Jump to content

23 posts in this topic

Posted

In 2008, Lisa and Anthony "A.J." Demaree took their three young daughters on a trip to San Diego. They returned home to Arizona and brought photos of their then 5, 4 and 1 1/2 year old daughters to a local Walmart in Peoria to be developed.

That should have been that, except instead of receiving 144 happy familial memories, Walmart employees reported the Demarees to the Peoria Police Department on the suspicion that they had taken pornographic images of their children. The police, in turn, called in the Arizona Child Protective Services Agency, and the couple lost custody of their daughters for over a month.

They were shocked. "Some of the photos are bathtime photos," Lisa Demaree told ABC News at the time, "but there are a few after the bath. Three of the girls are naked, lying on a towel with their arms around each other, and we thought it was so cute."

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that the photographs were not, in fact, pornographic, and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse. The girls were returned to their parents.

But the damage had been done: The couple's named went on a central registry of sex offenders, and "We've missed a year of our children's lives as far as memories go," Demaree told ABC News.

In 2009, the couple sued the city of Peoria and the State Attorney General's office for defamation. They also sued Walmart for failing to tell them that they had an "unsuitable print policy" and could turn over photos to law enforcement without the customer's knowledge.

A federal judge in Phoenix sided with Walmart, ruling that employees in Arizona cannot be held liable for reporting suspected child pornography. The Demarees appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and on March 6 the court held a hearing before three judges.

"The photos involved were simple childhood nudity," the family's lawyer, Richard Treon, told ABC News. He argued that Walmart committed fraud on its customers by not disclosing that employees would look at their photographs. Nor did customers know that employees could take photos they found offensive to their boss, who could then call the police.

"In order to convict a person of a crime of sexual exploitation of a child, you have to show that the intent of the photographer was to sexually stimulate the viewer. All the experts agree that even police officers don't have the authority to make that decision," said Treon. "So, we argued that Walmart was negligent in setting up this program with untrained clerks and giving them tremendous power over the lives of their customers."

Walmart did not respond to an interview request from ABC News. But, according to Courthouse News the company's lawyer, Lawrence Kasten, argued that under Arizona statute employees who report child abuse without malice are immune from prosecution. He added that there was no indication of malice in this case.

"I fear that what may happen after this case is [that the] employee will sit there and say, boy, if I turn these over my employer is going to spend millions of dollars in legal fees, and I'm going to get hauled in front of a deposition for eight hours, [so] maybe I'll just stick them back in the envelope and not worry about them," he said. "Immunity is supposed to prevent exactly that from happening."

It's unknown when the appeals court will rule on the case against the city and Walmart.

[url="http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/ariz-couple-sues-walmart-over-kids-bath-photos-114806960--abc-news-savings-and-investment.html"]source[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I mean.. It sucks for their family.. but better safe than sorry.. I think Walmart handled it poorly and should have escalated it and having police do an investigation first instead of ruining parts of peoples lives..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Fus10n' timestamp='1362841785' post='595568008']I mean.. It sucks for their family.. but better safe than sorry.. I think Walmart handled it poorly and should have escalated it and having police do an investigation first instead of ruining parts of peoples lives..[/quote]

No. Parents should be able to take pictures of their children naked, providing they are not overtly sexual and there is no evidence of child abuse. I have several pictures of me naked as a child yet surprisingly enough my parents aren't paedophiles. Children shouldn't be taken into custody unless there is evidence to suggest that they are being abused - a couple of pictures of them naked after bath time certainly does [i]not [/i]constitute abuse.
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='theyarecomingforyou' timestamp='1362842396' post='595568018']
No. Parents should be able to take pictures of their children naked, providing they are not overtly sexual and there is no evidence of child abuse. I have several pictures of me naked as a child yet surprisingly enough my parents aren't paedophiles. Children shouldn't be taken into custody unless there is evidence to suggest that they are being abused - a couple of pictures of them naked after bath time certainly does [i]not [/i]constitute abuse.
[/quote]

[size=4][u][b][color=#282828] I think Walmart handled it poorly and should have escalated it and having police do an investigation first instead of ruining parts of peoples lives..[/color][/b][/u][/size]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Fus10n' timestamp='1362842641' post='595568020']
[size=4][u][b][color=#282828]I think Walmart handled it poorly and should have escalated it and having police do an investigation first instead of ruining parts of peoples lives..[/color][/b][/u][/size]
[/quote]So what you're saying is basically that, that escalated quickly?

Joking aside, this is a horrible thing that happened to the parents and children, and I'm not a lawyer but it doesn't pass the smell test. Someone, somewhere, messed up, and the family deserves 1. whatever million, at least. How much are last month's memories worth to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

WHERE IS SHERIFF JOE ON THIS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Fus10n' timestamp='1362842641' post='595568020'][u][b][color=#282828]I think Walmart handled it poorly and should have escalated it and having police do an investigation first instead of ruining parts of peoples lives..[/color][/b][/u][/quote]

I read your post, I simply believe that unless there was evidence of abuse no further action should have been taken. Considering there were 144 photos taken it should have been obvious to the Walmart employee that they were from a family holiday and were not sexual in nature. Unfortunately businesses are so fearful of litigation they would rather report everything to the police in order to avoid any liability than to apply common sense.

At the end of the day, Walmart's actions
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='greenwizard88' timestamp='1362843459' post='595568042']
So what you're saying is basically that, that escalated quickly?

