After numerous adjournments, due to the complexity of the electronic evidence and the number of individuals involved, the trial was scheduled for the fall of 2017. The case was among the first to use the new law to address sharing of intimate images without consent. The Bridgewater teens initially faced charges under our child pornography laws as well as charges under this newer section of the Criminal Code. Unlike our child pornography laws, the age of the individual depicted doesn’t matter. Intimate images are broadly defined as images where the individual is nude or semi-nude, or is engaged in explicit sexual activity and has a reasonable expectation of privacy. In 2015, amidst mounting pressure for lawmakers to respond, the Criminal Code was amended to create a new offence for the non-consensual distribution of “intimate images.” In the wake of disastrous cases, such as that of Rehtaeh Parsons*, there was much debate about sexting, revenge porn, cyber-bullying and related issues. In recent years however, with the explosion of social media sites and the many options for file sharing, the misuse and mishandling of intimate images has become a hot topic. taken by one of the individuals involved.In part, this is due to a 2001 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada that established the “intimate photo exception.” Under this exception, images of individuals under the age of 18 but over the age of consent are not considered child pornography provided that they are.

Typically, sexting does not amount to child pornography under the law. Offenders are also placed on the National Sex Offender Registry.Ĭhild pornography charges against minors – individuals under the age of 18 – have been rare in Canada. The punishment for child pornography offences, depending on the circumstances, can be as great as 14 years imprisonment for adults.

Dropbox porn download