A 13-year-old girl at a Louisiana middle school got into a fight with classmates who were sharing AI-generated nude images of her
The girls begged for help, first from a school guidance counselor and then from a sheriff’s deputy assigned to their school. But the images were shared on Snapchat, an app that deletes messages seconds after they’re viewed, and the adults couldn’t find them. The principal had doubts they even existed.
Among the kids, the pictures were still spreading. When the 13-year-old girl stepped onto the Lafourche Parish school bus at the end of the day, a classmate was showing one of them to a friend.
“That’s when I got angry,” the eighth grader recalled at her discipline hearing.
Fed up, she attacked a boy on the bus, inviting others to join her. She was kicked out of Sixth Ward Middle School for more than 10 weeks and sent to an alternative school. She said the boy whom she and her friends suspected of creating the images wasn’t sent to that alternative school with her. The 13-year-old girl’s attorneys allege he avoided school discipline altogether.
So AI images of underaged nude girls being reported to police does not warrant any form of investigation?
And AI generation vendors get a free pass for generating child porn
They absolutely should not.
That would affect the economy, and profits, which as we know are much more important than morals, so unfortunately, we must allow it.
The Trump Administration is trying to make preventing this illegal.
Easy answer, we make unflattering AI porn of Ivanka. Make it impossible for her dad to enjoy.
He’ll insist on being added to the text chain.
I fear you’re underestimating his depravity.
Must be a majority republican police department.
It’s Louisiana, what do you think?
The article states that the police investigated but found nothing. The kids knew how to hide/erase the evidence.
Are we really surprised, though? Police are about as effective at digital sleuthing as they are at de-escalation.
The article later states that they continued investigating, and found ten people (eight girls and two adults) who were targeted with multiple images. They charged two boys with creating and distributing the images.
It’s easy to jump on the ACAB bandwagon, but real in-depth investigation takes time. Time for things like court subpoenas and warrants, to compel companies like Snapchat to turn over message and image histories (which they do save, contrary to popular belief). The school stopped investigating once they discovered the kids were using Snapchat (which automatically hides message history) but police continued investigating and got ahold of the offending messages and images.
That being said, only charging the two kids isn’t really enough. They should charge every kid who received the images and forwarded them. Receiving the images by itself shouldn’t be punished, because you can’t control what other people spontaneously send you… But if they forwarded the images to others, they distributed child porn.
At the end of the day, these are children, there is no punishment meaningful that ends with just these boys punished. Justice would be finding the source of who created these images. I’m honestly highly doubtful it was these kids alone. This really should bring into suspect any adult in the life of these boys. An investigation that stops at punishing children for child sexual abuse material is not at all a thorough investigation.
It’s possible these boys were able to generate these images on their own (meaning not with help from anyone in their real life interactions). But, even if that was the case, the investigation should not stop there.
Behold
your child pornography/child sexual abuse material. These stick figures are definitely underage in someone’s imagination.
What is the penalty?
There’s absolutely a legal distinction between a drawing or other depiction versus a deepfake based on a person’s likeness.
I don’t get it. Are you saying the victim’s age is imaginary? Or are you lashing out because you live in fear that you’ll go prison if anyone ever opens your phone?
This isn’t any different than busting someone for selling fake drugs, which is an actual crime. Even if the bodies are AI generated, they’re still attaching the faces of real girls to them and then distributing them amongst their peer group. The fact that you want to make your stand on this specific situation says a lot about you.
Seems like vacuous bullshit. At least there, a fraud is technically committed.
A real face is there in someone’s imagination. And it’s distributed to you. Are you going to excuse lesser skill?
So, again, what’s the penalty?
The stand against sensational irrationality is always a good cause.
How so? Is there not fraud committed in this case as well?
We’re not talking about someone’s imagination or stick figures, but an actual digital image depicting a nude human body with the faces of real children. What skill are you referring to and how is this “skill level” relevant to the argument?
Is that what you’re doing? Your comments are devoid of reasoning, logic, or nuance and just relies on a cartoon picture to do all the talking all while you claim everyone who disagrees with you is “showing a lack of thought or intelligence” and being irrational. You’ve done the equivalent of walking into a crowded room, farting, and walking away thinking “heh, heh, I showed those morons.”
Was there a transaction?
That is “an actual digital image depicting a nude human body with the faces of real children”. Both digital images, both depictions of nude human bodies with faces, both faces of real children as far as some viewer is concerned. Where’s your objective legal standard?
You’re just going to let people commit purported crimes with impunity due to weaker skill in synthesizing the images they’re sharing? Seems unjust.
That’s you. You lack an argument to draw a valid legal distinction & are just riding sensationalism. You were given a counterexample & have yet to adequately address it. It’s bankrupt.
Its literally none of those things apart from being digital. The fact that you have to dance around including the word “imagination” for your scenario to be even remotely equivalent gives away how weak your argument is.
Good one
Oh, so now it’s about legality and not “vacuous bullshit” or making a “stand against vapid irrationality?” The law isn’t rigid and immutable. It changes all the time. There weren’t any laws about drunk driving in 1810 either, so having those today must be irrational and lacking intelligence, right? Do you think any of those girls think this is sensationalism? Do you think this is isolated to this one group of kids in this one school?
