Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MachWun t1_iu1nt08 wrote

Ok fine. Heres some case law of a NEWSPAPER REPORTER reporting on child pornography ONLINE and was subsequently charged for possession. Go fuck yourself.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/07/cyber/cyberlaw/10law.html

"In addition, the government argued that even if Matthews were a legitimate journalist working on a story, he had no more right under the First Amendment to receive and disseminate illegal images of minors than a reporter would have in buying crack cocaine in pursuit of a story about drugs"

haha love the downvote after you got what you asked for

−6

C1V t1_iu35xs6 wrote

But he admitted he traded over 150 images to people online. That is a bit different than your idea you are trying to pass of "he only was doing research and report on it!!".

How about you take your own advice and go fuck yourself?

4