Parents sue Wal-Mart over bathtime photos brouhaha

The couple's three young daughters were taken away by Arizona Child Protective Services after a Wal-Mart employee found partially nude pictures of the girls on a camera memory stick taken to the store for processing. (Arizona Republic)

Comments

[sometimesilie]

Yes, but were they determined to be witches?

Does anyone know what the Statute of Limitations are for this kind of thing?

MY PARENTS HAVE CHILD 'PORN' OF ME AND THE LITTLE NEIGHBOR BOY IN THE BATHTUB

ZOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMFFFFFGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!

AGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHH!!!

BURN, WITCHES, BURN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

=)

[nunya]

geez,maybe i should toss that 60 yr old photo of me wearing nothing but a sombrero..in the FRONT YARD! how terrible! (what a CROCK!..I hope they wind up OWNING walmart!)

[SickBoy]

I dont think Walmart is at fault or liable here. In this day and age, people need to be sensible about this sort of thing. If it had been a pedophile and Walmart just informed him they couldnt print, and did nothing else, people would cry foul.

But it does sound like the AG or whatever definitely took things too far and I hope they find in the family's favor.

[RockyMtnMac]

My family has a calendar of pictures of each one of us in the bathtub covered in bubbles. Each picture is on the month of our birthday. There are 21 pictures. In several of these pictures, you can only see the kid's eyes through all the bubbles. None of these pictures show ANYTHING. Still, I wonder how much trouble we are all in?

[KDP]

With the cost of photo printers so low, why does anyone take their memory cards to Mal-Wart to have prints made?

[Sigh]

I wonder if a jury trial is the best choice. I imagine juries will be pretty pissed to find out CPS's treatment of these folks.

RMM -- send us your address so we can send Child Protective Services.

[Torgo]

And Wal-Mart continues to improve the world.

[DisgustedParent]

Sue the bastards. Be sure to file criminal charges against every accuser (including Wal-Mart employees, the police, and Arizona Child Protective Services) who saw sexual content in the nude image of a child. Those are the true sick individuals who need to be removed from society.

[nellagain]

Sick boy

RTA

"A second lawsuit, naming Walmart as the defendant, says the company is at fault for not telling Anthony Demaree that it had an "unsuitable print policy" and could decide to turn any photos over to law enforcement."

The suit is not over Walmart's actions, its over there failure to post their policy--which *is* absolutly actionable.

[dobie]

None of us grew up even being aware that we were child porn stars.

[Phranqlin]

The AG would have locked up my parents in federal prison and tossed away the key. They shot a Super-8 movie of my semi-nude sibs and I running innocently around the house when we were little kids.

[LimeGreenLizard]

So now my family has to go through three generations of photos and burn all of the ones with us in the bathtub, laying on our stomachs with our little baby butts showing, etc? Damn, this is going to be a long weekend.

[Mark]

My guess is the Walmart employee probably doesn't have kids.

[stopeatingmysesamecake]

I wonder if a jury trial is the best choice. I imagine juries will be pretty pissed to find out CPS's treatment of these folks.
---------------------------

At the VERY (underlined/bold) least, once CPS saw that these were indeed the couple's children they should have backed off as fast as humanly possible.

Yes. nude pics of your kids in a bath are your family photos. In a pervs hands, they are actionable.

What I'm saying is, I should be able to take such pics of my kids in. A 50 year old guy in trenchcoat should not.

[W]

RMM- I'm willing to bet any "over 18" versions of your photos would be very nice indeeed. ahhhhhh

[Kee]

Actually, I applaud what happened. There is NO REASON to take bath time pictures of any child over two. By 3,b my kids knew what modesty was and objected when I went in the bathroom. It made things interesting because I still didn't trust they were old enough to be alone. They understood but didn't like it. By 4-5, I wasn't even allowed in the bathroom with them unless there was a major problem. That was the older two kids’ ages. Even then my kids used a washcloth to cover up. I couldn't imagine trying to take pics of them.

And I don't see any liability on Wal-Mart's part. They turned the pictures over to police and CPS, which is exactly what they should have done for any pictures of a naked child. Don't like it than bbbdon't develop naked pics of your child at Wal-mart! The mother was a trained interventionist. She should have had a clue.

[RockyMtnMac]

@ Sigh - My address? Sure! It's 1313 Cemetery Lane. I'll be the one dressed in black. Haha

@W - There is an entirely different collection of over 18 photos, and I do clean up nice. These, however, are not for public display as they could interfere with the campaign Merc and I are launching.

[Kee]

Sorry about all the b's in the last post. My keyboard is acting up.

[:)-]

Kee=Prude

[mybrainhurts]

Kee, seriously? Your kids were so uptight about their bodies by the age of 3... 3!... that they took issue with their own parent seeing them partly/fully bare? And you're ok with that?

Never mind. Now that I think about it, I had my own kids trained to recognize the shamefulness of the naked human body when they were still infants. They even refused bottles because the tops looked too much like nipples. Sure, it was hard feeding them, but by golly, they understood simple decency and modesty! And it encouraged them to learn how to feed themselves when they were still quite young. A self-sufficiency win!

