Wow..

[Heracles 417]

If that was my child, I would not be talking photos to any store to have them printed. Then again I probably wouldn't find the need to take photos of kids like that but that is just me.

Walmart did act appropriately considering the sick f---ks that are out there in the US. I would rather protect or save a child from being abused or molested than worry about some idiots being inconvenienced. How would they have liked it if it was their child and someone else did have their photos.

Once the police confirmed they were the parents, they should have moved along.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Booyah!

[Marilyn. 340]

there were 144 pictures on the memory card. I am assuming that maybe the parents forgot they were on there

[Ling Ling 22]

If that was my child, I would not be talking photos to any store to have them printed. Then again I probably wouldn't find the need to take photos of kids like that but that is just me.

Walmart did act appropriately considering the sick f---ks that are out there in the US. I would rather protect or save a child from being abused or molested than worry about some idiots being inconvenienced. How would they have liked it if it was their child and someone else did have their photos.

Once the police confirmed they were the parents, they should have moved along.

Agreed. Who in their right mind would LEAVE nude pictures of their child in today's Internet age?

How easy is it for some clerk to make a second copy and sell it on the internet? While I also don't agree with bath time pics, I can understand why a parent would want a print of those memories. But I would ABSOLUTELY wait and watch everything that happened to the original and the copies.

Yeah, the cops absolutely went too far (taking the children away for a month). It should've been wrapped up in an hour or less....but no, it's not enough just to say "yeah, they're the parents". They still need to interview the kids and parents separately by someone trained to do so. Hopefully by someone who won't ask leading questions and won't make the situation any worse than it need be.

[Ling Ling 22]

there were 144 pictures on the memory card. I am assuming that maybe the parents forgot they were on there

Agreed...it may have been an accident. Regardless, it had to be investigated. Walmart did the right thing. The police went overboard.

If the parents should have an issue with anyone, it's the police. But first and foremost they should have an issue with each other for not PROTECTING private pictures of their children. I think they're pointing one finger at everyone else, and three back at themselves.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Common sense is flying out the window here. I, for one, hope that the law suit is successful and that courts stick it to Wal-Mart and send a strong signal to any other service providers that contemplate playing the moral police.

1) SO...you would be OK with people knowing that Walmart is the place you can take your nude pictures of children, and not have to worry about anyone asking any questions?

2) You'd be fine with your babysitter having unauthorized pictures of your child processed at Walmart, and then sold to some scumbag who sells them on the Internet?

3) You wouldn't be even a little bit angry if you found out that the clerk at Walmart saw these pictures, and just handed them to the babysitter's boyfriend with no questions asked?

1) No, I'd be fine with Wal-Mart focusing on the business they're in - retailing. They're neither the police nor the moral police.

2) We don't utilize babysitters. We chose not to put our daughter into situations where something bad might happen to her.

3) Moot point - see #2.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Mr. Big Dog

[Dave and Helena 0]

Here's another victim of perverts. My parents took pictures of me and my best friend in the bathtub when we were about five. Horrible! <Sarcasm font off>

####### is wrong with the world these days and what happened to common sense? Is this a change of the times or an American thing? When I was a kid I was roaming the town where I lived without my parents freaking out, the only rule was to be home for dinner. If I had kids and gave them the same freedom I had, I'd probably be accused of being a horrible parent.

Thanks for pointing out that Wal Mart checks all the pictures when processing them, hence invading the privacy of their customers. I for one will never use Wal Mart for printing out my photos. Their customers pay them to print out their photos. What is on those photos is none of Wal Mart's business.

[GabiandVi 34]

I'll admit that I'm paranoid about my daughter's safety, and I see perverts around every corner. And I wouldn't mind Walmart or any other photo place reporting nude pictures of my child on my usb to the authorities. I wouldn't even mind the police talking to me, though I think that would be an overreaction once they looked at the pictures and established that I'm the parent. But if it went farther than that, I would be upset about it. I wouldn't want them talking to my child. It could scar her in ways that we can't predict. Any sort of unusual event in the life of a young child makes a lasting impression, and who knows what fears or images would be attached to a strange person in a uniform asking questions about when Mommy bathes her. We can only imagine the negative associations she might have to deal with for years to come as a result of such an event. It might even suggest shame of such a practice to her and alienate her from me. We can't know.

While I appreciate the predicament that a place like Walmart might find itself, and while I support the police in their attempts to protect children, I think if we start assuming nefarious motives behind such innocent things as taking pictures of our own naked children, we have lost the battle to protect their innocence. This kind of thing has been done since cameras have come into the hands of parents.

