|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 03 2013 @ 07:15 AM EDT |
In your example, the offending item is in fact sent to the
district in question. Given that half of the transaction
took place in the district in question, it's not entirely
unreasonable for that district to try the case.
A better analog to this case is a pornographer in Sodom, CA
who sent explicit material to a customer in Amsterdam, NY
being hauled up on charges in Bibletown, AL because one of
the models pictured in the material was originally from
Bibletown.
The transaction in question is between parties that reside
outside Bibletown, the offending material never passed
through Bibletown. While there's an arguable connection to
Bibletown if you did deeply enough, it's not germane to the
supposedly criminal act of distributing pornographic
material. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|