[Worker]

The problem is actually FEAR of liability: the Walmart employee probably saw it and thought the same as most of the above posts state, "Well... it could be questionable..." and then realized it was not his/her decision to make. It's the police's decision to make/State's decision to make.

The people who should be sued are not Walmart. However, I suspect the family felt Walmart had deeper pockets.

The reality is that Walmart would be in FAR, FAR greater trouble for NOT reporting the photos to the police if it turned out the picture-taker was a weirdo!

[buddy]

does anyone remember the story jim posted about the michigan professor that didnt know there was alcohol in mikes hard lemonade when he gave one to his kid at a tigers game? they took that kid away for days even though the kid only took a sip before the mistake was found.

our country has a 'guilty until innocent' mentality when it comes to anything that has to do with kids and/or rape. look at the hofstra students. get accused of rape and your name is everywhere but they still are not publishing the name of the girl that lied. a system like that assumes guilt.

[RockyMtnMac]

To get serious AND back on topic - This is such BS. Can you guys honestly tell me this family had the only naked-baby pictures? Naked-baby pictures are common! Look at the posts on here! You cannot tell me there weren't a ton of other naked-baby pictures at any given Wal-Mart on that same day these people got their pictures confiscated. Makes me think these particular Wal-Mart employees may have had an agenda of their own.

[RockyMtnMac]

Oh Gawd! I'm agreeing with buddy!
Remember the Duke soccer players accused of rape? All 4 were tried and convicted by the press and public opinion long before they were drug into trial by an over-zealous DA hell bent on making a name for himself. Turns out, the "victim" lied her ass off, the DA buried DNA evidence proving the boys did not do ANYTHING with her, and now there is a huge lawsuit pending. I hope those boys own that town by next year. Same with the Hofstra bunch. Enough is enough.

[dobie]

They're coming after Anne Geddes next!

[oaw]

The problem is that most children are not molested by stranger pervs they are molested by someone in the family or a close family friend pervs. While i feel for the parents i would prefer that someone take an interest and do their best to protect the children before they worry about how traumatized the asshole parents are. As someone who was molested for many many years by a family member i know whereof i speak.

[Farmer Bob and the City]

Sterilize Walmart.

[Lou Sussler]

Have we gone insane as a society?

The stupid Wal-Mart clerk should be fired. A few bathtime pictures of small children on a stick with vacation pictures of the same kids should have nudged any even semi moron's brain to realize that these are not exploitive photographs.

And we routinely allow State's attorneys like the one in the article to get away with this crap. They should be required to comment to the news media. Instead, they "no comment" until the incident is forgotten.

I hope they win their suit against the state and Wal-Mart. Although, I would drop the suit in exchange for the State's attorney to be fired. She doesn't deserve a taxpayer funded position of public trust.

[sometimesilie]

wow. "asshole" parents. Seems to me we're all a bunch of "assholes" on this site oaw. Maybe you'd feel more comfortable at another site?

[jojo]

OMG, i had no idea I had escaped an arrest so narrowly. I've had pictures of my kids in the tub developed at Walmart (about 10 years ago, but still). Guess I 'lucked out' and a pedophile was working that day. Wow, what is this world coming too??

[W]

@ RMM - I say release them all...especially the naughtiest ones. The press coverage would escalate your campaign... it did wonders for Paris Hilton!
Just lemme know so I can see ;-)

[sometimesilie]

I know, as adults, the children with whom I was photographed during bath time. Non of us were ever molested. I think most people had nude photos taken of them as children.

Until this stuff started coming up for prosecution because of the current Witch-Hunt atmosphere that assumes a sex-offender behind every tree and camera lens, I literally had no conception that such photos would even remotely be considered salacious and now, in the revisionist witch-hunt attempt to re-assume that they are, ironically, people actually are having their lives damaged by absolutely unfounded allegations.

Well I, for one, will be g*d damned to have my parents and relatives and friends smeared with the "child molester" brush because some overzealous CUNT of a DA needs a wedge issue to run for election on.

[RockyMtnMac]

So go to court...
And ask every juror who had naked-baby pictures of their children, or of themselves, to remove themselves from the pool. There would be no one left, certainly not enough to make up a full jury.

[Wal-Mart Security]

"I tell ya, them people were perverts. P.E.R.V.E.R.T.S!!! Takin' nekkid pictures of their kids, and then comin' into MY workplace. Sheesh, what next, people will be bringing in their pets, and nonsense."

"When that scared little boy runnin' the picture makin' machine sees those pictures, he turned white as a ghost. He called me over, and had me hold my stun-gun on them folk until the po-lice showed up. It was disgustin', almost as disgustin' as them folks that showed up at the wedding when my sister was marryin' cousin Cleteus. Saying we's inbreedin' and other hogwash. Any how, the dad was a goin' on about that the kids were theirs, and the pictures were the kids ideas, and the mom all a cryin'. Made me want to take them out back and shoot them like that old yeller dog I shot a few years back."

People these days...................................

[American Veteran]

Is Coppertone into kiddieporn also??
How about that perverted doggie who pulled the little girl's swimsuit down??
Oh, what terrible crimes.

