twitter facebook stumble upon rss

Parents Sue Walmart Over Kid Bath Pics

sign up for the momlogic newsletter Tweet This

Were they out of line?

wal-mart store

Let's say you take some pics of your kids (ages 1½, 4, and 5) at bath time, and then you go have them developed at Walmart.

The Walmart employee sees the pics and calls the cops on you for child porn. Your kids are taken away and you don't regain custody for a month.

That's exactly what Lisa and Anthony "A.J." Demaree of Arizona say happened to them ... and now they are suing Walmart.

Richard Treon, the Demarees' attorney, said the seven to eight bath- and playtime photos of the girls were only part of the 144 photographs from the family's vacation in San Diego.

"There was nothing sexual about it," Treon told WTOP. "This is a parent's worst nightmare."

The couple has filed two lawsuits, one directed at the State Attorney General's office, the City of Peoria, and the state of Arizona. The other lawsuit is directed at Walmart, headquartered in Arkansas.

Do you think Walmart had a right to turn the bath-time photos over to the police? Comment below.


next: Momblogic Roundup: Celebrate Pirate Day, Matey!
176 comments so far | Post a comment now
MaNiC MoMMy September 18, 2009, 2:16 PM

Wal-Mart sucks.

jn September 18, 2009, 2:17 PM

This got way out of hand. I don’t know any family that doesn’ have pics of their kids in the tub.

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 2:23 PM

sue tha pants off Wal Mart!

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 2:31 PM

Believe it or not, I think Wal-Mart was right in their decision. Better to report it and be safe then let three young girls be abused and taken advantage of. It’s not their fault that the police, prosecutor, and child protection services failed to recognize the situation for what it was and act accordingly.

Josh September 18, 2009, 2:34 PM

No. Anyone with an ounce of common sense could see what the pictures really were. Taking away the woman’s children is just stupid.

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 2:40 PM

Yeah, and the worst part is that if these parents win the lawsuit, it will make it virtually impossible for companies to report real instances of child pornography without being subject to civil penalties, it’s said when money hungry people make it even more dificult to catch those who harm young children.

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 2:45 PM

yes, sue their pants off.

russ September 18, 2009, 2:47 PM

anonymous… very smart to keep your identity hid. if i was that dumb i wouldn’t want anyone to know who i was either

carly September 18, 2009, 2:57 PM

Well, I’m sorry both wal mart and the parents are stupid.
Wal mart for not recognizing the situation.
And the parents fr not seeing the potential case.

Kristine September 18, 2009, 2:58 PM

Report it to be safe? Give me a break. You know that “report it to be safe” idea has now caused these parents AND their kids a lot of stress and embarrassment.

Walmart needs to put common sense on their shelves for the anonymous people who lack it.

Elvira333 September 18, 2009, 3:04 PM

I used to work in a photo lab for an Eckerd drug store. Their policy was that if children were nude, whoever was developing had to use their own judgment as to whether it was pornographic or not. If they felt it WAS, they were to call the police immediately.

I agree that what happened was unfortunate, but I’m sure the person developing the pics just thought they were protecting a child.

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 3:26 PM

They should absolutely report it. I’m sure most Walmart employees are not qualified to determine if something is pornographic or not. That decision should be made by Child Services, who were (at least according to the parents here) completely off base in the case.

Keep in mind we haven’t seen the photos. We are taking the parents word that the images were not pornographic. If they had been, the parents would probably say exactly the same thing.

Fiona September 18, 2009, 3:26 PM

They should absolutely report it. I’m sure most Walmart employees are not qualified to determine if something is pornographic or not. That decision should be made by Child Services, who were (at least according to the parents here) completely off base in the case.

Keep in mind we haven’t seen the photos. We are taking the parents word that the images were not pornographic. If they had been, the parents would probably say exactly the same thing.

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 3:58 PM

This is totally ridiculous. Little-kid bath pictures are an embarrassing, but necessary, part of growing up. ALL parents take pictures of their kids in the bath. If there’s something sexual about taking the pictures, then does that mean there’s something sexual about a parent bathing his or her child? I don’t understand why people are so eager to try and get others in trouble these days.

Anonymous September 18, 2009, 4:01 PM

What potential case, Carly? Every parent I know including us has a photo or two of our kids in the tub…nothing porno or perverted about it. Walmart stepped waaaaay over boundaries and the local jurisdiction including the local child services was doing their job; IE, overreacting.

Quel September 18, 2009, 4:46 PM

I have bath pics of my son, but his genitals aren’t showing. There must have been something abnormal about the pics in order for everybody to react the way they did. If the pictures did indeed show the girls’ genitals, maybe the parents should have used some common sense in having them developed at Walmart—I wouldn’t want random Walmart workers seeing my kid’s parts.

jessica September 18, 2009, 5:00 PM

I think the walmart staff did exaggerate, but what about social services, the cops, and all those involved in the actual deed of taking the kids away??, it took them a month, with the children already under custody, to see the pics?? they should have seen the pics the moment they were informed and determined they were not pornographic, before hurting healthy and well-taken-care-of kids emotionally by taking them away from their parents for a month without a real reason. Not a day or a week, but a month, to determine those were baby bath pictures, the ones everyone has!! talk about wasting time chasing the wrong person, while other kids are indeed being abused… what a shame

Laf September 18, 2009, 5:12 PM

If you look at pictures of immature human genitalia and instantly see “child porn” (unless the kid is acting out something sexual or there are sexual props involved), maybe you’re a pedophile and should seek help. Bath time pictures of kids (taken by parents or possibly grandparents) doing normal bath time activities: innocent.

mercaties September 18, 2009, 6:29 PM

I can’t really make a determination since I haven’t seen the pictures. I would have to say that if the kids are just in the bath playing then Yes, Walmart way over reacted and should be sued. But, if the pictures are of their genitals or of a sexual nature then yes it should at least be investigated.

Patriot September 18, 2009, 7:12 PM

I agree with Laf. Anyone who looks at a bathtub picture and thinks “child porn” needs psychological help. Something tells me that Carly and Elvira and Anonymous don’t have kids, or they would know better.

“Hey, I’m sorry that my blow-torch burned the whole block down, but you never know—that mosquito I was trying to torch might have carried malaria. Better safe than sorry.”


Leave a reply:



(not displayed)

     




Avoid clicking "Post" more than once
Back to top >>
advertisement