On 10 Sep 2014 15:15:40 GMT, BlackWind <whoknows@yohomail.com> wrote:
>zup <zup@nowhere> wrote in news:XnsA3A4CD83EF76zupnowhere@74.209.131.13:
>
>> Ducky <ducky@theblind.org> wrote in news:
>>> That happened over 11 years ago. Arrest for "Child Porn" He was
>>> exonorated when the court ruled nude photos isn't cp.
>>
>> Thankfully he lives in Europe where they're more chill on nudity
>> because had he been American, he'd be getting his ass flexed by Bubba
>> in the prison shower. Also if this was in 2003, Newstar didn't even
>> exist for another 2- 1/2 years so whatever nudes he took at that time
>> had nothing to do with the site.
>>
>> But putting that aside, I fail to see how his stuff could possibly
>> constitute CP. After looking at Diana, Princess, Krystal, etc, and
>> their sweatshirts and thongs placed over top of jeans, he should
>> really be charged with boring his customers to death.
>>
>
> Ok...reread the article and see what you mean about him being a newstar
>photographer. I guess he is with them now after he got out of jail.
>
> but I disagree with listing Princess/Sunshine with Diana when it comes to
>being a little bit "shy". Princess usually has most of her butt out and
>isn't afraid to show it. Main reason I would love to see her at
>teenmarvel, although all their models are 18+ (I think) so she would have
>to wait a couple more years.
>
>---
>This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
>http://www.avast.com
The Princess Sunshine stuff is clearly over the line and dsplays the
genital area as the main focal pont of the photos and is meant to
elicit a sexual response, clearly violating U.S. law.
All the armchair lawyers on here bitching about photographer's stuff
being too tame should put yourselves in their shoes, you're not the
one facing prison time.
|
|
![Favorite](javascript:myfavor('http://www.nzbot.com/article/alt.binaries.newstar/281', 'Re: It's over - "arest-pavel rohel.jpg" (1/4) 504.6 kBytes yEnc')){kind=link}