Skip to main content

Full text of "Untitled"

See other formats


REGISTER OF 

CLASSIFICATION DECISIONS 


Date of entry in Register: 

Name of appiicant/court: 
Applicant to the Labelling Body: 
Title of Publication: 

Other Known Titles: 

Director: 

Producer: 

Publisher: 

Author: 

Format: 

Country of Origin: 

Language: 


16 December 1999 

The District Court at Christchurch 

Not Applicable 

Untitled 

DIA Exhibit #28 
Not Applicable 
Not Applicable 
Not Applicable 
Not Applicable 
Computer Printout 
Not Applicable 
Not Applicable 


Components of film originally examined: Not Applicable. 

Feature: 

Trailers: 

Excision/Alteration: Not Applicable. 


Running time: 
Running time: 

Total Running time: 


Reason(s) for Excision: 

Not Applicable. 


... Please turn over 


tmpll43 




Classification Decision: 


Objectionable. 

Display Conditions: 
Not Applicable. 

Descriptive Note: 
Not Applicable. 


Direction to issue a label has been given on: Not Applicable. 


SUMMARY OF THE REASONS FOR DECISION: 

The untitled computer printout also known as DIA Exhibit #28 is classified as: 
Objectionable. 

The publication comprises an A4 sheet of white paper containing five photographic 
images in sepia tonings. The subjects are all naked boys and vary in age from about 
10 years to late teens. Various devices used in producing these images serve to 
eroticise the nudity of the subjects, including the location in which the images were 
taken, body positioning and lighting. 

The computer printout is classified as objectionable due to the extent to which, and the 
manner in which, the images exploit the nudity of children and young persons. Given 
the characteristics of the publication, the Classification Office considers that the main 
purpose of the computer printout is the titillation or sexual arousal of adults with a 
sexual interest in children and young persons. 

Referring to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the limit on the freedom of 
expression resulting from this classification is considered to be reasonable and 
demonstrably justified, given the objective of preventing harm to the public. A less 
restrictive classification, such as making the publication available only to adults, would 
not mitigate the exploitation of children and young persons' nudity for the apparent 
purpose of gratifying adults who are titillated or stimulated by such images. 


OFLCRef: 9901756 


tmpll43