Taking cues from their close friend, no doubt older and wiser at a wintry 15, the two 13-year-olds broke out their cell phones -- T-Mobile Sidekicks, the only phones they'd ever possessed -- and made themselves models for a time.

Raising their shirts, they used each phone's camera to shoot close-up shots of their breasts. Giggling, they watched their leader remove her underwear, place the mobile between her legs and take photos. Armed with phones now storing salacious snapshots, they prepared to go out.

Too young to gain entry into more-mainstream clubs, they settled for the 17- and younger disco a few blocks away. Mid-dance, the 15-year-old met a man she liked.

"She didn't know him," one of her friends, a heavy-set girl with a raspy voice, said. "But they started talking. She had a Sidekick. He had a Sidekick. She had low self-esteem, so she sent him a picture of her titties."

"He kept asking her for more," she explained. "So she sent them, and he sent her pictures back."

And each photo sent thrust the correspondents further into possible criminal roles -- unwitting ones or not.

Sexting -- the combination of the word "sex" with "texting" -- denotes the sending of illicit photos via text message. And it can be a felony. Federal law partially defines child pornography as the "production of such visual depiction[s] [that] involve the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct." It stands to reason that texting out prurient photos of a minor counts as child pornography, but that could be the case even should that sender (and receiver) be a minor as well.

The advent of cell phone cameras and the ease with which minors may procure them has made more child pornographers of children than anyone could, perhaps, have deemed possible. Sexting has increased to such an extent that when the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, a nonprofit promoting sexual education, joined Cosmogirl.com in presenting site visitors with a survey concerning their "electronic activity," 20 percent of the nearly 1,300 adolescents who participated said they had, at one point or another, "sent/posted nude or semi-nude pictures or videos of themselves."

And, of course, Los Angeles high school students like that 15-year-old and her friends have been doing so for years. The photos the girls shot are already two years old; the oldest of the pack's first child is due in April.

But only now are they and their contemporaries learning that their antics could carry a heavy legal price, and only now is the city's school district acknowledging that sexting may be an issue here as well, that it, too, must be ready to react should a principal chance upon such photos.

Nationwide, students caught sexting face porn charges.

Those cases most widely publicized have taken place in Cape Cod, Mass. and Wyoming County, Pa. where school principals have come across the photos and reported the students to the police.

So teenagers could effectively forge a felon's identity for themselves simply by clicking a shutter and hitting send.

Much of the punishing power rests, at least initially, in the hands of those school principals. They cannot control the spread of the photos, nor can they track or keep a handle on whether or not shots meant to remain in texted-form on one phone end up on child porn Web sites in an indelible paperless trail for those depicted in the photos to deal with for the rest of their lives.

But they can, upon discovering incidences of sexting, decide whether or not to call the police. Their call would hand the minors over to those potential child pornography charges.

How exactly the Los Angeles Unified School District officials would handle a sexting case remains unknown -- partly because principals have not yet come across such things directly or have chosen not to report them when they have.

L.A. Unified Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines acknowledged that he had never heard of the phenomenon until he read a recent article and had been contacted by this reporter. In a phone  interview Cortines said a policy should be developed so that principals know how to address the issue and that students are fairly warned of the consequences.

Nothing to see Here, Nothing to see. Is There?

"If there was an issue, and it was discovered at a school," Cortines said, "the local superintendent would probably take care of it, but I would also be made aware of it."

Explaining that he had never until now really heard of sexting, and that he would have to figure out what his -- and the school district's -- general approach should be towards the act and its sexters, he said, "You've raised an issue with me. What should be our policy? We have a responsibility to communicate what our policy is, and we have not done that. Students and parents should be notified."

When asked what he would do when faced with a sexting situation, he replied that he supported the idea of alerting the authorities, even if that action might lead to a student receiving serious punishment.

"I encourage people not to use their judgment, but to report a problem," Cortines said. "The police should make the decision. If they feel it's worthy [of trial], then it is. I'm probably more stringent that I should be, but I err on that. Too many minors have gotten into trouble."

"But," he continued, "knowing that they could be charged with child pornography wouldn't change my decision. Parents and law enforcement should be notified."

