Wired picks up on the Christopher Handley story and adds some new details. According to the article, the package intercepted by customs officials included seven manga with images of minors having sex, and “one book included depictions of bestiality, according to stipulations in Handley’s plea deal.” Manga expert Frenchy Lunning said the books were Lolicon, so we aren’t talking about isolated images within a single book here, we’re talking about entire volumes.
Context is everything in this case, and I think manga readers will breathe a sigh of relief when they learn that the prosecution relies on books that were entirely loli, rather than isolated images in some other type of manga, although I’m not sure legally it should make a difference, because the charges rest on individual images.
Equally important to the perception of the case is the fact that Handley didn’t have a lot of dirty books:
“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.”
In other words, he’s not a creepy guy. I understand why his lawyer would argue that, but I’m not sure why the content of the other books in his collection would affect the legality of the drawings in question. Either a drawing is obscene or it isn’t, regardless of what’s around it. Furthermore, the Wired article leads with this:
Handley’s guilty plea makes him the first to be convicted under that law for possessing cartoon art, without any evidence that he also collected or viewed genuine child pornography.
Again, this makes him more sympathetic but shouldn’t affect the central question of whether the state can outlaw possession of a drawn image.
Meanwhile, Matt Thorn clarifies that he is not under a formal gag order but removed his correspondence on the case from his blog as a courtesy to the parties involved. He is also not so clear about what exactly Handley is being prosecuted for, but he clarifies the central issue rather nicely:
But regardless of whether the manga in question are the kind of thing any manga collecter would have on her shelf or are explicitly pornographic, as long as the material passes the Miller Test (as even the most explicit legal pornography evidently does), the material should be protected by the First Amendment.
The Wired article also has a link to Handley’s plea bargain agreement. I’m hoping a lawyer or two will review this and say whether he got a good deal or no. My impression of the document was that Handley was getting shafted royally. It appears that Handley is at the complete mercy of the prosecuting attorney. It looks like Handley gave up a ton and the DA in return gave up an ounce.
Also I can’t help but think this whole thing seems like a witch hunt. Handley is going to be used by cops, politicians, and DA as the poster child for obscenity. He’s a pawn at the mercy of someone’s career ambitions.
[...] is the best source for the latest news. [...]
This whole focus on context is ridiculous. This is a valid thing to point out. It’s like “oh, as long as we paint him normal then people will not think he’s a creep…”
A creep is somebody who creeps people out. Or, more accurately, is probably somebody who exists and other people get themselves creeped out by being antisocial towards an outcast.
Even if this guy connected nothing but pig-on-loli madness, I really don’t think it should make a difference, because you’re convicting based on the content, not on the thought.
But this plea just demonstrates that the lawyers get it: this IS about character. The entire basis of convicting people for media is thoughtcrime, so they wanted to convince the jury that he’s not a thoughtcriminal. Obviously they still lacked enough confidence to go through with it.
The major problem isn’t that he couldn’t get off, but moreso that there is a law that he needs to try to evade in the first place. This obscenity law and all its equivilents in other countries simply should not exist. The very idea that something is considered criminal until proven artistic, isn’t that like guilty until proven innocent?
The big problem with going after consumers is they’re not in a position to defend the art. In this case, he didn’t even get a chance to read it. He probably just liked the artist’s work and wanted to give him a shot.
If they are going to go after ANYONE then it should be the creators themself. They are in the best position to defend the artistic merit of their work, and they should go over to Japan and confront them on their own turf.
Instead, they go after fans, and overseas at that, cowardice. A total waste of resources while in the meanwhile more and more real children go missing.