Bath Time Photos Prompt Child *advertiser censored* Allegations

sniperacer

Former Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
581
Reaction score
3
Here's an interesting one. I admit, I have my baby's pictures lying naked on their tummy.

"For A.J. and Lisa Demaree, the photos they snapped of their young daughters were innocent and sweet.

But after a photo developer at Wal-Mart thought otherwise, the Demarees found themselves in a yearlong battle to prove they were not child pornographers. "

Full story at: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/arizona-couple-suing-bathtime-photos-prompt-wal-mart/story?id=8624533

Discuss....
 
Oh my gosh, I have tons of picture of my little one in the tub and sink. I even have a video of her her splashing around in the tub. It's called capturing the happy moments. Proffessional photagraphers take naked baby pics all the time. It's cute not sexual! Not like they are giving a close up of the private parts!
 
I agree with Dani. If someone actually took the time to investigate this for an entire year first, they wasted resources and missed the ball.
 
If the photo on page 2 of the article is representative of the types of photos this Mom and Dad took, then it boggles my mind that anyone could think *advertiser censored*. Even the photo the mom mentions that has the three little girls hugging each other right after their bath--not dressed yet--can't possibly suggest *advertiser censored* to a reasonable person.

It is completely insane that a Walmart employee would think such photos are sexual in nature, completely insane that it took LE a YEAR to determine this! That it actually had to be decided by a judge! That those little girls were removed from their home with no proof of abuse at all.....completely insane that the parents had to register as sex offenders for a time.

These parents deserve a HUGE apology on the parts of Walmart, LE and Children's Services.
 
I have pics of my toddler in the tub, but I make sure his privates are covered by a washcloth or suds, just to make sure. If I can see anything when I look later, I delete them. I'm not worried about being labelled a "child pornographer," but I am worried he'll be embarrassed by them when he grows up, so I don't keep any photo that shows any frontal nudity other than chest... though I do have one of his little bum from one day that he ran away from me after refusing to be diapered. I needed at least one for his wedding collage when he grows up. :)
 
This reminds me of a movie I saw on Lifetime years ago. It was based on a true story. A grandmother had taken pictures of her very young grandchildren (or maybe just one granchild) when they were naked, I believe it was either in the bathtub or right when they got out of the bathtub.
The person who deveoped the role of film contacted authorities. It's been so long since I've seen the movie, so I forget a lot of the details. I believe she was arrested and couldn't see her grandchildren for a long time. I know it was a long battle. Very heartbreaking. I can't remember if the case went to trial, but I know in the end she was cleared of everything. I just can't imagine having to go through something like this.
 
I agree with ya'all. So far the responses have been unanimous.

I was just curous as to how LE could charge them to the point the parents had to register as sex offenders AND CPS took their children away for a month. Was there not one resonable person among them? Or is there more to this we don't know (like they crossed some "what is appropriate" line)?

I guess the moral of the story is: go digital!
 
Wow, if the offending pictures were the ones they showed, I really don't see what the big deal was. I have pics of all four of my boys and my nieces and nephew at bathtime. There are also plenty of pics of my kids naked as babies because that is how I potty trained all of them. I really feel sorry for these parents, but I guess if the shoe was on the other foot and they were actually into kiddie *advertiser censored* we would be yelling, "why didn't anyone investigate this?!"
 
Wow, if the offending pictures were the ones they showed, I really don't see what the big deal was. I have pics of all four of my boys and my nieces and nephew at bathtime. There are also plenty of pics of my kids naked as babies because that is how I potty trained all of them. I really feel sorry for these parents, but I guess if the shoe was on the other foot and they were actually into kiddie *advertiser censored* we would be yelling, "why didn't anyone investigate this?!"

Agree with your 'both sides of the coin' comment.

The links below go to some of the photos taken by a photographer noted for taking sleeping baby photos. There was a time when I'd of looked at them and my only thought be 'how precious'.....now I wonder why any parent would allow the a photo of their semi-exposed naked infant to be placed on the Internet.

And, in relation to this thread's story, wonder why/if the linked photos would not also be considered questionable.
http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10787277

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10716110

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10716115

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10716123

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10748703

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10748708


(mods...please delete links if thought to be inappropriate for comparison)
 
Agree with your 'both sides of the coin' comment.

The links below go to some of the photos taken by a photographer noted for taking sleeping baby photos. There was a time when I'd of looked at them and my only thought be 'how precious'.....now I wonder why any parent would allow the a photo of their semi-exposed naked infant to be placed on the Internet.

And, in relation to this thread's story, wonder why/if the linked photos would not also be considered questionable.
http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10787277

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10716110


http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10716115

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10716123

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10748703

http://my.opera.com/brokenheartvn/albums/showpic.dml?album=790622&picture=10748708


(mods...please delete links if thought to be inappropriate for comparison)

I think that every pic you posted is precious works of art! If I am a bad person then maybe I should go to jail because if it weren't for my baby hating being naked as a newborn, I definately would have pictures like this done. I have always loved these pics. I too saw a story on Lifetime, except it was a father who took a video of son running away from him after a bath. I can't remember much details on it, but I believe Brian Austin Green starred in it!
 
I actually have a co-worker who seems to think it's odd to take these types of photos. Never took pictures of their son. Can't imagine taking a shot without a diaper. He thinks CPS taking the kids was disproportionate to their actions, but it really surprised me that people out there might really think this is inappropriate.

