U.S. Manga Obscenity Conviction Roils Comics World

[Johann Krauss]

In an obscenity first, a U.S. comic book collector has pleaded guilty to importing and possessing Japanese manga books depicting illustrations of child sex abuse and bestiality.
Christopher Handley, described by his lawyer as a “prolific collector” of manga, pleaded guilty last week to mailing obscene matter, and to “possession of obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children.” Three other counts were dropped in a plea deal with prosecutors.
The 39-year-old office worker was charged under the 2003 Protect Act, which outlaws cartoons, drawings, sculptures or paintings depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct, and which lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Handley’s guilty plea makes him the first to be convicted under that law for Possesing cartoon art, without any evidence that he also collected or viewed genuine child pornography. He faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.
Comics fans are alarmed by the case, saying that jailing someone over manga does nothing to protect children from sexual abuse.
“This art that this man possessed as part of a larger collection of manga … is now the basis for [a sentence] designed to protect children from abuse,” says Charles Brownstein, executive director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund. “The drawings are not obscene and are not tantamount to pornography. They are lines on paper.”
Congress passed the Protect Act after the Supreme Court struck down a broader law prohibiting any visual depictions of minors engaged in sexual activity, including computer-generated imagery and other fakes. The high court ruled that the ban was overbroad, and could cover legitimate speech, including Hollywood productions.
In response, the Protect Act narrows the prohibition to cover only depictions that the defendant’s community would consider “obscene.”
“It’s probably the only law I’m aware of, if a client shows me a book or magazine or movie, and asks me if this image is illegal, I can’t tell them,” says Eric Chase, Handley’s attorney.
Chase says he recommended the Plea agreement to his client because he didn’t think he could convince a jury to acquit him once they’d seen the images in question. The lawyer declined to describe the details. “If they can imagine it, they drew it,” he says. “Use your imagination. It was there.”
The case began in 2006, when customs officials intercepted and opened a package from Japan addressed to Handley. Seven books of manga inside contained cartoon drawings of minors engaged in sexually explicit acts. One book included depictions of bestiality, according to stipulations in Handley’s plea deal.
Frenchy Lunning, a manga expert at the Minneapolis College of Art and Design, was a consultant in the case. She says the books were from the widely available Lolicon variety — a Japanese word play on “Lolita.”
“This stuff is huge in Japan, in all of Asia,” Lunning says. Handley, she adds, “is not a pedophile. He had no photographs of child pornography.”
Handley remains free pending a yet-to-be scheduled sentencing date. Mike Bladel, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Iowa, declined to state what kind of sentence the government would seek, but claimed there were hundreds of obscene panels in the seized manga.
Chase says he’s hoping the judge will take into account the circumstances.
“He was a prolific collector,” says the lawyer. “He did not focus on this type of manga. He collected everything that was out there that he could get his hands on. I think this makes a huge difference.”

Link

So drawings are considered people

 

[The Dude]

This is stupid. I'm a big anime and manga fan and I don't like lolicon, but still this is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.
It's a drawing. Whether or not you find it offensive I don't care, was anyone hurt by it's creation? No. There is no victim here, so why is this guy doing time?

 

[BlackLantern]

I must do further reading on this

 

[Ghostvirus]

This Child Porn watch dog crap is as usua going over board! Nothing wrong with proteting children, but it is just getting nuts!

 

[The Original Bamfer]

Child pornography is child pornography - drawn or not. And it's sick. There's really no excuse for having material like that in your possession.

 

[Heretic]

If it's a child getting violated, only to then be followed by something of some merit, then Im fine with it. If its a child/adult orgy just for the sake of titillation then I'm not okay with it. I support the CBLDF...I'm a member actually...but this dude can go to jail for all I care.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Wait. The article says there was bestiality drawn as well.

Does tentacle rape count as bestiality?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

How do you age a cartoon character? Last time I checked they don't have birth certificates.

Alot of anime characters look like teenagers. Are they going to throw someone in jail for an anime with teens by somehow proving the cartoon characters are under 18.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I can't wait to see Chris Hanson bust comic book nerds in "To Catch an Anime Predator".

 

[The Battousai]

Based on the legal definitions of child pornography, half of the internet is illegal

 

[Johann Krauss]

Child pornography is child pornography - drawn or not. And it's sick. There's really no excuse for having material like that in your possession.

