Electronic Child Exploitation in Georgia

Georgia’s “Computer or Electronic Pornography and Child Exploitation Prevention Act,” codified at O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100.2, targets the use of computers and electronic devices to solicit, seduce, lure, or entice a minor into sexual conduct. The statute is structured to reach this conduct even when no actual child is involved, a feature central to how it operates in practice.

What Conduct the Statute Covers

Section 16-12-100.2 criminalizes using a computer or other electronic device to solicit, seduce, lure, or entice a child, or a person believed to be a child, to engage in sexual conduct. The statute separately prohibits transmitting obscene material to a minor through electronic means. Together, these provisions target the grooming and solicitation pathway, the process by which an offender uses electronic communication to pursue sexual contact with or exposure of a minor, rather than the separate question of producing or possessing child sexual abuse material.

The “Believed to Be a Child” Standard

One of the statute’s most significant features is that prosecution does not require an actual minor victim. Georgia law extends liability to situations where the person solicited is only believed to be a child, which is the legal foundation for undercover internet sting operations conducted by law enforcement. Because the statute is written around the offender’s belief rather than the target’s actual age, a defendant cannot avoid liability simply by showing that the person on the other end of the communication was, in fact, an adult posing as a minor.

Why Sting Operations Work Under This Statute

This “believed to be a child” framework closes off what might otherwise be called an impossibility defense, the argument that no crime occurred because no real child was actually present or at risk. Because the statute focuses on the offender’s belief and intent at the time of the solicitation, an undercover officer posing as a minor online can support a prosecution in the same way an actual minor victim could, which is a recurring point of public confusion about how these prosecutions function.

Distinguishing This Offense From CSAM Possession

Section 16-12-100.2 should not be confused with O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100, a separate statute that addresses the production, possession, and distribution of child sexual abuse material. The two statutes target different conduct: § 16-12-100 is concerned with the creation and circulation of unlawful material itself, while § 16-12-100.2 is concerned with the solicitation and grooming pathway carried out through electronic communication, regardless of whether any unlawful material is ultimately produced or exchanged.

Penalties

A conviction under § 16-12-100.2 is prosecuted as a felony offense, reflecting the seriousness with which Georgia law treats electronic solicitation of minors, with the specific sentencing range determined by the current statutory text.

Registration Consequences

Beyond the criminal penalty itself, a conviction under § 16-12-100.2 triggers an obligation to register as a sex offender under O.C.G.A. § 42-1-12. The specific mechanics of that registration requirement, including its duration, are addressed under a separate statutory framework; the relevant point here is that a conviction under this statute carries that registration consequence in addition to any criminal sentence.

How This Offense Differs From Child Molestation

Electronic solicitation under § 16-12-100.2 is also distinct from child molestation under O.C.G.A. § 16-6-4, which addresses immoral or indecent acts done to or in the presence of a child rather than electronic solicitation conduct. The two statutes can apply to overlapping factual scenarios in some cases, but they are separate offenses with separate elements.

This article provides general information about Georgia law and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed Georgia attorney about a specific situation.