Again with the Breastfeeding issue

A man that was to sell stolen pics of Jaime Lynn Spears , in the pictures she is breastfeeding. This has sparked a criminal investigation by federal law enforcement authorities.Because she is only 17 and still considered a minor, sale of the photos might violate child pornography laws.


I Understand this may be considered child porn , I feel the man who stole them is completly wrong. But it brings me to a QUESTION.

If the photo is considered child porn , wouldnt the person who took these photo's also be guilty of child porn?

When Jaime Lynn got pregnant she was 16 and he was 18 so yes he is an adult.

Did he as well cross the line?

Casey Aldridge -Age: 19
Birthday: April 29, 1989

Jaime Lynn Spears-Age 17
Birthday:April 4, 1991

I believe that you can date someone within two years of your age if one is a minor and one isn't.

I'm glad to hear Lynn is bf-ing. Its about time more celebs represent.

I think if the pics are considered child porn then the person who took them should be charged with it too. It seems if they find child porn on a person's computer they charge that person and this guy has pics he wants to sell.
The age thing with the kids tho, not sure on that. Yes he is an adult at 18 but she was 16 so it might make a difference. If he had been over 20, that too might make a difference. I don't know if each state has it's own laws on that or not.

Teddy I was thinking the same thing.

If the pics are considered child porn then whoever took the pics would be charged.
The law states they can be together because of the 2 year clause , but does this mean if the stranger that stole the pictures was only 2 years older then they wouldnt be porn? Or because maybe it wouldnt matter the age of the thief because they stole them? Only the Boyfriend is protected?
I really dont get it.

If these thoughts are accurate that just doesnt seem like a very good law to me. I would think what is good for one adult regardless of age should be good for all adults. Besides that since when is breastfeeding , porn? Are they trying to say it is bad? If so they maybe need to take a look at natrual geographic. I think in my opinon the biggest crime here is stealing. As a celeb they know NOT to take picture to walmart. Really what did she expect? Do you think her sister would ?NO. Now I am not saying it was right this person stole but I think there is some double standards going on and not very good judgement on both parties sides.

Cher-Teddy???? lol That 2 year thing is odd and I don't get how they apply that law. I think maybe to just the boyfriend but not sure. I'm also not sure how they consider breastfeeing porn. . . . . maybe cuz it's in a pic and you can see her breast? I don't know. But maybe it is cuz she is only 17 which puts her underage so it might fall into child porn? I agree, I think the stealing is the crime. If she took or had the pics taken for herself that is not a crime but someone stealing it, trying to sell it yep, that is a crime, at least I think so.

Well i think it is distgusting that people takes pics like that and try 2 sell them or post on the internet . I am not sure if it should be considered Child Porn. Yes she is only 17 . And the legal age is 18 . But I do think that they both should be charged for sometype of Invasion of privacy or somehing like that the person who took then and the person who is trying 2 sell them .. Was she @ homewhile she was BF? can they also be charged with tresspassing?

sorry tele I really was trying to type tele but for some reason teddy came out...lol I must have just seen her name...so sorry

Hey Cher - is ok, just had to give you a hard time!

ok so I took naked bare butt pics of my baby, is that child porn or just cute? where do you draw the line?

I would think it was it was just cute. I did the same thing when my kids were babies and I even got pics of them in the bathtub which now I think might be considered child porn. I think over the years it has changed and is much more murky now. If a parent takes candid shots of their babies that should be ok as far as I'm concerned but I don't know if the law would see it that way.

Blue has a good point there.
I also took a photo that I still to this day think is soooo funny.

Timmy wasnt but maybe a month old and his daddy had given him a bath in the kitchen sink , he had taken him over to the table to get him dried up and powdered prepairing to get his diaper on and in pure little boy fashion he peed , straight up in the air as he was laying there , he got his daddy , I thought it was so so funny. I had warned him it might happen and to take precautions but he didnt think it possble. I happen to have the camera right there. I got Dad getting a sort of shower himself...haha you should see Daddys face of shock..... PRICELESS!!!!

Did I ever think of that as porn? HECK NO I found it to be very funny and a pic to hold on to , so one day to show my son look what you did to your daddy.
The same son also spuit up in his dads mouth...lololol

I guess laws have to be made because some people do take things to a level that most of us never would. They have to protect the inncocent from being victimized. and shameful to say I bet there is some sick perve out there that would get thier jollys off on an innocent little baby like that. I will never understand how they would think of a little child in that way.

I think all parents have been guilty of taking bare naked pics of their children. Usually bottoms up though - LOL. I do not see the harm in it as long as it is for your family photo album type of thing. Now, there may be a prob if the child is older and not a Baby (in my terms, less than a year of age). I can see where people may want to start questioning the fact that you have naked pics of your child and they are like 5.

As far as the Jamie Lynn thing, I do not believe that is child porn. It is nature and natural. If she had those pics for her own memories of her child and an endearing moment between the two of them, then I think that is wonderful. I do believe the person who stole them and sold them should be brought up on charges though. Those were not pictures intended for the rest of the world to see. They were intended for personal memories of their bonding and motherhood. Just as any person may video tape the birth of their child also. It is not for the public eyes. It is something beautiful that your child can also appreciate and enjoy having as they grow older.