I mean, I never gave it a thought. There are plenty of nekkid pictures of me. When I was four, holding a broom. When I was two, with my butt sticking up in the air during a nap. Bath photos, etc.

I've taken bath pictures of my sons, and once my oldest (he was like eighteen months) was trying to bounce up and down on the little exercise trampoline after a bath. I mean, it was really cute. Or so it seemed to me. It's not like I was going to post it on Facebook or anything. There wasn't any inappropriate intent there.

Anyway, this co-worker feels like Walmart can't take chances and that if he was a photolab guy, he'd report images like that too. I can kinda see what he's saying, but LE should have dismissed them instead of putting this family through the trauma.

It's awful, and has me a bit paranoid. I think I might have my sister develop any "naughty" photos like my newborn's inevitable first bath pics.
 
I was looking at all my pictures from the last 18 years a few weeks ago,and I have tons babys first bath pictures ,the weird rash all over,(reaction to something yet identified) toddlers playing in the pool. etc.. . No one ever gave me grief about any picture. One time My ex husband pulled his ugmm.. out as I was taking his picture. (no kids home) Anyway a few weeks go by an my sister borrows My camra to take the kids to the park ,and drops the camra off at a 1 hour photo place where one of our friends wife worked, they chat and she leaves . A few hours later she sends another friend of ours to pick up the photos, needless to say I had rather they not printed that photo, as the 3 degrees of separtion working at it best Everyone who knew us heard that wifes photo story, and my sister and friend have never let me live that down.. it wasnt a sexual photo.. But it was revealing. My sister went to Woodstocks return in the 90's and they took photos of the nakid mud people and the rain dancers. Walmart took her negitives and refused to give them back. She was Hot ,I dont think that was even legal. I dont shop at walmart because of that.
 
I saw yet another Lifetime movie where a divorced woman had a photographer friend (old friend, female) over, and I think she took photos of both of their children, or maybe just the other woman's, after their bath. I think there was one with the woman holding her child and the woman had on only a bra. Hello? That's reality in homes. Sometimes you take off your shirt to bathe a young child, esp. this woman had all girls. I think it was based on a true story.

I wish I had a video of my son after his bath. He LOVES the way he feels after his bath running around naked and likes to announce it. He's so happy. It's such a shame that pornographers make us worry about capturing such a happy, free moment.

I'll mention here one of the books found at Michael Jackson's home, which was a book of photos taken of the 1963 film Lord of the Flies. It was titled The Boy: A Photographic Essay. (I'll just let you all search the title since I can't find a page for it.) It has photos of the boys, some of which are nude, including the cover of the book. It really is in the eye of the beholder.
 
wow, my parents were repressed & even they took nekkid pics of us lol

there's nothing cuter than a little baby bum running around while you race after them with a diaper before they pee on the floor!

it's unfortunate that we live in a society that has to be paranoid & suspicious b/c there's so many pervs out there but I don't think we should slam the Walmart worker or LE yet, esp. since we've only seen four of the photos

the mother seems normal to me though, with the expected facial expressions of worry etc.
 
wow, my parents were repressed & even they took nekkid pics of us lol

there's nothing cuter than a little baby bum running around while you race after them with a diaper before they pee on the floor!

it's unfortunate that we live in a society that has to be paranoid & suspicious b/c there's so many pervs out there but I don't think we should slam the Walmart worker or LE yet, esp. since we've only seen four of the photos

the mother seems normal to me though, with the expected facial expressions of worry etc.

Yeah - no nekkid pics of us, either. Only photos were formal or on holidays, etc.
 
I think there is more to this story.
'Dr Laura' had a commentary on this story on her show today. According to her, the pics everyone is seeing on the news articles weren't the ones that the Walmart people saw as objectionable. According to her- and this is not confirmed- some of them were with the children's privates exposed and posing provocatively.
Makes you wonder- can't they afford a digital camera?
Anyone else hear this?
 
I think there is more to this story.
'Dr Laura' had a commentary on this story on her show today. According to her, the pics everyone is seeing on the news articles weren't the ones that the Walmart people saw as objectionable. According to her- and this is not confirmed- some of them were with the children's privates exposed and posing provocatively.
Makes you wonder- can't they afford a digital camera?
Anyone else hear this?

I have a digital camera but photo paper and ink is expensive, so I still upload to walmart cause it's cheaper.
 
I think there is more to this story.
'Dr Laura' had a commentary on this story on her show today. According to her, the pics everyone is seeing on the news articles weren't the ones that the Walmart people saw as objectionable. According to her- and this is not confirmed- some of them were with the children's privates exposed and posing provocatively.
Makes you wonder- can't they afford a digital camera?
Anyone else hear this?

No, and if "Dr." Laura doesn't know this is a fact, she better watch it, she'll be the next one sued. I kinda doubt this account from her.

I also print all my pics at Walmart & am on my third digital camera.

This whole story is utterly disturbing to me. I can understand Walwart turning the pictures in to be safe, but the CPS people should know better.
 
I did think it odd that Dr Laura said this stuff today. I can tell you this- I hope these people are on real firm ground. If they sue Walmart they better not have anything hinky in their closet because it's gonna come out.
Am not one of Dr L's camp followers but sometimes find her interesting.
 
The Mother lost her teaching job for a YEAR and they are out 75K in legal fees, its ridiculous. saw this on the news yesterday.
No, after this I dont think anyparent should take cute neekid baby/toddler pics of their kids, wow you see how nutso some people get about it.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
830
Total visitors
899

Forum statistics

Threads
589,923
Messages
17,927,720
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top