
September 6, 2010
Lynn Powell's 'Framing Innocence'
shows Oberlin rising up for an accused mother
The child on the cover of "Framing Innocence" is Nora Stewart,
age 6, the subject of tens of thousands of pictures before she turned
10, snapped almost daily as she grew up in Oberlin.
The photographer was her mother, Cynthia Stewart, a former Oberlin
College student -- famously depicted herself on a 1970 Life Magazine
cover for a story about co-ed dorms. Stewart stayed in town, becoming a
colorful, well-liked school-bus driver. Then, in 1999, she dropped off
11 rolls of film at the town Discount Drug Mart.
The store had developed countless Stewart negatives over the years, but
this time, a lab processor called in police to look at four photos of
Nora in a bathtub, moving a shower head across herself to rinse off.
Stewart had sought to capture a typical bathing ritual, but the police,
and Lorain County Prosecutor Greg White, saw an 8-year-old in the act
of masturbating with a shower nozzle. The pictures were confiscated as
obscene, and Stewart was charged with felony child pornography. She
faced 16 years in prison.
"We do not see things as they are. We see things as we are," Oberlin
poet and author Lynn Powell quotes from the Talmud.
In "Framing Innocence," Powell tells the story of "a Mother's
Photographs, a Prosecutor's Zeal, and a Small Town's Response" in a
thoughtful, measured way. She writes as a community champion of
Stewart's innocence, but she is honest enough to report that one of the
notorious pictures, for a moment, gravely unsettled her.
Still, those who knew Stewart -- a warm, earnest hippie who gave birth
at home -- were shocked by her arrest. She lost her bus-driving job
immediately, then an organic-food grocer came forward to provide
another. The community rose up:
"A lawyer offered to be on a $10 retainer in case the family needed an
attorney especially for Nora. A sculptor made the family a talisman of
stone and strips of willow. Nora's violin teacher stopped charging for
lessons. Cynthia's landlady . . . stopped charging rent."
|

|
In this well-written, absorbing book, Powell charts the
ingenious ways
the prickly residents of Oberlin rallied to support Stewart and her
partner, David Perrotta, and to back down White. The born-again
guardian ad litem turned into an ally. Sources within the courthouse
leaked information to the activists. Eventually, and painfully, the
prosecutor and Stewart's lawyers bargained a truce, settling on a
diversion agreement with the court.
White and his assistant refused to give Powell interviews, but her
careful reporting lets the reader intuit a good deal. The book drags
some in the legal sections -- a magistrate sustaining/overruling
various objections -- but it also lets us ponder how a vague law was
used against an unconventional mother; where the boundaries of family
privacy reside; and how the First Amendment and notions of nudity came
into play.
Nora Stewart is 19 now and a sophomore at Yale University. Her parents'
partnership did not survive the ordeal.
* * *
Following is article published by City
Beat while Cynthia was undergoing her ordeal.
Thursday, January 27,2000
A Snapshot of What Freedom Is and Isn't
by SYBIL IBBURTEZAN
Like many parents, Cynthia Stewart is an ardent amateur photographer
when it comes to recording the lives of her children. Unlike most, the
Oberlin Schools bus driver faces up to 16 years in prison on two
criminal charges of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material
and pandering sexually oriented photographs involving a minor.
Her crime was taking 19 pictures of her 8-year-old daughter Nora in the
bath (apparently Nora takes her baths naked!) and giving the roll of
film to a Discount Drug Mart in Oberlin for developing. The store sent
it to Fuji Color Processing of Ohio in Mansfield, where technicians
felt compelled to contact Mansfield police, who sent the photos to
police in Oberlin, who arrested Stewart.
So what lewd and lascivious smut is occurring in these pictures, which
Lorain County Prosecutor Gregory White describes as "well over the
line" and "not anywhere near the category of normal"? Well, it's not so
easy to say, as for months the prosecutor's office has refused to make
prints of the photographs available to defense lawyers.
"The state of Ohio is not in the business of reproducing child
pornography," Assistant Prosecutor Jonathan Rosenbaum explained,
refusing to share the photos unless a court order compelled him to do
so. "Clearly, the fewer copies of such prohibited material that are in
existence will make the task of destroying them and removing them from
the face of this planet much more easy."
Stewart herself has not seen the confiscated pictures she took.
In response to a defense request for more specifics about the case,
Rosenbaum filed a one-paragraph reply, saying nine of the pictures had
the child "assuming adult-like postures or expressions which are
inappropriate and beyond her years" and in two of the pictures she
holds a shower sprayer in "a provocative and adult-like manner which is
inconsistent with normal photographs of a child of tender years and
certainly inappropriate."
No sex acts here. No other persons or beasts. The child's not touching
herself. There's no selling or publishing or posting of these images.
It's just that the pictures are not what these publicly funded art
critics consider "normal."
The ACLU has filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of Stewart,
arguing that the Ohio statute under which she is charged is so vague
and overbroad it permits violations of her constitutional rights. ACLU
lawyers who have seen the photographs say they're completely innocuous
pictures of a child playing in a bathtub. Stewart's attorneys agree,
saying the pictures are "innocent depictions ... which journalize a
child's activities and life. There is no evidence to establish that
this child is abused or exploited in any way."
Meanwhile, Cynthia and her husband, Dave Stewart, put a $20,000 lien on
their house to post Cynthia's bond to get her out of jail and have
already used up their life savings for her legal defense. Nora has been
taunted on her school playground, and her family is being investigated
by child protective services, who are considering removing her from the
family home. The fear and anxiety wrought by the genuinely
"provocative," "inappropriate" and "well over the line" actions of
local public officials has caused inexcusable and irreparable damage to
this family's lives. The real abuse here has been confusing
prosecutorial with persecutorial.
If photographing your child undressed is a criminal act in Ohio,
countless other parents must be living in fear of prosecution. Simply
picturing nakedness, even of minors, is not porn or obscenity and
should not be a crime. Even sexuality is not something to be purged of
representation, as it is a normal part of children's identities. We so
need to grow up as a culture when it comes to these issues!
|