"It's their issue, not mine," he concluded.

He stressed, however, that one of the reasons sexting may have been a problem in the first place could stem, as it had with him and the rest of the upper echelons of the district, from the fact that most people were ignorant of the ramifications a simple text could have in their regular and online lives as well as on their freedom.

"I think with the advent of so much technology, there's a lot of potential for the manipulation of young people through it," he said. "We have a responsibility to warn parents and students [what could happen to the minors]."

Cortines emphasized how unfair it would be to punish someone without first warning that individual there could be consequences to his or her actions.

"If someone's hands could be cut off," he said, "he should be told that could happen before springing that on him, and if he still engages in [the crime], then so be it; then it's his fault."

But Everybody's Doing It...and Still Ignorantly

And what of those minors who may not now know sexting's illegal?

"It's illegal?" the two friends, now 15, chorused in unison after school one Wednesday. "Nobody knows it's illegal. Nobody."

The girls could not be named as that information would put them at risk of facing child pornography charges. They agreed to be interviewed off-campus on the condition that neither they nor their school be identified.

Would they continue to sext if they found out it was?

"Yes," said the girls together.

"It's like you telling the kid not to jump in the pool, and he hot," one said. "Well, he's gonna jump into the pool, even if you're telling him not to. You tell him not to drink the last juice, he's gonna drink it. People still do drugs, and that's illegal."

"They'd probably say 'it may be illegal, but it's my phone, so I don't care,'" the other girl explained, playing a bit with brightly colored streaked hair.

But why do it in the first place?

Some, from both sexes, the girls thought, did it to broadcast the fact they were endowed. "They do it to show that their thing is big -- same thing with girls and boobs," one said. "It's like, 'I got a 'D',' and he's like 'Prove it.'"

Others, more often female, they said, did it out of peer pressure or to satisfy the boy they liked.

"People ask and keep on asking," said the more voluptuous of the two students. "it's like asking 'can I have a cookie? Can I have a cookie? Can I have a cookie?' Eventually, you're gonna give it to them!"

Students at Crenshaw High School responded to similar questions, beginning with whether or not they knew sexting was illegal.

"It's illegal?" 11th-grader Deon Washington asked. "People don't know that. But sexting's very common. It's a problem here."

Did he think kids his age would continue to sext were they to find out it was against the law?

"Yes," responded Washington, nodding vigorously, "They wouldn't be open about it, but yes."

Crenshaw High School yearbook teacher Carolyn Scott outlined why she thought little would deter those set on sexting from doing so.

"They're at the age where even if their mouths are moving," Scott said, "they don't think they could be caught talking."

Beneath the Surface

Harsh as child pornography charges could be, however, the problems with simply allowing this behavior and such pressure to continue could be manifold, and of a less tangible, more psychologically damaging nature.

"A lot of girls do it to attract guys," Washington said, "but a lot of the guys spread the photos."

"And then you get offended and start fighting," the husky voiced girl sighed.

"It breaks down on gender lines," said Erik Kronstadt, history teacher at the Marc and Eva Stern Match and Science School, an LAUSD granted charter school affiliated with both California State University, Los Angeles and the Alliance for College-Ready Public Schools. "I worry about my female students, I really do and how susceptible they are to manipulation and lies by men and boys their age."

Spreading these photos could, in fact, have tragic consequences.

In the case of Ohio adolescent Jessica Logan, sexting could have catalyzed, if not directly led to, her suicide. After her boyfriend forwarded the suggestive photos she had taken of herself and sent to him to a group of girls in the school, they began calling her a slut and Logan took her own life. The sexting-related shame and humiliation cannot, likely, be blamed for Logan's death, but their involvement is clear.

"This issue is a complicated one," Van Ness Middle School and Aldama Elementary School psychologist Desiree Freudiger said in an e-mail. "It is natural for adolescents to go through their sexual developmental phase, and with cell phones being a huge part of today's world, it may be unavoidable. The serious types of situations [like photo spreading] would likely be psychologically traumatizing."

Then Whose Line is it, Anyway?

Given the potential for public shame and that of criminal charges, whose responsibility is it to monitor this activity?

"It [any given sext] is really none of my business," Crenshaw High School Dean Bill Vanderburg said. "I don't wanna see it. I don't want to know."

But how would parents react to and deal with sexting?

"I still think it should be a legal issue," said Johnnie McCray, mother of a Crenshaw High School 9th grader, tossing her head during an on-campus interview. McCray volunteers at the high school, keeping an extra eye on students in an attempt to nip any wayward behavior in the bud. "Sure, if I caught my son, he would be in so much trouble, and he wouldn't have his computer or phone anymore."

But she implied it should be an issue that, at the end of the day, is the court's business. "I don't think it's crazy that it's illegal," she said. "I don't think children should be taking naked pictures of themselves."

"They think it's OK," she continued. "They think it's not sex because there's no contact. But they don't understand they're setting themselves up to get raped or molested. It's common sense. Someone finds the picture, they gonna see you walking down the street, and they gonna snatch you up."

The number of rapes related to sexting is not one easily discovered, but McCray further illuminated the very real problem behind pictures on the Internet.

"You can get a [print] picture and tear it up or burn it," she said, frowning, "but once you get a text, it stays, and you can't hide anymore."

Still, she finds criminally charging the students might be too draconian a reaction for her to support.

"I think sometimes the punishment's a bit too harsh," she said. "Yes it should be on their permanent record, but that's fine, they need to understand this is not good. It's just not good."

If you Cannot go to the Law, can the Law Come to you?

 "Good" or "not good," though, this is serious. Those teens discovered are facing very real, very grave consequences.

Just Wednesday, CNN reported Florida-based recently turned 18-year-old Phillip Alpert had to register as a sex offender after police discovered he had disseminated nude texted photos of his 16-year-old girlfriend after an argument.

"'You will find me on the registered sex offender list next to people who have raped children, molested kids, things like that, because I sent child pornography,'"...Alpert [told CNN] in disbelief, explaining, 'You think child pornography, you think 6-year-old, 3-year-old little kids who can't think for themselves, who are taken advantage of. That really wasn't the case.'"

But just weeks before, a Los Angeles criminal lawyer could not imagine someone like Alpert facing that kind of situation.

"You can indict a loaf of bread if you want," Ryan Okabe, attorney for and co-founder of Redondo Beach-based criminal defense firm Okabe & Haushalter, said in a phone interview. "It doesn't mean it's going to stick. When you're dealing with young children sending these off, you might have a hard time convincing a jury these kids are pornographers."

Child pornography law has not yet changed since the sexting debacle with children themselves as perpetrators has come to light, and Okabe said that he "hasn't heard of prosecuting agencies prosecuting children for this in Los Angeles."

Okabe clarified that much of pornography defenses concern performing an action "knowingly" -- or not. If a 13-year-old boy opens a text that contains a nude photo of his 13-year-old girlfriend, not knowing that is what he will find, there's less of a problem and easier chance of defending the boy.

But even with regards to knowingly sending a picture of him or herself, Okabe said he thought it would be difficult to prosecute a 13-year-old sexting with her own image.

Perhaps the law would have to accommodate children-child-pornographers dealing with new technology?

"This questions whether the person who is the victim of the crime can be charged for the crime," UCLA legal ethics professor Scott Cummings said. "And it questions how old you have to be to be charged with this kind of crime."

There will probably be, he added, "many challenging this."

A little more than a week ago, a Pennsylvania federal judge prevented Wyoming County's district attorney from attempting to charge teenage girls caught sexting with felonies, ABA Journal's Martha Neil reported.

Both the judge and the American Civil Liberties Union said the photos were not merely not pornographic but that they were protected under the girls' First Amendment Rights.

Moreover, the ACLU, the teens and their parents explained that prosecuting the adolescents also violated the citizens' Fourth Amendment, those protecting against unreasonable search and seizures, Rights.

Moving Forward

Nevertheless, the issue behind who should be dealing with this problem -- parents, the school or the law -- is one that is still very much in question.

For the time being, LAUSD has begun to mull over sexting, making plans to deal with it should cases crop up in this city.

"I've just been learning about sexting," LAUSD crisis interventionist Barbara Colwell said in a phone interview, "and I'll be training all of the school counselors to deal with this come fall."