[Ling Ling 22]

I'll admit that I'm paranoid about my daughter's safety, and I see perverts around every corner. And I wouldn't mind Walmart or any other photo place reporting nude pictures of my child on my usb to the authorities. I wouldn't even mind the police talking to me, though I think that would be an overreaction once they looked at the pictures and established that I'm the parent. But if it went farther than that, I would be upset about it. I wouldn't want them talking to my child. It could scar her in ways that we can't predict. Any sort of unusual event in the life of a young child makes a lasting impression, and who knows what fears or images would be attached to a strange person in a uniform asking questions about when Mommy bathes her. We can only imagine the negative associations she might have to deal with for years to come as a result of such an event. It might even suggest shame of such a practice to her and alienate her from me. We can't know.

While I appreciate the predicament that a place like Walmart might find itself, and while I support the police in their attempts to protect children, I think if we start assuming nefarious motives behind such innocent things as taking pictures of our own naked children, we have lost the battle to protect their innocence. This kind of thing has been done since cameras have come into the hands of parents.

True, this kind of thing HAS happened since cameras came into the hands of parents...but the world was much smaller then. Back then, when the parents handed off that roll of Kodak film to the local photo shop, they knew the guy behind the counter, and he knew them. The guy behind the counter knew the Jones family, and his kids probably played with theirs. When he hand developed the film, and made the prints by hand, he didn't see any harm or foul in the photos...he only saw the pride of his neighbors. He didn't look at them with perverted eyes, but with a quick glance to make sure the exposure was correct, and a smile knowing that they will enjoy these memories forever.

Today is NOT yesterday. Today we live in a world where any picture or even motion picture of an event can be instantly and even semi-anonymously sent around the world, with very little effort. These are different times.

I totally agree that it could be, and I'm sure WAS a very traumatic experience for the entire family. That said, there are a few things that everyone seams to overlook.

One, we don't know what level of cooperation the parents gave the police in resolving the matter. Circumstances where there's a strong opposition to cooperate, or a complete lack of cooperation, both raises red flags, and has an adverse effect in a timely investigation. Second, many here have overlooked the parent's obligation to the situation. The parents had an obligation to protect those pictures, and they failed. Private pictures should be kept private. If by accident or negligence, the harm is still the same, and the blame is still the same. If I give you a hundred dollar bill, and you accidentally lose it, the blame rests on you for not taking every possible measure to insure that it was safe. It's the same with a picture of a nude child, a nude spouse, a nude boyfriend or a nude girlfriend. But even more so in the case of a nude child. The child is not capable of giving their consent...and if you are negligent in maintaining the privacy of the pictures, you have only yourself to blame....not the stranger who looked at your negligence. (this is not to Gabiandvi) I mean, how do you know the guy that works at Walmart isn't a pedophile and didn't just get the job so that he COULD find pics of children? These parents obviously don't want to take responsibility for what happened. It all could have been avoided. Walmart did not walk into their homes and start snooping through their cameras. They are not bad parents for taking the pictures, but they are bad parents for not keeping them private.

[Ling Ling 22]

1) No, I'd be fine with Wal-Mart focusing on the business they're in - retailing. They're neither the police nor the moral police.

2) We don't utilize babysitters. We chose not to put our daughter into situations where something bad might happen to her.

3) Moot point - see #2.

Sorry, your arguments continue to fail. I don't know if you're just being difficult or silly.

You do realize that someday your daughter will be outside of your care. If her boyfriend is kicking her azz in the Walmart store, would you want them to intervene or call the police? If she's an adult, and heaven forbid some sicko would kidnap her and bring in pictures of her being tortured, would you want Walmart to just focus on the business of retailing? Apparently Walmart realizes that there are sickos in this world and that many parents do use babysitters, and that in the real world there are people that take unauthorized pictures of children. Walmart has (and I commend them for it) taken measures to set a policy that prevents their employees from having to act as the police or the moral police. It's a clear policy to wit, nude pictures of children should be reported to the proper authorities. If Walmart were acting as the police then they would try to arrest the people who pickup the pictures. If Walmart were acting as the "moral police" then they would have a confrontation with the person picking up the pictures.

I'm sure that you as a good parent would never put your child or pictures in harms way. I'm sure that you as a good parent would blame yourself if by your negligence you were in fact negligent. You wouldn't go around trying to blame everyone except yourself....for something that should have been avoided. Again, it's not Walmart's job to pry, or to ask a parent "is this really your child in the photos"? It's NOT Walmart's job to be the police or the moral police. I don't see where they tried to be either. They did exactly what most reasonable people would want done. The parents did exactly what most reasonable people would not want done...they negligently placed very private pictures of their children into the hands of a stranger.

[jundp 191]

Maybe I'm odd, but I find the whole "taking pictures of your nude babies/kids" thing to be weird, creepy, and pretty damn offensive.

OMG Did NO ONE catch that Platy is offended by something?!

Pardon the interruption, but this is just one more reason not to ever shop at Wal Mart. Just saying. If child labor in foreign countries, and a complete disregard for American labor laws aren't enough reason...well here you go. Some kid with little to no actual photography experience perusing through your photos....

How about, get a photo printer and a digital camera and do it yourself?