- NEW!
by lonelydragon on September 19th, 2009
If taking bath time photos of one's child is considered sexual abuse, then I suspect that most American parents would be in jail. I guess that means that now we can all report Mum and Dad to the police for taking embarrassing photos of us as kids. Unless the photos had the children posing in a seductive manner, then I don't see any reason to believe that the parents had any ill intentions.
by Ec-nal Licensed Bootie Inspector on September 19th, 2009
We live more and more in a 'police state' yo...
by RC loves ice cream on September 18th, 2009
I wouldn't be surprised if Walmart have a blanket policy that their staff should report any pictures of naked children and then let the authorities decide whether it's a case of abuse.
The authorities on the other hand should have known better. Of course we're talking about the same kind of authorities who arrested and charged a 17yo girl for child pornography... for taking pics of herself to give her bf.
by Thriftymaid on September 18th, 2009
I only heard this on the news; haven't read anything. But what I understood was that the pictures were just kids in a bathtub. What was the state going to prosecute for? These people will be wealthy!!! Their kids were taken away from them for a month.
by Fiddle Playing Creole Bastard on September 22nd, 2009
That's ridiculous. Sure, it is very important to be vigilant when it comes to child pornography, but there is a difference between pictures of your own kid taking a bath and child porn. There are tons of pictures of me naked when I was a little kid, and I wouldn't call any of that porn.
by ConservativelyLiberal on September 19th, 2009
Good for Walmart. I'd rather they report a thousand mistakes than not report a single case of abuse. The very fact that the state prosecuted means there's more to the pictures and OTHER history, than is public knowledge.
by norm on September 19th, 2009
I would tend to think taking pictures of little ones in the bathtub should not be classified as child porn unless they were broadcast on the net.
Pictures of yourself when you were a little kid can bring fond remberances of yourself in your adult years.
I would suggest the parents get a digital camera, and download the pictures to their computer.
Disclaimer: I'm not an advocate of child abuse or child porn, but if the pictures are taken with a bit of discretion I don't understand how they would be harmful.
by George Dufferin on September 19th, 2009
If I were the lowliest clerk in the store or at the lab I would have known enough not to pass those pics to the "authorities."
Holy cow, this isn't an authoritarian dictatorship and citizens are still allowed to make judgements. This isn't a police state.
Don't be afraid to make decisions and to take responcibility for your own actions.
by teresa on September 18th, 2009
my brother took a pic of his son in the tub and took the pics to another company and he got investigated as well but no charges were filed we were in disbelief but after all so much child molestation does go on and it was justified by the company to have it investigated I would rather they be aware of something like this rather than see a child be truly hurt because a child in our family was molested and after seeing what this child endured I have no problem seeing the fact that this is taken seriously by Walmart or any other corporation
by PhilippeRococo on September 18th, 2009
I have a few pictures of my darlings in the buff. Two were taken in our garden when they played under the sprinkler. Comeand arrest me!
by centrator on September 18th, 2009
walmart was invading the privacy of a customer. walmart was not using its head. Idiots. A child in a bathtub. The couple will sue and will win. I hope millions. All they need is the right lawyer. walmart will put up its high priced lawyers and will hold this couple off years, but in the end if they and their lawyer hang on they'll win.
Disgusting!
by HoboJoe on September 18th, 2009
I don't think any laws were broken on either side. It is a sign of the times. Wal-Mart was just being careful. The couple has no case.
by Yarnlady is happy every day on September 22nd, 2009
I saw the pictures on the news, and the children are NOT naked, but rather are wrapped in fluffy towels. Wal-Mart and the child protective services were way, way out of line here.
I hope the parents are able to get just compensation for this horrible injustice of being separated from their children for an entire month on this ludicrous charge.
by Spirit of the Nomad on September 22nd, 2009
It seems that Wal Mart photo centers would be used to parents taking naked pictures of their children (Almost every parent I know has at least one naked picture of their children) the fact that they were reported makes me think they may have been a bit overzealous in photographing the children or maybe that they took pictures of the children in strange poses.
by Starmaster on September 19th, 2009
Pictures and videos of kids taking baths have been very common through years and years in baby shampoo, soaps and bathtub kiddie toys, like those cute yellow ducks. Maybe the Johnson and Johnson guys should also be arrested for promoting "nudity" of minors. This is ridiculous.
by Cubaneyes on September 23rd, 2009
Oh come off it. Everyone who has an ounce of common sense understands that the people who turned in these photos, from the walmart employees, to the cops, to the judges, to social services, were nutty and guilty of impaired judgment.
-
It's not walmart's "job" to spy on folks.
-
And if they decide to take on that job then they must be held responsible for the actions.
-
Money across the table! Lots of it, I hope.
by MasterS on September 22nd, 2009
I just seen this on tv a bit ago, Walmart was not obligated to report them, but they did anyway.
This is a sad story and it should have never went as far as it did, granted i didnt see all the pictures, but a judge said they were fine.
Should the state have prosecuted no i dont think so, the photos were supposedly innocent, but once again i didnt see all of them.
by QEDqed on September 22nd, 2009
Walmart at it's craziest.
by MaryWebb on September 19th, 2009
Walmart and the like care only about appearances. They don't care about the average customer. They screw their suppliers. So here it was just CYA...
by norm on September 28th, 2009
I think there have been a lot of good answers posted here. I believe my parents took pictures of me when I was a little kid that nowadays may be considered questionable; no malice intended, just something they wanted as keepsakes of when I was an innocent child. I'm now a not so innocent adult.
As I stated before, pictures of little kids in the bath tub may be innocent and just someting the parents treasure as their children grow. I haven't seen the pictures, but if they were of two or three year olds sitting in a bathtub semi covered by suds I fail to see how they could be considered porn. Baby food companies use similar shots of kids frequently.
If there was no mal-intent, Wal Mart, the cops, and the prosecutor should receive a very hard rap on the knuckles.
by EmptyWallet on September 28th, 2009
Well, recalling pics from my own family I once was in a snap shot taking a dump while reading the comice (I was 3)
A couple of the pics were as chicldren 4-6 in bath tub.
It really depends on how this clerk was taught/trained/family.
Now if I saw them and knowing my past, I would have smiled and ignored them. But you get these 18 year olds and they have yet to understand the major differences.
Plus, rules are such if the management had found out later, the clerk could have been fired also..So it's CYA in all cases now.
sad that ti's so.
by mcltdcrew on October 15th, 2009
This just shows how STUPID people can be... R u freaking kidding me this is the first i heard about this.. Walmart should be SUED for turning them in omg if this does not show how messed up our system is i dont no what will!
by dumdum on September 19th, 2009
Have not seen the pictures, are not aware of any other details that may be vital for an informed opinion.
Shortly, cameras will decide who gets a ticket and who doesn't. If the sign says 55, at what speed should the camera spit out a ticket?
by excon on November 30th, 2011
| 2 people like this
Should cussing be illegal for middle school students, high school students, and college students in the United States?
by cp10225 on December 6th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
where do i go in the uk if i want to make a complaint about a service because ive been ripped of and have evidence of it?
by oscareo on January 3rd, 2012
| 1 person likes this
Is it legal to park your own helicopter in your backyard?
by shaungawler on December 29th, 2011
| 3 people like this
Help! My roommate is harbouring a criminal!
by redirie on November 14th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading An Arizona couple accused of sexual abuse after taking bath-time photos of their children and then trying to have them developed at Walmart are suing the state and the retail giant. Should Walmart have reported them? Should the state have prosecuted?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments