Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a federal statute prohibiting the "pandering" of child pornography [1] (offering or requesting to transfer, sell, deliver, or trade the items) did not violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, even if a person charged under the code did in fact not possess child ...
Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the First Amendment to Federal obscenity laws.
Former Galion City Schools athletic trainer Jon Vitello awaits sentencing after pleading guilty to 10 counts of pandering obscenity involving a minor.
One count of gross sexual imposition One count of pandering obscenity involving a minor Parker previously entered a not guilty plea in the case but changed his plea ahead of a jury trial.
According to court documents, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children notified the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program about child sexual abuse material (CSAM ...
A 1987 report by the U.S.A. National Institute of Justice described "a disturbing correlation" between traders of child pornography and acts of child molestation. [6] A 2008 longitudinal study of 341 convicted child molesters in America found that pornography's use correlated significantly with their rate of sexually re-offending.
Timothi L. Cramer, 43, of the University District, is charged with one count of pandering sexually oriented material involving a minor and one count of pandering obscenity involving a minor ...
Ordinary libertarians, who separate sex and violence, take MacKinnon and Dworkin to task for their refusal to leave sexual expression alone. [15] This was done particularly by Gillian Rodgerson and Elizabeth Wilson in Pornography and Feminism: The Case Against Censorship: "Yet this theoretical cocktail of biologism and behaviorism is lethal. To ...