Distribution of child pornography-David McDade?

Question

According to the article below, district attorney David McDade released a video of underaged teens having sex at a party. According to McDade, he had to release the video under Georgia's open records law. I will not get in to tons of details involving the case as I have posted the link below. I will say this. Where I grew up, children whom are victims of a crime have their identities protected. Does Georgia simply not value victims rights as much as my home state? Is this some rogue prosecutor that likes to distribute child porn? Or, is this some sort of vendetta against the kid prosecuted in this case? My opinion is quite obvious; a prosecutor whom forgets to protect the most vulnerable people in society has no place being a lawyer nor an attorney. Opinions??

http://media.www.dailyiowan.com/media/storage/paper599/news/2007/07/13/Nation/Georgia.Prosecutor.Under.Fire.For.Releasing.Teen.Sex.Video-2923499.shtml

This comes down to morality. As a prosecutor, you fight against child pornography getting out there. It seems contradictory to me that you kick back and release it without a fight. By following the letter of the law, you are correct. I don't for a minute believe that the laws intent was to have a child sex tape released by a prosecutor. At some point, the world of common sense has to enter into the realm. Am surprised by the defense of this person. Was figuring there would be more outrage about this.

Answer 1

You're missing the point of the argument.

This is not a case of "victims". Both of the teenagers were within a couple years of each other, and everything was consensual. It's a statutory crime, which is fundamentally different than one where the victim was unwilling. In fact, under the current laws, the defendant wouldn't even have been prosecuted. The change in the laws just came too late.

More importantly, the court proceedings were not sealed. The tape was used in evidence, and therefore is part of the public record. That's the law. Now, if the court ordered the record sealed, that's a different law.

So, no, the prosecutor was not being a rogue. The prosecutor was following the law as set forth by the state legislature.

The court can always seal the record if the judge determines that the girls are likely to suffer harm. Or the state legislature can change the law. But until one of those happens, the prosecutor is doing exactly what the law requires.

Stop blaming people for following the laws that they didn't write.

Answer 2

You are not being fair. The law must be obeyed. The moral error occured when the either the D.A. decided to enter into the record the tapes themselves,thereby making them public,or the judge ruled that a private jury&judge only screening would not suffice. Normally,a written description is accepted by a judge - written by a detective and duly notorized. Depending on the judge's attitude,the D.A. may have had no choice but to enter enter the tapes into the public record.

Answer 3

I think the D.A. in this instance did what he was legally obligated to do. I don't agree with the young man being in jail. But, according the law as I understand it, if evidence is requested he has to provide it. I don't he did anything wrong, legally, but I do think the law needs to be changed for instances like this.