Education

High School Yearbook Accidentally Publishes Pic of Students Engaged in Sex Act

High School Yearbook Accidentally Publishes Pic of Students Engaged in Sex ActYearbooks are supposed to capture special memories, but for one California school the definition of “special” has taken on an entirely new meaning.

Following the discovery of an illicit photograph in Big Bear High School’s annual yearbook, students have been mandated to return their copies. An image present in the book has fueled child pornography fears, as a 17-year-old boy is pictured putting his hand under a 15-year-old’s dress. Yahoo! News has more:

The candid photo, snapped at a dance, showed the couple in the background. School officials surmised the couple may have been involved in sex. The photo got past the yearbook adviser initially. The image, as one parent put it, “did not leap to the eye” as sexually explicit. Certainly, it didn’t come across as pornography at first glance.

Since the Big Bear High School yearbook came out, the compromising photo was discovered. Students were told to return their yearbooks for either a sanitized version (sans offending photo) or a refund on the purchase price. Whether the photo is vague or unclear, the sheriff’s department says it is deemed child pornography because it looks like two minor engaged in sex.

The Los Angeles Times explains the legal ramifications that the yearbooks could have for the district and for anyone who holds onto an original copy:

According to federal law, any visual depiction of a minor “engaging in sexually explicit conduct” can be considered child pornography. Because of this, officials warn, anyone who still has the photograph could face a criminal charge of possession of child pornography.

It seems the school district may need a few more chaperones on hand at next year’s school dance (and maybe some extra eyes to vet yearbook photos prior to publication next go around).

Comments (99)

1 2 3
  • markdido
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:12pm

    Students who do not turn in their yearbooks to have the picture removed can be charged with felony possession of child pornography?

    Really?????

    Report Post »  
    • betterthantv
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 1:51pm

      Welcome to the no common sense police state that we now live in. Simply absurd!

      Report Post » betterthantv  
    • steelpanther
      Posted on June 9, 2012 at 8:40am

      Did you also notice that while they are talking about possably charging those that don’t return it with possesion of Chid porn, no one is talking about charging the ones at fault with making and distrubting child porn?

      Report Post »  
  • Slowman101
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:05pm

    Wow. Now thats taking the situation well in hand!

    Report Post »  
  • SamIamTwo
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:02pm

    Accident, yeah, right, pfft, fire someone please. What no oversight, eh? Give me a break…

    Report Post » SamIamTwo  
    • rickc34
      Posted on June 9, 2012 at 11:23am

      Blame it on Obama it happened on his watch. I am sure someone in the doj wants a closer look at these pictures. And please who approved the photos in the first place.

      Report Post »  
  • Casca
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:00pm

    I was reading a forum about the pic. They were saying the kid does NOT have his hand down her dress. Her hand is over his, on his wrist actually. Unless she has ten fingers on one hand, his hand is not down her dress.

    Report Post » Casca  
  • WTSpike
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:52am

    Umm….so I guess that all kids who engage in any sexual act, like kissing, touching, or looking to see if black patent shoes really do reflect up, are all child pornographers? I agree…..they’ll never retrieve them all, and it will become a small time collectors’ item of sorts.

    But all in all, it’s just not that big a deal. Civilization will not end because of this.

    Report Post »  
  • The cable guy
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:46am

    They were probably upset he wasn’t using the condums they gave him

    Report Post »  
  • biffo
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:43am

    ‘but there’s something seriously wrong with our country when a yearbook, containing no nudity and only a slightly indecent act between a 15 year old and a 17 year old, can get one thrown in jail and branded a sex predator for the rest of their life.’

    Condoning this behaviour in this way is part of the rot in our society. You are what is seriously wrong with our country. I hope you don’t have children.

    Report Post »  
    • Talent-Keyhole
      Posted on June 9, 2012 at 4:10pm

      This is the mind-set of the “Wow-Sers” to use a word from back in the day. Most likely the guy was “fingering” his girl friend. Kids today from elementary school on up do not consider fingering to be a $3+ act (notice how I had to use symbols to get around the silly censorship herein instead of just typing the word “sex”). My oldest daughter teaches at a relatively affluent middle school and she tells me that both boys and girls are into all kinds of sex acts which do not involve actual entrance into a bodily orifrice, including the Monica Lewinski Routine. There seems to be an idea amongst young kids that if it feels good then you can do it anytime and any place. I have seen kids in the back seats of school busses engaging in the two-backed beast under the watchful eyes of kids who turned around and were leaning over the seats. THis has happened twice while I was driving a large vehicle on local highways. I would have taken a picture but didn’t want to be arrested for child pron.

