Quote Originally Posted by emmieslost View Post
i had to read it about seven times, but it says she showed people pictures of her and her boyfriend having sex with her sixteen year old daughter.

so, regardless of the age of consent, why were there not some insect charges? i would still think that that constitutes rape, since she is the child's mother. or, it is just written wrong and that isn't what they intended to suggest? i don't know... even if the age of consent is 16 wouldn't photographs still be considered child porn?

this is fucking gross. way to fuck up your kids, lady. ugh.
It wouldn't be child porn because it was a picture of the mom and the mom's boyfriend. Not the mom and the daughter's boyfriend.