toys? *perk* And butt sex? *perk perk*

 

[cloudy]

Did someone say toys? *perk* And butt sex? *perk perk*

I was singing your song.

strap on *clap clap*

strap off *clap clap*

strap on, strap off....the strapper!

 

[angelicminx]

Well, if you don't believe the woman should have been allowed to post fictional stories, why should U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan believe you should be allowed to post yours?

I said, "While I don't believe the woman should have allowed those types of stories on her site..."

I guess I should have clarified my statement before posting it. In today's witch hunt for sex offenders, I think it was stupid on her part to allow "those types" of stories to post. I got the impression from the article that "those" stories weren't the only type on the site, but maybe I'm wrong.

I admit, I didn't read the end of the article until this morning, so I was operating with the idea she was in Laurel and Manu's position. Now that I know she was the main writer, I think she's doubly stupid for posting them on a US based website.

I wouldn't read the child stories, but there are also BDSM stories, as well as a few other types, that I wouldn't read either.

There is the possibility that she's done this to make a statement about the freedom of speech, or something, but she's facing 30 years. She's going into this case with probably a 90% chance that she will lose. If/ when she loses and goes to prison, does her case open the door for authorities to prosecute the rest of us for obscenity?

 

[angelicminx]

In light of Lawrence vs. Texas, those laws are likely to be invalid now and unenforceable.

Ah, yes, but they are still laws. Let's say you pissed off a police officer and he really wants to fuck with you now. He can arrest you for owning a sex toy (assume for the sake of argument he has probable cause and all that). You will get your day in court, and the case will more than likely be dismissed, BUT (and here's the kicker) that arrest will be on your record. Just food for thought.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

If/ when she loses and goes to prison, does her case open the door for authorities to prosecute the rest of us for obscenity?

The door is already wide open. What is the difference between the fictional writings of that woman and your fictional writings? None. It's only a matter of whether or not U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan feels like considering your stories obscene as well - and there's nothing stopping her from doing that. And apparently that's cool. You won't get into trouble, though, because you're not (singularly or doubly) stupid. You just write the stories and post them on a US-based site. The trouble will only come to those that are stupid enough to own and operate US-based pornographic sites.

 

[angelicminx]

The door is already wide open. What is the difference between the fictional writings of that woman and your fictional writings? None. It's only a matter of whether or not U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan feels like considering your stories obscene as well - and there's nothing stopping her from doing that. And apparently that's cool. You won't get into trouble, though, because you're not (singularly or doubly) stupid. You just write the stories and post them on a US-based site. The trouble will only come to those that are stupid enough to own and operate US-based pornographic sites.

Okay, I can see that you don't much care for me. I have enough people in my life who take what I say and slap me in the face with it, thank you.

The difference between her fiction and my fiction? To the best of my knowledge mine don't contain subject matter that is a hot button issue in the United States.

Well aware that the door is open and there is nothing to stop U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan from considering my stories obscene. I just hope that there isn't a crusade to do just that.

I didn't say, nor did I infer, that I won't get into trouble for posting my stories on a US based site. I live with that threat every day. I just do my best not to wave a red flag in front of a bull or jump up and down and say, "Here I am! Come get me!"

I disagree with the trouble only affecting the owners and operators of US based pornographic sites. If there's trouble, I believe it will affect anyone who visits/ posts/ or are members of those sites.

I don't recall saying I wasn't "singularly or doubly" stupid. I know I am (thanks for pointing it out though, I appreciate it). All I said was I thought she was, for jumping up and down and waving that red flag.

 

[sophia jane]

First off-
Minx, I don't think Lauren was calling you stupid. She's just trying to make a point about that nature of obscenity laws and censorship. None of what any of us writes is inherently safer, more moral, less obscene because the whole thing is judgment based.

The first line of Abs post- "A woman who authorities say ran a Web site that published graphic fictional tales about the torture and sexual abuse of children has been indicted on federal obscenity charges." The key words in that line are "authorities say" because the whole thing is based on what the authorities and their interpretation of the obscenity laws. I have no idea what was on her site, but, for the sake of argument, couldn't a bdsm story about a sixteen or seventeen year old be considered "torture and sexual abuse of children"? If you look at any story, there is something potentially "wrong" with it- threesomes are adulterous behavior, sex in public is illegal, bdsm is abuse, etc. It is all about interpretation. So, if we say that it's okay to censor this woman, to try her and convict her on obscenity laws, we're basically giving the okay for all of us to be censored. There is no line in censorship where it is/is not okay to do it. Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

 

[angelicminx]

SJ: First off-
Minx, I don't think Lauren was calling you stupid. She's just trying to make a point about that nature of obscenity laws and censorship.

