The Rule: A person commits the offense of child pornography when that person films, videotapes, or photographs a child under the age of 18 engaged in sexual conduct with a person, according to Illinois State Law 720 ILCS 5/11-20.1.  Child pornography also includes reproducing images of a child under 18 in a sexual nature on any visual medium including computers.  The person must reasonably know or should have known that the child is under 18.  And the law includes not just sex, but any form of “lewd touching” and other sexual acts. 

In R. Kelly’s situation he was being accused of possessing a videotape that depicted him having sex with his goddaughter, when she was between the ages of 13-14.  R. Kelly’s defense attorneys claimed that the tape was doctored to extort money from Kelly.  They also claimed the man on the tape was not R. Kelly and that the girl was not his under aged goddaughter.  R. Kelly’s goddaughter told the prosecutors that she was not the girl on the videotape.  However, she refused to testify at trial.  Prosecutors did have a witness who testified that she had three-way sex with Kelly and his goddaughter on a basketball court, which R. Kelly also taped.

In the end, however, the jury found R. Kelly not guilty on all charges.  The jury did not believe the defense’s claims that the tape was doctored, and most of them believed R. Kelly was the man on the tape.  But the jury members did not believe “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the girl on the videotape was R. Kelly’s goddaughter.  Therefore, although the prosecution proved that R. Kelly had engaged in a sexual act with the woman on videotape, they could not prove the girl was under 18, or that R. Kelly should have known she was under 18.

Do you think the jury was right?  Should R. Kelly’s goddaughter have to testify?  Illinois law states that lack of knowledge that a person was under 18 is an affirmative defense, therefore, the defendant must show he did not know the girl was under 18.  However, the prosecution must first prove that the girl actually was under 18 years old, which they did not in this case.   

What to take away: It’s probably a good idea to refrain from all pictures that are of a sexual nature, particularly if they are with an under aged person.  In other Illinois cases, people have been charged with child pornography for pictures of under aged girls with only their breasts exposed in a swimming pool.  Most other states have child pornography rules that are similar to those in Illinois, so the bottom line is don’t take sexual pictures of under aged people.  This applies even if you’re under 18 and the pictures are of yourself.

For R. Kelly, although he was ultimately not convicted, his image (fair or not) will forever be tarnished by this case.  The case lasted over six years and a lot of people have developed bad feelings about him, which has also probably cost him a lot of money.  So think before you make spontaneous decisions like taking sexual pictures and putting them on MySpace, your Ipods or cell phones.  They could haunt you for a long time in a lot of different ways.