      Report Post »  
  • angelcat
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:29am

    Highschool yearbook advisors and student editors are NOT doing their jobs. Things like this should be caught in the galleys. I was a student editor and later a faculty advisor to a yearbook, and believe lme, I checked and double-checked everything because I knew that I would be held responsible for any errors, especially serious errors. The advisor needs to lose his/her job and the student editor should have some kind of consequence also.

    Report Post »  
  • ProbIemSoIver
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:27am

    I hope someone told those detectives to get lost and get off their property before they exercise their 2nd amendment right. I know I would.
    TEA!

    Report Post » ProbIemSoIver  
    • MrSpork
      Posted on June 4, 2012 at 12:20pm

      Your avatar name is “PROIEMSOIVER”? You obviously don’t know what a capital “L” looks like, do you?

      Report Post »  
  • zman173rd
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:18am

    Pleaze Blaze , “…is deemed child pornography because it looks like two minor engaged in sex.” We poster’s have occashun to mispell, butt it’s you job to Edit and Research and use Spellchecker and Grammar editing programs. Kan’t youse guys git it right? Ae ya‘ll sure htis isn’t some High School prajeckt? It happens more at this website than any other I visit.

    Report Post » zman173rd  
  • ChiefGeorge
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:12am

    Has anyone seen a year book in this decade? They are chock full of pictures and collages of pictures from the most self centered generation every to grace the green acres of this land. There is also self promotion going on in them where parents can buy a whole page just for their kid. A straight forward yearbook is fine without all the BS contrived memories sections which is exactly what the preceding year did and the year before them. You kids think your unique and special? Get in line and get over yourselves.

    Report Post » ChiefGeorge  
  • ProbIemSoIver
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:11am

    How pathetic. I can understand not wanting the picture in a yearbook. But criminal charges for Pornography? How many men out there dated or had sex with a 15year old when they were 17. I did. I would say most have. Our society is so backwards thanks to the progressives. I am now 46. I would assume society is so out of touch, that I will have some local prosecutor(liberal wack-job) come after me to press charges for underage sex, from 29 years ago. Well if any prosecutor wants to try. I welcome it. I will run your @$$ through the ringer. I would keep a copy of the year book. FTNWO.

    Report Post » ProbIemSoIver  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:47pm

      i would keep it too, charge me, see what happens to you in court. it is easily argued… “judge, if i sent a photo to you, anonymously. then called the police on the day i knew it arrived at your house… you WILL be charged with child pornography.” end of story.

      same with the sexting thing… recieving unwanted material is a felony… hmm genius, how easily ‘set-up’ we all are… we all can be jailed instantly if they want to jail us.. you recieved it.. you are guilty. done. it is completely unjust.

      anyone can write a virus that sends pornography to phones.. it is the oldest form of annoying people digitally… it’s called, war dialing…

      dumb dumb dumb…
      they are passing the buck of responsibility to the recievers of the photo, instead of the sender (the editor) it’s that simple. the editor should be charged on X accounts of child pornography… where X = the count of yearbooks printed.

      Report Post »  
  • loadingmyclips
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:09am

    Gee, child porn… grrr

    Report Post » loadingmyclips  
  • Lion420
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:51am

    Sounds like crap to me.

    Report Post » Lion420  
  • Thighmaster
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:49am

    Under Bill Clinton’s definition of “sex” that was clearly not a sex act…

    Report Post » Thighmaster  
  • football lady
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:48am

    Accident? Sure it was. Anyone really believe that?

    Report Post »  
  • I.Gaspar
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:39am

    Maybe someone should go back and double check anthony w’s yearbook…

    Report Post »  
  • snidley-whiplash
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:35am

    High School Yearbook Accidentally Publishes Pic of Students Engaged in Sex Act
    Just like those SUV’s a mind of their own………………I can see and hear it now……….
    printing press goes wild printing sexually explicit pictures it found rummaging through students
    personal at home information. WTF
    The only reason some people are alive, it’s against the law to kill them.

    Report Post » snidley-whiplash  
  • affinnity
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:25am

    Teenagers in California having sex – no way – I don’t believe a word of this. What is really shocking, to me, is that the school district actually seems to care and the state law is actually being discussed as being valid. The people who are most likely going to take the heat for this is the yearbook company.

    Report Post » affinnity  
  • Shane the Golden
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:25am

    This is the progressive way, make the kids as little like their fathers as we can, WWilson. Where was the student sponsor and were they looking at the photos?

    Report Post » Shane the Golden  
  • beekeeper
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:25am

    “the sheriff’s department says it is deemed child pornography because it looks like two minor engaged in sex.”

    Really? That’s the criteria? So if I took a picture with one girl squatting, tying her shoes in front of a young man, laughing, sitting in a chair several feet in front of her (so it “looks like two minor children engaged in sex”), it’s child porn? Prosecutable child porn, never work again as a teacher, have to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life child porn?

    Is that the criteria now? It “looks like” sex?

