Barton: Capitol Police investigating possible crime against me. Seems Barton is playing

[riversedge]

the victim card now.






https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/22/joe-barton-investigation-scandal-nudity-259597?lo=ap_a1





Barton: Capitol Police investigating possible crime against me

By POLITICO STAFF

11/22/2017 11:38 PM EST

Texas Rep. Joe Barton, having already apologized over a nude picture of him circulating online, said later Wednesday that the Capitol Police is investigating a potential crime against him involving explicit materials.

“Today, the Capitol Police reached out to me and offered to launch an investigation and I have accepted," the longtime Republican congressman said in a statement later Wednesday.

Barton's statement followed a report in the Washington Post. A woman told the Post she had a recording of a 2015 conversation in which he threatened to report her to the Capitol Police to protect himself after their relationship had ended. She also told the newspaper that she had received explicit material from the congressman during a relationship that lasted several years.

In the Post article, Barton is quoted as saying to her: "I will be completely straight with you. I am ready if I have to, I don’t want to, but I should take all this crap to the Capitol Hill Police and have them launch an investigation."

The Post said the woman spoke on the condition of anonymity.

In response, Barton said: "The Dallas Morning News has identified a potential crime against me and the transcript referenced in the Washington Post may be evidence."........................

Link to tweet

[Sneederbunk]

1. That's it. That's the ticket. He is a victim.

[msongs]

2. another anonymous claimant. maybe he is being extorted eh? nt

[jberryhill]

4. Thats what it sounds like

Apparently the “cash reimbursements” for travel ended.

[Loki Liesmith]

3. As far as I can see he is a victim

“Revenge porn” is a crime in Texas.

[LisaL]

5. And some people here totally buying it.

[Grassy Knoll]

6. This Shit Is A Tit For Tat

Un-Fucking Believable

Dems Did It, Cons Dit It, What A Fuckin Shit Show.

[sarah FAILIN]

8. I'm not a lawyer..and I don't play one on tv...

So I really don't get the crime here. If he sent the pics to her, is it a crime to turn them loose? I would think he took the risk and sent it, he doesn't have any rights to them at that point since he gave them up willingly. Stupid thing to do for anyone.

[LisaL]

9. That's my question as well.

If somebody sends you photos/videos, you are then obligated to keep them private? Doesn't sound right. What if you didn't even ask for these photos and videos?

[womanofthehills]

67. It's almost like a Saturday Night Live take on a penis picture

That adds to the whole story. It almost yells "share me."

[tammywammy]

10. In Texas releasing nude photos sent to you without permission of the individual is against the law.

It's revenge porn.

[LisaL]

11. What if said individual send you these photos without you asking for them?

You are now obligated to keep that private? Says who?

[tammywammy]

15. It is a Class A misdemeanor

To publicly post intimate photos of a partner that were sent with the understanding they remain private.

[LisaL]

18. She doesn't admit to publicly posting it.

[tammywammy]

21. She shared it with someone and it's been posted on the internet.

The measure offered by Sen. Sylvia Garcia, D-Houston, would make it a class A misdemeanor for anyone to display such images on the Internet without the consent of the affected person, typically an ex-spouse or ex-partner, who would also have the right to recover monetary damages.

“This bill gets at a very disturbing Internet trend, the posting of nude or sexually explicit images without the consent of the affected person and with the intent to harm,” Garcia said. “In many instances, the images are posted by an ex-partner seeking revenge or to cause harm, and indeed this does cause immediate and irreversible harm.”

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-politics/2015/04/14/texas-senate-passes-bill-to-criminalize-revenge-porn

[LisaL]

22. Actually, we don't know what ended up on the internet.

If this guy was having relationships with multiple women, somehow I doubt she was the only one he send photos to.

[Luz]

45. I say turn them over to the proper law enforcement, not publicly

post them.

[LisaL]

52. I still don't agree with the law, because it puts burden on a receiver of images to

keep the images private, regardless of whether they asked for the images to begin with.

[sarah FAILIN]

12. Only if she was in Texas?

I would assume the phone it was sent to had been stolen and someone found the pics

[LisaL]

13. I don't think this would qualify as revenge porn.

She didn't take the photos or videos, he did.
Then he voluntarily send it to her.
If that's revenge porn, that is a bad law.
Because if I am sitting somewhere minding my own business, and I get such photos and videos, am I now obligated to keep that private, or I am breaking a law? That doesn't make sense.

[sarah FAILIN]

17. Agreed

We should prosecute people for sending that to us

[madville]

14. Revenge porn or nonconsensual pornography is illegal in most states and DC

She admitted to the WaPo writers she had been sharing the pics with other women he had been seeing. Plus she gave them WaPo so they already have a case for distribution without his consent.

[LisaL]

16. So you are claiming the burden is on whoever got those videos (even if they didn't ask for them) is

to keep them private? Seriously? What sense does that make? What if somebody send it to me and I wanted to give that to the police? I now shared it with someone, so I am guilty?

[madville]

19. That's the law in Texas

"A person commits an offense of unlawful disclosure of intimate images if without the effective consent of the depicted person, the person intentionally discloses visual material depicting another person with the person’s intimate parts exposed or engaged in sexual conduct."

[LisaL]

20. Doesn't sound like a good law.

[madville]

23. There are versions of it in 40 states and DC now

Some are misdemeanors, some are felonies. I agree with the laws, revenge porn is very damaging to many women.

[LisaL]

24. Well, I think it's bizarre that I would be required to keep private something sent to me, whether I

wanted it sent to me or not. Under this scenario, even if I am sitting minding my own business, and somebody sends me unwanted images, I am still required to keep those private, otherwise I am breaking a law? How does it make any sense?

[tammywammy]

25. So, imagine you're in a relationship with someone.

The two of you mutually decide to take intimate photos or video. You break up with the other person. They get mad so they distribute the photos or videos online. Do you think that's okay to do, release the photos?

This is what revenge porn laws are working against. The majority of victims are women.

Texas Penal Code Section 21.16

Sec. 21.16. UNLAWFUL DISCLOSURE OR PROMOTION OF INTIMATE VISUAL MATERIAL.
(a) In this section:
(1) “Intimate parts” means the naked genitals, pubic area, anus, buttocks, or female nipple of a person.
(2) “Promote” means to procure, manufacture, issue, sell, give, provide, lend, mail, deliver, transfer, transmit, publish, distribute, circulate, disseminate, present, exhibit, or advertise or to offer or agree to do any of the above.
(3) “Sexual conduct” means sexual contact, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality, masturbation, or sadomasochistic abuse.
(4) “Simulated” means the explicit depiction of sexual conduct that creates the appearance of actual sexual conduct and during which a person engaging in the conduct exhibits any uncovered portion of the breasts, genitals, or buttocks.
(5) “Visual material” means:
(A) any film, photograph, videotape, negative, or slide or any photographic reproduction that contains or incorporates in any manner any film, photograph, videotape, negative, or slide; or
(B) any disk, diskette, or other physical medium that allows an image to be displayed on a computer or other video screen and any image transmitted to a computer or other video screen by telephone line, cable, satellite transmission, or other method.
(b) A person commits an offense if:
(1) without the effective consent of the depicted person, the person intentionally discloses visual material depicting another person with the person’s intimate parts exposed or engaged in sexual conduct;
(2) the visual material was obtained by the person or created under circumstances in which the depicted person had a reasonable expectation that the visual material would remain private;
(3) the disclosure of the visual material causes harm to the depicted person; and
(4) the disclosure of the visual material reveals the identity of the depicted person in any manner, including through:
(A) any accompanying or subsequent information or material related to the visual material; or
(B) information or material provided by a third party in response to the disclosure of the visual material.
(c) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally threatens to disclose, without the consent of the depicted person, visual material depicting another person with the person’s intimate parts exposed or engaged in sexual conduct and the actor makes the threat to obtain a benefit:
(1) in return for not making the disclosure; or
(2) in connection with the threatened disclosure.
(d) A person commits an offense if, knowing the character and content of the visual material, the person promotes visual material described by Subsection (b) on an Internet website or other forum for publication that is owned or operated by the person.
(e) It is not a defense to prosecution under this section that the depicted person:
(1) created or consented to the creation of the visual material; or
(2) voluntarily transmitted the visual material to the actor.
(f) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Subsection (b) or (d) that:
(1) the disclosure or promotion is made in the course of:
(A) lawful and common practices of law enforcement or medical treatment;
(B) reporting unlawful activity; or
(C) a legal proceeding, if the disclosure or promotion is permitted or required by law;
(2) the disclosure or promotion consists of visual material depicting in a public or commercial setting only a person’s voluntary exposure of:
(A) the person’s intimate parts; or
(B) the person engaging in sexual conduct; or
(3) the actor is an interactive computer service, as defined by 47 U.S.C. Section 230, and the disclosure or promotion consists of visual material provided by another person.
(g) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(h) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under another law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section, the other law, or both.

[LisaL]

26. The woman in question claims she didn't want the photos.

Whether it's true or not, I have no idea. But lets assume its true and yet he still sent those to her. Are you saying she was still obligated to keep them private? What kind of law is that?

"He says to me, 'Do you want me to send you a picture of myself?' I said, 'Oh no, no. Please do not do that.' It kind of started there," she said."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/powerpost/congressman-told-woman-he-would-report-her-to-capitol-police-if-she-exposed-his-secret-sex-life/2017/11/22/e3345862-cf10-11e7-a1a3-0d1e45a6de3d_story.html

[tammywammy]

29. I've been sent unsolicited dick pics.

You know what I did? I deleted it immediately and stopped responding to the guy.

[LisaL]

31. So you think when this guy send it to you without even asking, he had a reasonable expectation of

privacy?

[tammywammy]

34. Yes. I don't think they expect the receiver to share the photo or post it on the internet. n/t

[LisaL]

35. Maybe then they shouldn't send it.

I fail to understand why the burden is on the receiver, especially if those photos are unsolicited.

[VermontKevin]

42. I think that expectation is unreasonable. Unsolicited pics are different from

photos sent by mutual consent.

[jberryhill]

44. Yeah, so in response, she flew to Washington, slept with him, carried on for a while,

...and kept the photos the whole time.

That's exactly what people do when they receive unsolicited nude photos. Uh-huh.

[onenote]

49. if she didn't want them, why did she keep them?

Last edited Thu Nov 23, 2017, 10:48 AM - Edit history (2)

And why did she keep seeing him after he sent them to her? Under TX law, the question is whether "the intimate visual material was obtained by the defendant or created under circumstances in which the depicted person had a reasonable expectation that the material would remain private."

We don't know the nature of the back and forth conversations between them that preceded the sending of these images. Yes, she has said, now, that she didn't want them. But the fact she didn't delete them could call into question the credibility of her statement -- and if the texts or emails between them still exist, they would be pretty strong evidence as to whether it was reasonable for Barton to think the communications between them would remain private.

[LisaL]

61. That law is kind of bizarre.

Sounds like if somebody send you photos you don't want, and you tell them if they send you more, you will make it public (at which point sender clearly won't have expectation of privacy) you still might be the one breaking this law. I realize it's designed to protect victims of revenge porn, but it's also seems to be designed to protect people who send these sort of images even if unsolicited.

[madville]

27. Solicited or not, it's not illegal in most places for an adult to send an adult a nude picture.

It is illegal in most states to distribute that picture though without the originators consent.

An adult sending an adult a nude picture is not illegal by itself, especially between two people in an established sexual relationship.

[LisaL]

28. Not everybody wants to see that.

And if you send it unsolicited. what in the world makes you think you have a "reasonable expectation of privacy?"

[madville]

33. The laws are intended to protect women

Remember all the cases in the news a few years ago. High school girls and college women's nude pictures being shared on websites and forums dedicated to revenge porn from ex-boyfriends and lovers?

They apply equally to men and women.

[LisaL]

38. If his private part is covered by a blue box, I don't think it qualifies as revenge porn, since the

private part is no longer exposed. Now, I don't know if this photo is out there without a blue box, but the image that I saw, with blue box covering private part, presumably no longer would qualify as revenge porn.

[jberryhill]

43. That was added after the initial release

If you recall, earlier in the day, you had mentioned a video. While you were careful to avoid mentioning just where you got that tidbit, yes, Alex Jones had the video up briefly.

It’s plainly obvious if you look at the bottom of the picture that it is a screen cap of a ten second video.

Apparently, someone managed to inform Jones and this poor victimized lady, that they had violated the law, and thus the blue blob.

Or, as you put it, “no longer would qualify” since you seem to know it initially was.

[LisaL]

47. I can tell you exactly where I got the tidbit-twitter. I didn't see the actual video, just a claim

that there was a video.

[DetlefK]

53. The important point is that she got them while them two were in a relationship.

That's why publishing them is revenge-porn.

If he had sent her the pics WITHOUT them being in a relationship, then publishing them wouldn't be revenge-porn.

[LisaL]

58. I don't see anything in the text of the law supporting that idea.

Seem not to matter if you are in a relationship or not.

[DetlefK]

60. See response #19

The text of the law refers to "intimate images". By my reading, "intimate" refers to the role these images play in the relationship between these two people.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intimate
By my reading, "intimate" does not refer to the content of the image, because the content is defined later on.

If I send you an unsolicited dick-pic, that's not an intimate interaction between the two of us.
If we were in a relationship and I sent you a nudie, then that's intimate.

[Irish_Dem]

55. Once you give me something, isn't it my property?

How can you then tell me what to do with my own property?

[LisaL]

56. That's the thing I don't understand about this law.

[Irish_Dem]

59. I agree, the law can't protect people from their own stupidity. nt

[mythology]

62. Are you actually asking that sincerely? How have you not been aware of revenge porn?

I can't believe people are trying to justify this sort of thing.

[Demtexan]

30. Who made him take the picture and send it.

He did it to himself.

Was he married at the time?

If so he was cheating on his wife.

Once on the internet always on the internet.

[LisaL]

32. Married.

[Demtexan]

36. Then his wife is the victim.

And any children.

[LisaL]

37. Wife asked for divorce in 2014, so he is divorced now.

[Demtexan]

39. Do not blame her.

He did this to himself.

Never thought he would be caught I guess.

Why would anyone want that picture.

I bet he did it before.

Maybe trying to stop more pictures from coming out.

[Angry Dragon]

40. perhaps Barton and Trump could have a dick contest

[L. Coyote]

51. How do men like that pee when they can't see the plumbing without a mirror?

Asking for a Deplorable.

[Angry Dragon]

63. the same way women do

[Blue_Adept]

68. I weigh significantly more than Barton does

and just came back from the bathroom and had no problems at all.

I can drive a car just fine too.

I can engage in all manner of sex without any problems as well. If anything, it's my knee from age that gives me any real problem.

I have no issues getting out of a couch or a chair.

Any other issues us overweight men can answer for you since you seem to have such a problem figuring out?

I think I've at least figured out who the deplorable is.

[Lars39]

41. Making good on his promise.

[FarCenter]

46. She probably broke the law, but would a jury convict her? I don't think so.

[Vinca]

48. Here's the first question I'd like investigators to ask -

why so much Magic Marker on the image? That can't possibly be true.

[Vogon_Glory]

50. Lest we forget, Smokey Joe voted for Bill Clintons impeachment k

I have very little sympathy for the right-wingers who beat the drum for “traditional slurs,” who then go off and commit adultery.

As much as I dislike Mike Pence, he seems to be monogamous. Smokey Joe wasn’t.

[shanny]

54. Adultery isn't against the law.

Sending dick pics to another adult you are in a relationship with is also not against the law.

Releasing someone else's dick pic w/o permission is against the law in most places, and imo should be, even if I don't like the person whose dick pic is released.

[LisaL]

57. So per this law, a married can can be sending you photos of his genitals, even if you didn't ask for

that, and you are obligated to keep that quiet?

[shanny]

64. issue is consenting adults, as was apparently the case

when pics were sent, not just some random married (or unmarried) person who sends you stuff. Continuing a relationship with someone who sent such pics would be construed as "consent" to receiving them (qui tacet consentit) and would require you get consent before sending them on, to anyone

If some random married or unmarried person sends (adult) you stuff out of the blue, you have no obligation to keep that quiet. if any married or unmarried person person sends (minor) you stuff, with or without your consent, that person is in trouble and should be (see Anthony Weiner).

"Consenting adults" is the key. Both sides.

[LisaL]

65. Where does it say so in the actual law?

I don't see anything in the wording to suggest that.

[shanny]

66. which law? which state? there's lots

besides, we don't write laws to say what is permitted, we write them to say what isn't