How can it be child pornography WHEN NO CHILD WAS INVOLVED. Last time I checked, drawings are not people.

 

[Mike_D202]

...didn't interview with the vampire have a child Kirsten Dunst fall in love with Brad Pitt?

I guess that ain't the same thing though.

 

[yenaled]

Just because something is obscene shouldn't make it illegal. I don't own any material like that but I don't care if anyone else wants to own it - remember we even aren't talking about photorealistic images of young teens it's black and white line drawings like all manga.

The Protect Act is a joke - there is no definitive level of abuse to it - it's based on opinion. How a Law can exist when you can never be sure if you are breaking it is insanity. Is Alan Moore's Lost Girls, Neil Gaiman's Sandman: Doll's House now illegal child pornography?

Importantly, there is no victim in the publication of this material.

The next stage is depicting acts of violence to be made illegal - after all killing someone is illegal so shouldn't drawing images of it also be ._.

 

[Mike_D202]

 

[Heretic]

Just because something is obscene shouldn't make it illegal. I don't own any material like that but I don't care if anyone else wants to own it - remember we even aren't talking about photorealistic images of young teens it's black and white line drawings like all manga.

The Protect Act is a joke - there is no definitive level of abuse to it - it's based on opinion. How a Law can exist when you can never be sure if you are breaking it is insanity. Is Alan Moore's Lost Girls, Neil Gaiman's Sandman: Doll's House now illegal child pornography?

Importantly, there is no victim in the publication of this material.

The next stage is depicting acts of violence to be made illegal - after all killing someone is illegal so shouldn't drawing images of it also be ._.

As much as I agree with everything you said...if the comics in question show random sex acts with children...then there is NO reason to read it other than titillation. I understand that sometimes a brutal story must be told...and Im all for telling it. I think that theres a young actress filming a movie where she is raped and its causing controversy...but as long as it has some sort of artistic merit then Im okay with it. just showing a series of child porn scenes will ONLY appeal to people who want to rape children.

There has to be a way to protect the first amendment AND deal with people who have an interest in that stuff.

And like i said, I donate regularly to the CBLDF. so its not like I take a stand against them lightly

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

What is the point of these laws?

Isn't it to protect children from being filmed and exploited physically? Not to make certain thoughts and ideas illegal.

 

[Gilpesh]

Alright. Who's getting arrested for reading that issue of Fantastic Four where Reed hit Sue?

 

[Manic]

"Japanese manga books depicting illustrations of child sex abuse and bestiality."

Inuyasha?

 

[StorminNorman]

How do you age a cartoon character? Last time I checked they don't have birth certificates.

Alot of anime characters look like teenagers. Are they going to throw someone in jail for an anime with teens by somehow proving the cartoon characters are under 18.

Please. There is a different between drawn teenage sex and drawn CHILD sex. This article clearly referred to the latter.

What is the point of these laws?

Isn't it to protect children from being filmed and exploited physically? Not to make certain thoughts and ideas illegal.

The two sorta go hand in hand. Trying to combat the idea of child rape and child sexual abuse helps protect children from being sexually exploiting.

All that being said, my inner-libertarian is cautious to support the actions taken here. This is a case where I face an inner conflict between political ideals and morality.

 

[Manic]

All that being said, my inner-libertarian is cautious to support the actions taken here. This is a case where I face an inner conflict between political ideals and morality.

This is just me, but I say if something is setting off your morality alarm, you can put your political party on the back-burner for it.

 

[The Battousai]

(8) “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
- - (A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
- - (B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
- - (C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002256----000-.html

 

[BlackLantern]

Battousai just got legal up in this piece

if its clear that it is a minor engaged in a sexual activity then its child pornography

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Battousai just got legal up in this piece

if its clear that it is a minor engaged in a sexual activity then its child pornography

Not really, it also says if you photoshop or manipulate a photo to make it look like a child is engaged in sexual activity it's illegal. So no child needs to be involved physically for it to be considered illegal.

 

[The Original Bamfer]

I don't understand why anyone would even argue this. It's disgusting.

 

[Addendum]

I don't get worked up over drawings. It's not like the artist is using a model