Eh, this is still a civil matter. Unless the picture was made for the purpose of harassment, there is no ill will we can presuppose the perpetrators had towards the victim. Just immense immaturity and a lack of judgement and empathy. Judgement and empathy can be taught. (If it was done with the intent of causing distress, i.e. cruelly, it's a matter for the police.)
I'd need to see more to conclude harassment, i.e. proof of intent to cause psychological harm, versus teasing without any clue about the impacts of one's actions.
> 'boys will be boys' mentality
I don't think this is equivalent. This is immature kids playing with new technology and pushing the boundaries of decency with it. Without proof of intended malice, or evidence of actual harm, it's not a matter for criminal procedure.
Teasing, whether you have a clue or not, is intent to cause psychological harm.
> Without proof of intended malice, or evidence of actual harm, it's not a matter for criminal procedure.
I concur. However I think it absolutely is grounds for a civil matter.
As someone who teased and was teased, was bullied and may have crossed into bullying, I disagree. The behaviours, when done with a group, are the seeking of social approval. The victim is closer to irrelevant than targeted. Where it crosses into bullying or harassment is where the victim is germane.
Yes, that's why invesitgations happen.
Source? It's a shower. Where are you hiding the phone?
I guess the FBI might knock down my door soon after trying to Google for some report or stats about it. Just some random news articles. Maybe I overestimated the problem?
Well, yes, that's clearly true whether or not it is also a criminal matter.
> Unless the picture was made for the purpose of harassment, there is no ill will we can presuppose the perpetrators had towards the victim
That is almost tautologically true, but on what bases do you conclude that it is so certain as not to warrant inquiry that there was no intent to harrass?
I conclude it is uncertain enough to warrant solely civil engagement on the basis of them being kids. Otherwise, every five year old pantsing their sibling becomes a matter for armed law enforcement.