Recently we’ve read where a professional football player was arrested and charged with revenge porn under NJSA 2C:14-9 in NJ. The player was Jets player Jermaine Cunningham . The law, the first of its kind in the nation, makes it a criminal act to distribute sexual images of a person without their permission(NJSA 2C-14-9) in the State of NJ.. In essence it was aimed at two classes of predators. The first was the “peeping Tom” type who snaps the photo of the unsuspecting victim while they have sexual parts of their bodies exposed (dressing, sunbathing, showering). The second involved sexual pictures that were exchanged, received and shared between two consenting adults, but then were distributed as revenge after the couple broke up their relationship.
In California under SB255 recently enacted California was the second state to address this problem a successful prosecution of a male after he posted sexual photos to his ex girlfriend’s employer. So far only New Jersey and California have enacted such legislation.
What California failed to do, however, is address those sexual images freely sent over cyber space to friends. So called sexting images. The relationship isn’t one of trust and mutual understanding as in a dating relationship and as such, how would consent then be established or understood? In other words, the legislation establishes that certain images were meant to be shared by two people in an intimate relationship and in no way were they to be shared unless the person photographed gave consent for that sharing.
If a person simply sends a sexual image out with no such understanding, and that image is shared by others without the consent of the sender, the law gives no legal remedy for such actions. Lives of those involved could be ruined by these images being made public. How could anyone prove who took them, intercepted them, and shared them without consent? (CNN-“New California revenge porn law may miss some victims.”)
This then brings this discussion to the college campus. A recent survey(Georgia Campuses, by editor “Study:Sexting prevalent on college campuses.”) has found that 80% of all college students send sexually explicit photos to their friends. The so called sexting has become such a problem on college campuses that administrations are holding sex seminars and se weeks on campus to address the dos and don’ts of sexual activity, particularly the sexting issue.
We already know the nightmarish remedy that has been legislated concerning sexual assaults in California campuses. To put the decisions of guilt or innocence based on a preponderance of the evidence in the hands of the college administrations is preposterous and is leading to college students’ lives being ruined by the false accusations.
With the present vacuum existing in the laws proposed in California concerning sexting and freely shared sexual images, the legislature has left the responsibility for the safeguarding of those that send those images in limbo with no legal recourse for law enforcement. Parents whose college aged children are victimized by revenge porn because of their innocent trust in friends will find they cannot go to law enforcement and will demand remedy of the college administration who has taken on this mantel of protection under other misguided legislation.
Imagine, then, should the legislators settle on the fact that colleges are already handling sexual assaults so why not consolidate their handling revenge porn also? Law enforcement cannot remedy this situation as proof of liability is next to impossible in the cyber age. Besides, only a preponderance of evidence is needed not beyond a reasonable doubt.
To enable colleges with further power to prosecute would be unthinkable. The legislators have to amend the so called revenge porn statutes address the sexting problem or we will be faced with another over reaching of fundamental rights by college administrations.