    Report Post » beekeeper  
    • Airb0rne4325
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:52am

      Big nothing. Sure there is worse at the football halftime show then what was there. Shouldn’t be in the yearbook? Sure, but overreaction? Definitly. Threatening people to get the books back is a bit much. It happened, be more diligent so it doesn’t happen again next yr. Because you know those pesky kids are going to try and top it in next yrs yearbook.

      Report Post » Airb0rne4325  
    • Mapache
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 2:02pm

      I would love for it to be brought before a court. The stupid detectives would be laughed out of the court….’child porn?” really? Get real….this is the attitude that makes people lose what little respect they have for law enforcement. What is REALLY going on here is they want to USE THE THREAT of Child Porn in order to get the books back because they are afraid of being sued by the students in question. Alpha Hotels is what they are.

      Report Post » Mapache  
    • chris3
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 6:56pm

      yes, it means whatever they need it to mean,on a lighter note please, they‘re teen’s, not wise,but this ain’t new folks,we started in 4th grade,I’m 41 and a father so this scares me,but I‘m not blind and don’t see this as a“sign” of anything

      Report Post »  
  • felix
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:17am

    hands on school work

    Report Post »  
  • HillBillySam1
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:16am

    Must have been on the page titled “Most Likely To Serve In Congress”…….

    Report Post »  
  • NOBALONEY
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:15am

    California norm.

    Report Post » NOBALONEY  
    • kindling
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:12pm

      When I was in high school the senior class prank was a massive orgy on the football field. It was the class of 1970. When we got back to school the next Monday we all learned of it. I don’t remember any of the participants being punished. But then again, I was molested by two teachers and teachers sold drugs so maybe it was not that unusual then. And to think these people are running our government now.

      Report Post » kindling  
    • Rice Water
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 1:14pm

      At the other extreme, California was also the home of the “Thong-Wrong”, in which the HS principal (a female) made all female prom attendees lift their skirts to prove they weren’t wearing thong underwear. This was one of the most egregious examples of puritanical hysteria since 2 Live Crew.

      Report Post » Rice Water  
  • nzkiwi
    Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:13am

    Hand them back? Yeah, right.

    It will become a collectors item.

    Report Post »  
    • marhee9
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:20am

      What’s with all the yearbook issues lately? Seems like there has been one issue after anither this year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWDHs-GnHh8

      Report Post »  
    • Dustyluv
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:24am

      So a bear was beaver hunting? Kids….gotta love ‘em. Really, where does a parents responsibility step in? I don’t think our society can stoop any lower, but I said that 10 years ago and we have gone even lower…Just incredible that this could happen.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:24am

      It’s not child pornography, it’s a moral panic. A bit distasteful, though, but certainly not worth destroying all the yearbooks that have all those signatures from people you’re probably never going to see again.

      I love a good moral panic as much as the next Blaze reader, but there’s something seriously wrong with our country when a yearbook, containing no nudity and only a slightly indecent act between a 15 year old and a 17 year old, can get one thrown in jail and branded a sex predator for the rest of their life.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • TheCenturion
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:29am

      Are they sure the “girl” wasn’t a teacher? ……………. just sayin’

      Report Post »  
    • Old Truckers
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:35am

      The school will probably get two returned books.

      Report Post » Old Truckers  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:40am

      Yep, those union teachers are doing a FINE JOB!
      Used to be the teachers/school administration reviewed and approved yearbooks.
      I guess it is not in their union-job-description.
      Volunteering to rubber-stamp the yearbook probably helps to pad the resumee for promotion from union-teacher to union-principal.
      And yet WE THE PEOPLE who pay their salaries PAY THEM BETTER than WE get paid!
      WE don’t have retirement pension plans anymore. Why should we pay our employees better than WE get paid?
      Remember when teachers were paid VERY LITTLE and did the job because they LOVED CHILDREN?
      When they weren’t glorified babysitters?
      When it wasn’t just a job?
      When it wasn’t about the money?
      Doing a job out of LOVE will yield better results than doing it out of GREED.
      Union teachers who teach for money will only do the minimum required work to keep their jobs or to assure students pass the minimum testing requirements. There ARE good teachers who are in the union. But, like the silent muslims, they are not standing up and wresting control of their own unions. Silence speaks volumes! Parents who chase the dollar at work and are not involved are also to blame. School boards and ‘pta’ groups that have allowed themselves to become politicized share the blame. Lastly, government monopoly of education has destroyed quality. Central planning (socialism) has eliminated our the presence of 50+ educational laboratories in this republic.
      We need a BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS, like the

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:52am

      Actually, it seems that they are getting most of them back because detectives are turning up at student’s homes and threatening them with a felony.

      Good grief.

