>>764472>As far as I'm aware there's only one documented case where this has occurred and it's the one in the picture. Every other case is either a plea bargain or they had real CP.United States v. Senior Airman Blake E. Taylor (Washington, where Steam is based)
United States v. Ryan A. Bowersox
Before saying "oh it's military court so it doesn't count", first consider that they were charged under the exact same laws in the exact same manner they would have been even if it wasn't, and given peer pressure, a jury would be even less likely to agree that loli hentai isn't obscene.
>It's legal in California too which is why 4chan can be hosted here and still have loli on /b/Do you know what the legal precedent is for California? I'd like to add that to the list. For Oregon it was State v. Henry (1987) and for Georgia it was Stanley v. Georgia (1969).
That said, while I'm not sure where Bowersox was tried, his court case had him invoking Stanley's case as a defence, and it was overturned for various reasons, including the fact that while he was entitled to obscene material within his own home, downloading it over the internet was considered "transferring it across state lines", and thus breached the protections afforded by Stanley. Despite this, while he was convicted of possession of obscene material in an area he shouldn't have it, he was acquitted of child pornography charges for that same material, as the judge considered seeing drawings as such to be a violation of free speech, while saying at the same time that this would perhaps only be the position of a judge in an area of maritime law where the constitution must be upheld over statutes. It's an interesting read.
