As recently reported by the Associated Press, the mayor of Cambridge, Maryland has been arrested and charged with posting revenge porn online. The mayor is accused of posting nude photos of a woman with whom he was in a romantic relationship. According to the report, he also posted her name, birthdate and captioned the nude photos with racial slurs and sexually explicit language.
The case is a good reminder that revenge porn, better termed as “nonconsensual pornography,” is illegal. Victims can often sue to recover civil money damages and those posting nonconsensual pornography can go to jail. As reported, in the case of the Maryland mayor, if convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of two years’ incarceration and a $5,000 fine for EACH count. The mayor was charged with 50 counts of distributing nonconsensual pornography. Being the victim of nonconsensual pornography can be devastating since intimate images can end up all over the internet including pornography sites and will, likely, be on the internet forever.
The case is also a reminder that perpetrators will not get away with posting nonconsensual pornography. The mayor tried to use different Reddit accounts to mask and disguise his identity. But as noted in the report, law enforcement officials were able to track him down through use of his IP address that linked to his internet service at his home.
The vast majority of US states and the District of Columbia have laws punishing the non-consensual distribution of intimate and sexually explicit images or videos. Nonconsensual pornography often involves a former romantic partner, but the laws apply to any nonconsensual distribution of graphic images. The statutes can be worded differently, but in general, the statutes prohibit dissemination of graphic images/video where the dissemination is done knowingly, without consent and for the purpose of harming the victim. The Maryland statute, for example, states that:
“A person may not knowingly distribute a visual representation of another identifiable person that displays the other person with his or her intimate parts exposed or while engaged in an act of sexual activity:
- with the intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce the other person;
- (i) under circumstances in which the person knew that the other person did not consent to the distribution; or (ii) with reckless disregard as to whether the person consented to the distribution; and
- under circumstances in which the other person had a reasonable expectation that the image would remain private.”
See MD Crim. Code, § 3-809(c).
Under most statutes, it is no defense to criminal charges or to civil liability that, originally, the victim consented to the taking of the images or video.
As noted, many statutes also permit victims to sue for money damages. That is, victims have what is called a “private right of action” to sue the perpetrator. Damages can be recovered for damage to reputation and some statutes allow for recovery of compensation for intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and unauthorized use of likeness.
Contact Revision Legal If you have been the victim of nonconsensual pornography and you need legal help bringing the perpetrator to justice and trying to get the images/video removed from online, contact Revision Legal at 231-714-0100.