      Report Post »  
    • YellowFin
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 10:52am

      Nothing like that would have happened in ‘63’…….or would it?

      Report Post » YellowFin  
    • YellowFin
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:00am

      nzkiwi,
      If this is true then this will be viewed as one of the biggest crime’s of the century! Good Grief!

      Report Post » YellowFin  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:00am

      I found the photo on google and it was a big nothing. When I went back to collect the link it was gone. Maybe I’m going to be arrested in the morning for looking at child porn. Well, no. Not in this country – well, not yet, anyway.

      Report Post »  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:20am

      Yellowfin

      Here is the item which notes students have been threatened. Can’t find the one where it said that detectives had shown up, but its there somewhere.

      http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/inland_empire&id=8195542&rss=rss-kabc-article-8195542

      Waking hours are short enough so I’m moving on to more interesting stuff.

      Report Post »  
    • jakartaman
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:48am

      unfortunately our present culture has found some heroes

      Report Post »  
    • PrfctlyFrank
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 11:56am

      Wonder who’s daughter is getting felt up there.. Seems like a hysterical reaction to behavior that the president (clinton) thinks is ok..

      Report Post » PrfctlyFrank  
    • stifroc
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:30pm

      WAIT! WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WAAAAAIIIIIIT A MINUTE HERE!!!!!

      If the students do NOT return the books they could face criminal charges for owning child pornography??? What about the SCHOOL for SALE and DISTRIBUTION of child pornography!!!!

      BOOM WINNING!

      Report Post » stifroc  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:40pm

      Child pornography? Really? This assumes that the girl in question was going commando, or that there was contact at the time of the photo. Sounds embarrassing, not illegal. Get a life. Arrest the school officials for production and distribution of child pronography before any other claims of illegal possession can be taken seriously.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
    • stifroc
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 12:42pm

      HANG ON A SECOND!!!!

      The article says they are recalling the books and threatening to press criminal charges because the two people in the picture are ASSUMED to be minors! They better freakin verify before they level such charges and threaten such action to those who do not return the books.

      Don’t misunderstand me here. Not for child porn. disgusting and those who view it or distribute it should be wiped from the earth. My POINT is this. The law better be enforced based on FACTS and EVIDENCE and NOT assumptions! Once laws enforcement and lawyers start throwing muscle around based on assumptions NOBODY is safe or even protected by the law. VERY slippery slope with dire consequences. The teens better be identified and VERIFIED that they are minors before charges or child pornography are thrown around.

      Report Post » stifroc  
    • maumau
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 1:40pm

      heres the pic if you care

      http://www.barstoolu.com/random-thoughts/high-school-yearbooks-confiscated-as-child-pornography-after-picture-found-of-17-year-old-with-hand-up-prom-dates-dress/

      Report Post » maumau  
    • chips1
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 1:55pm

      What do they mean it COULD be a sexual act. Mitch Miller eating a banana looks like it could be a sexual act, but you can’t prosecute it.

      Report Post »  
    • DTOM_Jericho (escaped PA)
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 2:03pm

      So if it’s child porn, school officials will be arrested for distribution right? I mean if they are threatening possessors, then distributors should be punished, right?

      Report Post » DTOM_Jericho (Creator vindicator)  
    • USAMama
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 2:34pm

      While I don’t think the people holding the yearbooks should be charged with child porn, the picture is disturbing. If I saw that in my kids yearbook I would not be happy. They do not appear to be having sex, but there is definitely inappropriate touching, and it’s obvious.

      Having said that, who the he** let‘s they’re 15 yr old daughter wear that SHORT dress to the prom?!? My goodness you can see her underwear!!!!

      Report Post » USAMama  
    • boxy
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 3:27pm

      The country reflects us as individuals. Polls show that 46% didn’t think Weiner should resign. And this is surprising? Please, we are going downhill fast and the responsible minority that is left won’t be able to hold their weight anymore.

      Report Post »  
    • NRAmedic23
      Posted on June 19, 2011 at 5:05pm

      My school took orders only for yearbooks. This way, they didn’t make too many. It is quite simple, return the yearbook or you don’t get your diploma.

      Report Post »  
    • Cause4Liberty
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 12:26am

      16 & Pregnant is a show on MTV… That channel has become a monster whichs destroys values and morals of young people… Trust that, the media is dumbing down the human race and brainwashing the masses subconsciously….

      Report Post » Cause4Liberty  
    • EP46
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 8:29am

      If this pix is deemed ‘child porno’ then anyone who looks at it on their computer is in TROUBLE !!!

      Report Post »  
    • Longshot35
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 4:46am

      Graduated in ‘99. At the two senior proms I went to people were practically having intercourse on the dance floor. That this activity was captured is not surprising. In fact what is surprising is that they found a picture that clean. Or maybe I grew in an exceptionally morally vacant area.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love