that's nothing . . .

I remember when I was in high school, years ago, we were required to do a research paper.

I recall that one girl was doing a paper on child abuse, and she had checked out a book from the library that had numerous photos or horrific abuse: a small child whose mother had burned them with an iron, cigarette burns, bruises, skin rubbed raw where a child had been tightly tied up and left for a while - I couldn't look at them for long.

All those images not only were and are legal to own and view, but they were in a book that was being lent out to minors from the city library and nobody thought twice about it.

It's perfectly legal and acceptable in the United States to see photos of abused children, as long as nothing sexual is involved - but when sex is involved, all those other things (physical abuse, physical neglect, even emotional abuse and neglect) can be dispensed with.

So, no, I don't buy the story that they don't want to show the photos to the jury because they don't want to upset them. I think they don't want the jury to see the photos because some of the jurors will laugh in their faces when they're told that these are images of child abuse.