Blogger pushes taste — and legal — envelope again
It appears Perez Hilton has a thing for Miley Cyrus' vagina.
Hilton — who caused this reporter to spend far too much time researching child porn laws last week ("Will Perez Hilton Face Child Porn Charges Over Upskirt Miley Cyrus Photo?") when he tweeted a photo that may or may not have shown the 17-year-old pop star flashing her underage parts while exiting a convertible — did it again on Monday.
Via Hilton's Twitter:
Oh, #Miley! Warning: If you're easily offended, do NOT click here http://bit.ly/bfYCHP
This time, the photo in question did not show Cyrus' full frontal nudity, though it came precariously close.
Last week, legal experts debated whether or not Hilton could be charged for a crime. The general consensus was that Hilton’s posting could be considered child pornography under both federal and state law — if it had turned out she was, in fact, pantyless. (The posting led to ABC reportedly pulling its advertising from Hilton's site.)
“The laws governing child pornography are extraordinarily far reaching,” Jeffrey Douglas, a Santa Monica criminal defense attorney who specializes in child pornography cases, told TheWrap last week. “He didn't have to know what the definition of the law is. If you distribute a photograph, you’ve committed a crime.”
Despite that, a spokesperson for the Los Angeles Police Department told TheWrap that the incident would not be investigated.