Joking aside, this is a horrible thing that happened to the parents and children, and I'm not a lawyer but it doesn't pass the smell test. Someone, somewhere, messed up, and the family deserves [b]1. whatever million, at least.[/b] How much are last month's memories worth to you?
[/quote]

Yeah, because money will fix what happened to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

if there was no sexual abuse, then i am sorry for them they it happened. But, I too would report something if it fringed on the boundaries. I would rather be embarrassingly wrong then horrifyingly right. We have no idea what were in the pics. Can't say what we would think unless we saw to judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If the Walmart employees thought something was untoward, then they had every right to report it. What went wrong here was a lack of common sense in the police department that took up the report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Should invest in a photo printer and photo paper, then there's no need to have other people looking through your private photos and jumping to conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Mikeffer' timestamp='1362844239' post='595568068']
If the Walmart employees thought something was untoward, then they had every right to report it. What went wrong here was a lack of common sense in the police department that took up the report.
[/quote]

This. Not really Wal-Mart's issue that they reported it. It is ridiculous what happened after they reported it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

When they take kids away from a reported abusive situation, and the claims are false - EVIL AUTHORITIES WHY DID THEY NOT CHECK FIRST!

When they don't take kids away from a reported abusive situation, and claims are true - EVIL AUTHORITIES NOT ACTING QUICKLY!

...rock and a hard place if you ask me. Having said that tho, I think something did go wrong. I would have imagined that meeting the family, and speaking to the kids first would have been a more appropriate course of action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

we should learn from this that you should just never go to walmart whom is against family values in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Wal-mart just should not look at anyone's photos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='UseLess' timestamp='1362846230' post='595568116']
When they take kids away from a reported abusive situation, and the claims are false - EVIL AUTHORITIES WHY DID THEY NOT CHECK FIRST!

When they don't take kids away from a reported abusive situation, and claims are true - EVIL AUTHORITIES NOT ACTING QUICKLY!

...rock and a hard place if you ask me. Having said that tho, I think something did go wrong. I would have imagined that meeting the family, and speaking to the kids first would have been a more appropriate course of action.
[/quote]

In this case there was no evidence of anything wrong other than a nosy WalMart employee looking at people's pictures. How would you feel if you got arrested for assault on your significant other because he/she has bruises say on their knees, or like my ex, the type that bruises if you look at them wrong, would you not sue for being wrongly accused of being abusive and added to the list of abusive types for the rest of your life? Remember, once on the pedo list you never get off of it, no matter if you were wrongly accused of the crime to start with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='z0phi3l' timestamp='1362851607' post='595568276']
In this case there was no evidence of anything wrong other than a nosy WalMart employee looking at people's pictures. How would you feel if you got arrested for assault on your significant other because he/she has bruises say on their knees, or like my ex, the type that bruises if you look at them wrong, would you not sue for being wrongly accused of being abusive and added to the list of abusive types for the rest of your life? [b]Remember, once on the pedo list you never get off of it, no matter if you were wrongly accused of the crime to start with[/b]
[/quote]

I bloody hope the kids parents are removed from the list as they are in-fact NOT Pedophiles. Also the fact this took over a year to resolve is disgusting to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Wait, the customer was ignorant and it was up to WalMart to education the customer before purchase? How whack is that. The customer has every right to ask for a Terms of Service before authorizing that services be performed.

I don't think WalMart did anything wrong, but I agree with others in this thread that they should have a system where employees do not review any photos. Walmart shouldn't have to do that and then make judgement calls on what the photos represent in the larger legal scheme of things.

It was the child protective agencies that went to far in this case, but what else is new? Those people really live to take kids away from parents IMO. Sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. I have friends and family that are social workers and I don't mean to dis on what they do. But I do question sometimes as to what gives them the right to make those kinds of judgement calls.

[quote name='Fractalize' timestamp='1362851982' post='595568282']
I bloody hope the kids parents are removed from the list as they are in-fact NOT Pedophiles. Also the fact this took over a year to resolve is disgusting to be honest.
[/quote]

It probably took a year because the social workers didn't want to admit that they did anything wrong and face the aftermath of the law suits. These people probably realized it was wrong early on but decided to not do what was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It is sad but I don't think it is Walmart fault. The employees saw naked children pictures and reported them.

I would blame the Child Protective Agency process. I mean they should have done a quick investigation before taking action.

But you probably have better chances of winning a lawsuit or get money from Walmart than the state agency.

Sad for this family but I don't think that lawsuit have any merit (against Walmart) and it should have been directed toward the Child Protective Agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='greenwizard88' timestamp='1362843459' post='595568042']
the family deserves 1. whatever million, at least. How much are last month's memories worth to you?
[/quote]

I don't know, but for a million, you can have my last month's memories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

no way today would i let someone else handle my photos. all it takes is one person to protest and it will change your life. wait until the drones hover outside your bathroom window and see you bathing your child. i bet if they tried to upload those photos to google drive they may have run into issues. every thing is on the lookout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='theyarecomingforyou' timestamp='1362842396' post='595568018']
No. Parents should be able to take pictures of their children naked, providing they are not overtly sexual and there is no evidence of child abuse. I have several pictures of me naked as a child yet surprisingly enough my parents aren't paedophiles. Children shouldn't be taken into custody unless there is evidence to suggest that they are being abused - a couple of pictures of them naked after bath time certainly does [i]not [/i]constitute abuse.
[/quote]

those kind of pictures...that parents dont let you forget.... lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='SPEhosting' timestamp='1362873542' post='595568638']those kind of pictures...that parents dont let you forget.... lol[/quote]

Thankfully I'm not embarrassed by that sort of thing. Heck, I uploaded all my childhood pictures to Facebook and there's at least one or two naked ones there. Friends of mines on Facebook post naked pictures of their children as well and they're not paedophiles. Nudity != Sexuality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.