Maybe not, but that was how it read, to me.

SJ: So, if we say that it's okay to censor this woman, to try her and convict her on obscenity laws, we're basically giving the okay for all of us to be censored. There is no line in censorship where it is/is not okay to do it. Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

That was my point. You just said it a lot more clearly and eloquently than I did.

I also think she should have done a little self censorship, in light of how big an issue child abuse, in any form, is. It's a no win situation. It seems that sex offenders are a major political platform. I don't agree with the charges against her, I believe she has the right to post what she wants to. I just think she should have exercised a little more caution.

I don't know, SJ, I hate society and the demand to conform to appearances. I don't know how to fix it, or if it even can be fixed. I'm in a position now to be very afraid of what society will do to me because I didn't conform.

I can look at what little the article says and say, "Well that was a dumb move." But, anyone can look at what's going on in my RL and say the same thing.

I'm sure all of that came out absolutely wrong.

 

[oggbashan]

UK litizens are equally at risk

The UK Government has agreed that suspects can be extradited to the US to stand trial without any need to demonstrate probable cause. The three UK bankers involved in the ENRON debacle are awaiting trial now. The US has not ratified their side of the treaty. The UK MAY withdraw its consent if legislation proposed by the House of Lords is successful.

As the law stands at present if a US prosecutor thinks that a story posted on Literotica by a UK member is obscene and illegal, that prosecutor can seek AND GET extradition of the UK citizen without needing to provide any evidence. Because Literotica is a US site, posting here is an act within US jurisdiction.

Og

PS. If a UK citizen is extradited, they cannot have the protections available for US citizens. They cannot use bail bonds, nor can they have a public defender. They have to surrender their passport and, unless they have substantial funds, will remain in jail until the case is heard.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Thanks, Sophia, that's exactly what I meant.

Minx, I don't even know you, so why would I not care much for you? I said "you're not stupid". There was no sarcasm in my post. And you are absolutely 100% risk-free of getting into trouble over the fictional stories you write. All the trouble will lie entirely on those distributing it, namely Laurel and Manu.

If you think that the difference between your fiction and hers is that yours doesn't contain subject matter that is a hot button issue in the United States, I believe you're being naïve. You write pornography. If the U.S. Attorney can have her arrested for distributing her fictional stories, then she can also have Laurel arrested for distributing your fictional stories. If she should have done a little self-censorship, then maybe so should you. At least she was putting her own neck on the line. Does that make her doubly stupid? Probably. Should she be being called stupid in a forum of pornography authors? I don't know, it sounds a bit hypocrite to me.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

The UK Government has agreed that suspects can be extradited to the US to stand trial without any need to demonstrate probable cause. The three UK bankers involved in the ENRON debacle are awaiting trial now. The US has not ratified their side of the treaty. The UK MAY withdraw its consent if legislation proposed by the House of Lords is successful.

As the law stands at present if a US prosecutor thinks that a story posted on Literotica by a UK member is obscene and illegal, that prosecutor can seek AND GET extradition of the UK citizen without needing to provide any evidence. Because Literotica is a US site, posting here is an act within US jurisdiction.

Og

US obscenity laws apply to distribution, not authorship or possession.

 

[oggbashan]

US obscenity laws apply to distribution, not authorship or possession.

That is a limited relief but isn't posting on an internet site, including this one, technically distribution?

Og

 

[Lauren Hynde]

That is a limited relief but isn't posting on an internet site, including this one, technically distribution?

Og

Only if you have a very bad lawyer.

 

[angelicminx]

Lauren: I believe you're being naïve.

Yep. That's what the psychatrist who did my mental health assessment for CPS said too. "There's no treatment for naive."


Lauren: If she should have done a little self-censorship, then maybe so should you.

Probably so. My mother certainly thinks so.

Lauren: At least she was putting her own neck on the line.

Yep and she didn't take anyone down with her. Mine is stretched out there. Not on a national level, and there may not be jail time, nor does it deal with pornography or obscenity issues, but it's out there.

Lauren: I don't know, it sounds a bit hypocrite to me.

Probably is. I don't mean to be, but I probably am to a certain point.