In others, it’s a confidence boost or confirmation that someone finds you attractive or wants to pursue a relationship with you.Whatever the provocation, web-based relationships have become a unique outlet for cheaters, a way for them to guarantee easy access to others and to eliminate the effort in hiding their infidelity.Justice Matthew Durrant said he wondered if the case depended on whether or not Gallegos believed this was a minor."If a person tells you they're a minor you'd better log off," Durham said.People who are unfaithful, be it online or in person, usually seek something lacking from their real-life relationships.In some cases, it’s friendship and attention, or the chance to reveal your true self to someone.The trial court ruled the testimony was not relevant.
"All you're doing is criminalizing speech," said attorney Ann Taliaferro. Even if a suspect outright confesses to a crime, the state must show independent evidence that they either committed the crime or intended to commit a crime.
He said he was "troubled" by the law and concerned about its constitutionality.
In this case, Wilkins said it appeared all the state needed to do to convict someone was to go online, set up a meeting for sex and that is enough.
Taliaferro argued that on the Internet people pose as someone they are not all of the time and that it is difficult to tell who you are actually chatting with.
Because of this, Internet chat sometimes turns into fantasy and is not grounded in reality.