Well, after thoroughly reading and re-reading the question on my Macintosh, I came up with the following information, that I hope everyone will find helpful:
According to local sources Florida Today (link from C.O.‘s post above), and baynews9 :
”...[38 y/o Danny] Parker has been booked into the Polk County Jail on 90 counts of sexual performance by a child and one count of possession of images of child pornography.”
And according to the Polk County Sheriff’s Office charge report the 90 counts refer to: Statute: 827.071(2) CRUELTY TOWARD CHILD-USE OR ALLOW CHILD TO ENGAGE IN SEX, which in the letter of the law states the following:
“827.071 Sexual performance by a child; penalties.—
(2) A person is guilty of the use of a child in a sexual performance if, knowing the character and content thereof, he or she employs, authorizes, or induces a child less than 18 years of age to engage in a sexual performance or, being a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of such child, consents to the participation by such child in a sexual performance. Whoever violates this subsection is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.”
and 1 count (Charge Number 91) of possession as defined by statute 827.071(5) OBSCENE MATERIAL-POSSESS-POSS PHOTOGRAPH OF SEXUAL PERFORMA[NCE]; Charge on arrest docket: POSS CERTAIN IMAGES CHILD PORN (RECLASS)
As defined by statute:
(5) It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess a photograph, motion picture, exhibition, show, representation, or other presentation which, in whole or in part, he or she knows to include any sexual conduct by a child. The possession of each such photograph, motion picture, exhibition, show, representation, or presentation is a separate offense. Whoever violates this subsection is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
The key words in the statute above are ”...knowingly possess a photograph, motion picture, exhibition, show, representation, or other presentation which, in whole or in part, he or she knows to include any sexual conduct by a child.”
It may be useful to note that, in the opening paragraph of 827.071(1), there are several definitions that are used to describe the various terminologies, and the relevant one here seems to be:
(1)(b) “Performance” means any play, motion picture, photograph, or dance or any other visual representation exhibited before an audience.
(1)(g) “Sexual conduct” means actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality, masturbation, or sadomasochistic abuse; actual lewd exhibition of the genitals; actual physical contact with a person’s clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or, if such person is a female, breast, with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of either party; or any act or conduct which constitutes sexual battery or simulates that sexual battery is being or will be committed. [Emph.] A mother’s breastfeeding of her baby does not under any circumstance constitute “sexual conduct.”
Notice the last sentence indicates ”...or any act or conduct which constitutes sexual battery or simulates that sexual battery is being or will be committed.”
IMHO, these are the issues that will likely be argued in this case:
1. Whether the 90 counts of performance are actually performance if the actual person (child) has to be a physical participant in an act;
2. what in the eyes of the court (and jury) consitutes sexual conduct in this case; and
3. whether or not the evidence in hand is sufficient to prove that “sexual battery is being or will be committed.”
As stated in my posts above, since I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t have a background in interpreting or understanding law, at best, I can only speculate that the accused will likely be convicted if the evidence is irrefutable and the circumstantial evidence is corroborated.
Now, because my Macintosh did display the header of the question (imagine that), my interpretation was that GP was asking was if anyone here thought that the simulation of child pornography was as equally punishable as the actual act or “performance”, and my answer to that is, what I think about the concept is irrelevant, since there is already a set of laws that take this into account.
As for free speech/thinking, I think you already know my opinion.