Since when are Snapshots of Babies Kiddie Porn?

The Dallas Morning News Reported: “The service was fast, the judgments even hastier. Never did Jacqueline Mercado imagine that four rolls of film dropped off at an Eckerd Drugs one-hour photo lab near her home would turn her life inside out, threaten to send her to jail and prompt the state to take away her kids.”

The story details how one family’s snapshots at bathtime and while breastfeeding led to a felony porn charge.

“To Richardson police, who arrived at the store that afternoon and apparently made up their minds from the content of the pictures alone, this was nothing short of a felony case of child pornography. ‘We thought they contained sexuality,’ says Sergeant Danny Martin, a Richardson police spokesman, explaining why two Richardson police detectives began pursuing a criminal case. ‘If you saw the photos, you’d know what I mean.’

“The couple’s lawyer says, ‘These aren’t pictures that were peddled on the open market. This wasn’t on someone’s website. This is just a mother who took a roll of film and left it off at Eckerd’s. The state used them to arrest her, indict her for a felony and take away her kids.'”

The charges were dropped, but the couple’s kids are still under state control.

This is, honestly, one of the most idiotic things I’ve heard. Everybody takes pictures of their baby and kids, and many times, they’re naked. Makes me want to go set fire to all the pictures I have of my daughter as a baby, in case they could be used against me for a felony court case. Not only that, but the mom still can’t see her kids.

Link from Al’s Morning Meeting.


I for one am outraged at this article.
“but in this instance the system worked.”
how the f— has the system worked?
be carefull when you take photos of your kids, or get a damn digital camera so you dont have physical photos to put in an album or the police harassing you.
i was just taked to some friends on a board and he said he was in New York City taking photos of the skyline and the city and police came up to him and made him stop taking photos.
total bull s—.

Eric Nordstrom says:

I think that pictures of children in the bath are a wonderful part of growing up, and haveing memories of the childhood fun in the bath are perfectly fine. I live in Canada and I used to take lots of pictures of my nieces and nephews together in the bath, it’s all astigmatism. I for one am outraged that the mother cannot have her children at home. God made us without clothes and in his eyes we go to heaven without clothes!

Tim Natcher says:

What is the age that nude children is considered kiddie porn? 5,6,10? I don’t think anyone can draw a line in the sand for that one. The fact is these children didn’t have a choice to be photograped naked and be seen by Bill the store clerck who developed them. Thats a total invasion of the childs rights. Sure he/she doesn’t know that now, but does that make it right? If they knew that their nudity is something to be kept private for only those that they want to share it with, would they have really concented?

gary rainey says:

I think any thing under 18 years old and to revealing should not be allowed no apseptions!!!!!!!

Anonymous says:

unfortunatly, the law is on the side of the Eckerd tech, and the tech themself could be prosecuted if anyone looking at the pictures belived they were pornographic. There are letters and numbers on the back of the prints which name the store that proscessed the prints, and an order number which provides a rough time frame for who printed them

Heard about this story from the referenced website that discusses giving a legal definition to what “porn” is about based on Biblical study (& the study gives a HUGE amount of latitude – way more than the Eckerd Nazi’s did. What a bunch of idiots!
Of course the article above exposes child Protective Services for the fraud that it is too!

stewy says:

Come off it! If this lady was a real pornographer she’s be using a digital camera and selling jpegs online