Should I be afraid

[unfamous618]

I accidentally downloaded this file which I am not sure is child pornography. The child wasn't in any type of sexual situation, one picture she was in a one piece bathing suit in a bathtub and in another she was in a dress. I deleted the file as soon as I saw what it was. I only ask because I heard of a situation were someone was charged with having of child pornography and it was just a photo of a kid in a bathing suit. I want to know if I took appropriate action.

[Citicop]

I've done work with the Federal Computer Crime Task Force in my area.

No one gets charged with child pornography for a picture of a child in a bathing suit. In some instances, even photos of nude children aren't chargeable.

If there is no sex and no nudity in the photos, then you are not in violation of the law.

-Citicop.

[Big Sexy]

If there is no sex and no nudity in the photos, then you are not in violation of the law.

There doesn't have to be either sex or nudity, for something to necessarilly not be child pornography.

Based on the OP's rather limited description, BIG would agree it isn't CP.

[Kimble]

There doesn't have to be either sex or nudity, for something to necessarilly not be child pornography.

True, a seemingly innocent .jpeg of a kid could be the first image in a series of images (i.e. the child starts out clothed before having clothes removed and the sexual offense being committed in later images to the series), but I also agree that doesn't seem to be the case here. Sounds to me like family photos, nothing out of the ordinary for a parent to photography.

unfamous, how exactly did you come across this image? Where you searching for (adult) pornography and came across these images?

[unfamous618]

I searched the name on the file and apparently the picture was from a 15 year old japanese model in a photo shoot so I'm pretty sure I'm fine. She just looked younger than that.

[Citicop]

True, a seemingly innocent .jpeg of a kid could be the first image in a series of images (i.e. the child starts out clothed before having clothes removed and the sexual offense being committed in later images to the series), but I also agree that doesn't seem to be the case here. Sounds to me like family photos, nothing out of the ordinary for a parent to photography.

unfamous, how exactly did you come across this image? Where you searching for (adult) pornography and came across these images?

I agree about the image series... seen more of those than I wanted to...

But possession of only the clothed images of the series would not be a violation of the law, right?

-Citicop.

[Kimble]

But possession of only the clothed images of the series would not be a violation of the law, right?

Correct. It's kinda like finding a glass pipe with no residue of MJ. It, in and of itself, isn't a crime, but in the presence of other contraband helps to build a stronger case (i.e. if you have pics from a series along with other CP, it helps to show the subject was searching for specific series and may have other pics in the series after further forensic analysis).

[Citicop]

Yeah, the foresics guys here take note of those pictures, too, and "nonsexual" nudes or clothed but provocotive pics are termed "erotica" (as opposed to pornography) and included in the final forensic report that they submit back to the original agency.