.

Spurned Lovers, Take Note: IL May Ban Revenge Porn

Rep. Scott Drury has proposed legislation that would make posting explicit photos of someone without their consent a felony sex crime.

An angry ex can be an unpleasant thing. An angry ex with naked photos of you who isn’t afraid to post them online is terrifying.

That’s the concept behind “revenge porn.” And it’s what Rep. Scott Drury (D-Highwood) is hoping to outlaw in Illinois with a bill he introduced this week.

“This is behavior that isn’t going to be tolerated,” he said.

Under the bill, any non-consensual dissemination of sexually explicit materials would become a felony, classified as a sex crime. Consequences would be more severe if the victim is a minor or disabled.

Drury said he was motivated not by any specific incident, but as a father of two young kids who are connected to the Internet all the time. He hopes this bill will protect children, as well as woman, who make up the vast majority of revenge porn victims.

Only two other states, California and New Jersey, currently have laws banning revenge porn. Drury said his bill goes beyond those in terms of labeling the offense a sex crime. The bill also allows for the forfeiture of any profits made from the photos, which is a way of targeting for-profit sites that post them.

Last week, Hunter Moore, dubbed the “revenge porn king” was indicted by the FBI for allegedly hacking into computers to retrieve nude photos. Moore’s now defunct site, IsAnyoneUp, encouraged angry exes to post revenge porn.

What do you think? Does Illinois need a law banning revenge porn?

Jordan S. Zoot February 03, 2014 at 04:59 PM
There are numerous examples in the criminal law where in the burden of proof is shifted...and I can see why they may decide to apply it here.......if one party deliberately posts pictures of themselves in an attempt to ascribe the conduct to the other side there are appropriate remedies once the conduct is identified....sorry...each of us may reach our own conclusions and there is no way to absolutely prove which one is correct so I will stick with my own views. We don't need to agree. Whether we are dealing with a criminal misdemenor or a felony the standard of proof is the same..I certainly wasn't mentioning a civil matter.
David Greenberg February 03, 2014 at 05:47 PM
Sure, there's places where the burden of proof is shifted - and I'd argue that they're unconstitutional - changing burden of proof is a very slippery slope to step onto. Deliberately conspiring to mislead the Court in a divorce case? Certainly grounds for contempt, and perhaps criminal charges depending upon some other factors, but it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility for some individuals. Personally I have no problem agreeing to disagree - I just don't think that for two consenting adults who consented to the pictures to begin with, that releasing those photos hardly rises to the level of criminality.
Walter White February 03, 2014 at 11:33 PM
Zoot the psychopath is back! How's the militia training going?
Jordan S. Zoot February 03, 2014 at 11:40 PM
Just file...Walter.....I thought you would be fully occupied with Dan Cocks
Walter White February 04, 2014 at 06:07 AM
Nah he's old news since his failed "boycott."

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »