Utah Supreme Court upholds “harm to minors” conviction for nude drawings defendant sent to his 5 yr. old daughter
Eugene Volokh writes at the Volokh Conspiracy: Utah law . . . bans the distribution to minors of “harmful-to-minors” material . . . Defendant . . . wrote two letters to his wife . . . with drawings that he asked the wife to pass along to their 5-year-old-daughter . . . he drew a picture of himself naked and depicted him holding his daughter’s buttocks up to his mouth. . . . The jury convicted defendant on two counts of attempting to distribute “harmful to minors” material to his daughter; the jury convicted on both counts; and the Utah Supreme Court upheld the convictions (see State v. Butt (Utah June 8, 2012)), reasoning . . . Here’s my question: Can a reasonable jury conclude that the defendant’s drawings appealed to a minor’s prurient (defined as “shameful or morbid”) interest in sex, and especially a 5-year-old girl’s interest in sex? . . .