SUE THEIR ASSES OFF.

[joel]

SIL...bravo

Kee...you are unbelievable...you are dangerous

[Kee]

"Kee, seriously? Your kids were so uptight about their bodies by the age of 3... 3!... that they took issue with their own parent seeing them partly/fully bare? And you're ok with that?"

I am absolutely okay with it. They understand modesty! And it isn't partial nudity; it's full nudity. We live right next to Peoria in Phoenix. I've gone to this Wal-mart. It stays hot/warm here year round so clothing here is a lot skimpier than elsewhere in the country. I have a teen and a preteen and don't have to worry about them going out in inappropriate clothing.

The point I was trying to make was about the children's modesty. My children were modest at that age.Most children develop modesty around this age. I wouldn't have disrespected them enough to take nude pics of them. Someone trained to protect children and perform intervention (the mother) should have foreseen this might be an issue.

Back to the article. What would you have prefered? Wal-mart raise the flag on something questionable or ignore it all together? Wal-mart didn't take her kids away; CPS did. It was the right decision for Walmart to inform the police about nude picture of someone over 2 and under 18. Not seeing the pictures, I don't know if it was the right decision to remove the children. But obviously someone trained thought the children were in danger. CPS agents here (and most places) carry over twice the recommended work load. Even with that, someone thought there were grounds to remove the children.

Remember too, we don't have all the facts. Just the parents' side.

[thomas]

Except for oaw's post, I am oddly aroused imagining y'all in a bubble bath, or less.

[David]

I don't applaud Wal-Mart in this, their policy is nuts. There has to be common sense involved as well.

At one time I worked making calendars and picture mugs for a temp job before Christmas. Every calendar containing small children had a few shots that were the same subject matter - the bathtub shot, the child covered with food shot and the child in a costume shot. A large percentage had the baby nude on a fur rug shot too. Most of the calendars were sent to grandparents for Christmas.

ps. While children covered in food shots might be 'cute', please think twice about spaghetti sauce. It really looks bad.

[sometimesilie]

"CPS agents here (and most places) carry over twice the recommended work load. Even with that, someone thought there were grounds to remove the children."

I disagree without having any more information than what was in the article. Partially because of a recent experience as a foreman on a jury. I think that in PA, the law states that once an issue reaches CPS, it has to be referred to the District Attorney. Has to be.

You would be incredulous about the accusations against which they tried to make a case against the defendant in this experience and also by the zealousness that this case was prosecuted with. I live in a city where they offer plea deals to Rapists and violent, violent people because they do not have the resources to take everyone to trial and we were tied up Tuesday-Thursday with this CRAP.

[stopeatingmysesamecake]

Kee, you really don't think you could distinguish a picture of a 'kid in the bathtub shot' with one for perv purposes?

Before you you jump the gun, I understand that ANY nude shot is the right one for a perv.

But when you see bathtub pics along with the other family pictures, you think 'perv'? I think 'hey, they got some pictures of the kids in the tub'.

[buddy]

isnt 5 a little too old to be in porn?

[Kee]

"Kee, you really don't think you could distinguish a picture of a 'kid in the bathtub shot' with one for perv purposes? "

I think most of us here could, but we're not working for a little above minimum wage printing pictures at Walmart.

[Kee]

Sometimesilie, I will admit that I might take a hard line against nude child pictures. The Phoenix area has had some horrific crimes against children lately. Just a couple of months ago, an 8 year old was gang-raped by 4 boys 9-14. And in the spring, an ex-police detective plead guilty because he was purchased child porn (pics and video - and not in the line of duty). He had quite a few

[Pandora]

Myspace deleted pictures of my daughter taking a bath in an inflatable duck when she was a month old. My profile is private and I doubt I know any pedifiles, but I understood that someone might use them in a non kosher way.

This is different because the only people in reciept of these photos were the parents.

This seriously is my worst nightmare.

[Pandora]

Myspace deleted pictures of my daughter taking a bath in an inflatable duck when she was a month old. My profile is private and I doubt I know any pedifiles, but I understood that someone might use them in a non kosher way.

This is different because the only people in reciept of these photos were the parents.

This seriously is my worst nightmare.

[Pandora]

Myspace deleted pictures of my daughter taking a bath in an inflatable duck when she was a month old. My profile is private and I doubt I know any pedifiles, but I understood that someone might use them in a non kosher way.

This is different because the only people in reciept of these photos were the parents.

This seriously is my worst nightmare.

[Pandora]

Myspace deleted pictures of my daughter taking a bath in an inflatable duck when she was a month old. My profile is private and I doubt I know any pedifiles, but I understood that someone might use them in a non kosher way.

This is different because the only people in reciept of these photos were the parents.

This seriously is my worst nightmare.

[dorkster]

I just wanna ask the people who were saying that it was child 'porn' how many of your parents have pictures of you in the tub when you were little? now how many who have kids have pictures of them in the tub? EXACTLY it would child porn if it were like a 12 year old in the shower not toddlers in a bubble bath!!!

[Kee]

Dorkster - They weren't toddlers; they pictures in question were of the 4 and 5 year olds.