I’ve addressed your counterexample (BTW thanks for the wiki link. You must not be aware that this term is common knowledge) in literally every single comment, but perhaps your reading comprehension skills are a bit vacuous.
You should have kept reading.
"Ultimately, the weeks-long investigation at the school in Thibodaux, about 45 miles (72 kilometers) southwest of New Orleans, uncovered AI-generated nude images of eight female middle school students and two adults, the district and sheriff’s office said in a joint statement.”
Unless they can pull out their gun and shoot at something or someone … or tackle someone … they aren’t very good at doing anything else.
Literally verbatim what an officer said when we couldn’t get a hold of animal control and he got sent over instead…
Oh, shit! Did they shoot the computer?
I think that one’s okay. It’s not black.
No it doesn’t say that.
Your question was answered in the article but you clearly stopped at either the outrage bait headline or the outrage bait summary.
“Ultimately, the weeks-long investigation at the school in Thibodaux, about 45 miles (72 kilometers) southwest of New Orleans, uncovered AI-generated nude images of eight female middle school students and two adults, the district and sheriff’s office said in a joint statement.”
That was the investigation by the police not the school.
What we’re asking is why the school didn’t investigate given that the police had already been contacted.
I mean, the police are the proper individuals to be investigating csam. The school bringing them in immediately would have been the correct action. School officials aren’t trained to investigate crime.
Perhaps the cops are the proper investigative arm, but the school system had an obligation to assist in that investigation, and not ignore it, then deny it, then cover it up.
The entire leadership of the school should be fired, and the principal should be prosecuted.
Agreed
Because a school can’t compell Snapchat to release “disappeared” images and chat logs. So perhaps in this case it was best left to the police.
It wasn’t left to the police she’d already gone to the police. It sounds from the story like the school did literally nothing at all.
Also you don’t need to compel Snapchat to release the images they’re 13-year-old boys they absolutely have permanent copies on their phones.
How can the school compel the boys to show the permanent copies then? I think you are overestimating the power of the school in this scenario.
Saying there is nothing they can do is the standard cop-out for lazy administrators.
They are minors in school, under the legal supervision of the school. There are LOTS of things a school can do, and courts have been finding mostly on the side of schools for decades.
Without even trying, I can think of a dozen things the school could have done, including banning phones from the suspects until the investigation is over.
But they chose to do nothing, them punish the victim when she defended herself, after the school refused.
Banning phones during the investigation does not give the administration evidence to work with. Even if they took the phones, the school still couldn’t force the students to unlock them. The only way to get the evidence needed was through the police.
Okay, then permanent expulsion.
The school doesn’t even need to do that to effectively squash suspected behavior in the short term.
Maybe they can’t dole out a substantive punishment, but when I was growing up they absolutely would lean on kids for even being suspected of doing something, or even if they hadn’t done it yet, but the administration could see it coming. Sure they might of wasted some time on kids that truly weren’t up to anything, but there generally weren’t actual punishments of consequence on those cases. I’m pretty sure that a few things were prevented entirely, just by the kids being told that the administration sees it coming.
So they should have at least been able to effectively suppress the student body behavior while they worked out the truth.
What? RTFA. 2 boys were charged by the Sheriff’s department. They didn’t face any punishment from the school, but law enforcement definitely investigated.
I mean, law enforcement doesn’t have enough resources to go after people making real CP.
What makes you think they can go after everyone making fake CP with AI?
They do have resources, especially in the US. They do go after real cp and people go to jail on a near daily basis for it.
This too, could have been investigated better, which is kind of the point of the article
Why are you so okay with child pornography? Checking your message history really shows you being completely fine with CP, yet you really have it out for the victim
I think you may have read the wrong article.
No! Are you trying to get the perpetrator hired into Trump’s cabinet?!
Correct. They will not investigate it further than threatening the victims with persecution. The goal is that the victim doesn’t pursue it further.
They don’t know how to properly investigate it, and they are not interested in knowing. The see it as both ‘kids being kids’ and ‘if this gets out it will give our town a bad name’.
I’m glad the kid and her family aren’t letting this go!
Read.The.Whole.Article.
Yes, after the kid had to take matters into her own hands.
She asked for help. The officer said no. She didn’t let it go/escalated the issue as the sexual harassment progressed. Only when forced did they investigate
No they didn’t and if they did that information is not in this article. She went to the Guidance Councilor at 7AM then to the onsite Sheriff’s Deputy after. She texted her father and sister about 2PM. The SD couldn’t immediately find anything but it appears that they didn’t stop looking because 3 weeks later they were charging the boys.
So unless you have another source with a different timeline or more information your originally comment was inaccurate. Sort of like the ragebait headline and the ragebait summary.
You’re simping hard for the police in here. There is no proof that any of the charges would have occurred had people not become outrage. The school definitely need this pressure.
You have a lot of cops in your family because I can’t think of a reason anyone would be such a massive cheerleader for professional thugs without some personaon relationship.