As many have experienced, relationship breakups can sometimes be brutal and emotionally charged. Often, the images and videos were created voluntarily. But, however much you want some revenge, it is a crime to publish such images and/or videos, even if they were made with consent. The issue of consent involves the distribution of images/videos, not their creation.

If you have been arrested or charged with revenge porn here in Maryland, you will need seasoned and skilled Maryland criminal defense lawyers to help. The Law Office of Robert Castro is a top-rated law firm with experienced criminal defense lawyers in Waldorf, Maryland.

What Is Revenge Porn in Maryland?

Revenge porn is a crime in Maryland (and also can lead to civil lawsuits where victims can claim substantial sums of money in compensation for being victimized). The crime is commonly called “revenge porn” because it often involves a jilted romantic partner distributing pornographic images and/or video – sexually explicit images and/or video – of the partner as retaliation or revenge for the breakup.

There’s a large number of elements to the crime of revenge porn in Maryland. From the standpoint of providing a solid criminal defense, this is “good.”

Under Maryland Criminal Law Code 3-809, revenge porn is defined as:

Knowingly distribute a visual representation of another identifiable person that displays the other person with his or her intimate parts exposed or while engaged in an act of sexual activity:

(1) with the intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce the other person;

(2) (i) under circumstances in which the person knew that the other person did not consent to the distribution; or (ii) with reckless disregard as to whether the person consented to the distribution; and

(3) under circumstances in which the other person had a reasonable expectation that the image would remain private.”

From this legal definition of revenge porn as a crime, you can determine several potential defenses.

Legal Consequences of Revenge Porn in Maryland

A conviction for revenge porn in Maryland carries up to 2 years in jail and/or a $5,000 fine.

Maryland expanded its law to cover AI‑generated deepfakes, treating synthetic images the same as real ones.

Also, a new amendment allows victims to pursue civil claims, including defamation or invasion of privacy, and recover attorney’s fees. Practically, this means a single act, whether posting to social media or sending via text, can spark both criminal charges and civil lawsuits.

Appellate Court Reverses Protective Order in Dispute Over Ex-Husband’s Posting of Ex-Wife’s Photos to Tumblr

Revenge porn may also be cited as grounds for issuing a protective order in the context of family law. That is to say, revenge porn is considered a form of “abuse,” and a judge can issue an injunction to put a stop to it. At the same time, the revenge porn law does require proof that the party who distributed the images possessed “intent to harm or harass” the alleged victim. The evidence must also show that the person claiming revenge porn had a “reasonable expectation that the image would remain private.”

An unreported decision from the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, Leister v. Leister, demonstrates the importance of both of these requirements. In this instance, a former wife sought a protective order against her ex-husband.

During the marriage, the former husband often took “explicit photos and videos of and with” the former wife. Both parties consented to the creation of these images. Indeed, at one point, the former wife told the former husband he could even post some of the photos to his Reddit account “provided that her face was not displayed in any of the pictures.”

However, the former husband went beyond this consent and decided to also post explicit photos of the former wife to his Tumblr account. These images also did not show the former wife’s face.

After the parties separated and the former wife learned of the Tumblr posts, she demanded that the former husband remove “all of the pictures and videos of her from the Internet.” The former husband later testified in court that he “made a concerted effort to remove the images,” but some of them still had not been removed.

The trial court issued a protective order despite finding the former husband lacked any intent to harm or harass the former wife. The Court of Special Appeals said that it was a legal error and reversed the protective order. As noted above, Maryland law explicitly requires proof of intent to harm or harass. Furthermore, the trial court failed to resolve the apparent contradiction between the former wife’s claim that she had an expectation of privacy in the posted images and her prior decision to consent to their posting on Reddit.

Maryland Criminal Defenses Against Revenge Porn Charges

Note that there are two intent elements: intent to distribute and intent to harm. Sometimes, lack of intent can be a basis for a criminal defense. But the question of intent often depends on the circumstances.

Lack of Intent to Harm or Coerce

A guilty verdict requires proof of intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce. If the defendant can demonstrate that the material was shared inadvertently, without malicious intent, or due to a misunderstanding, it may undermine the intent. For example, accidentally forwarding a message without knowledge of its contents may defeat the intent element.

Consent

If the subject explicitly or implicitly consented to sharing the images, such as by posting them publicly or sending them to others, then there was no non-consensual distribution. Proving consent often hinges on communication records (e.g., texts, emails) showing agreement or participation.

No Expectation of Privacy

Images already posted publicly on adult content platforms, public social media, or forums may not meet the expectations of privacy. Courts have ruled that content posted publicly lacks the protected expectation and does not qualify as revenge porn.

Mistaken Identity

Mistaken Identity can be raised if someone else is responsible. Digital forensics – IP logs, metadata, timestamps – can prove that another person accessed or shared the content. Such evidence can support a motion for dismissal if the State cannot prove the defendant’s involvement.

Non-Identifiable Imagery

Suppose the individual’s identity cannot be established from the content. In that case, faces are blurred, and unique identifiers are removed, the defense can argue that the content doesn’t depict an identifiable person, thereby undermining a key statutory element.

Constitutional and Procedural Challenges

Common procedural defenses include:

• Illegal Search and Seizure: If police violate Fourth Amendment rights during a device seizure, digital evidence may be suppressed.
• Insufficient Evidence: The State must meet all statutory elements—intent, non-consent, and identification beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Overbroad Statute or Free Speech Concerns: Though these defenses are rare and largely unsuccessful in Maryland, they may be available in specific contexts.

Contact a Waldorf, Maryland Criminal Defense Lawyer Today

Facing criminal charges under Maryland’s revenge porn statute carries potentially severe outcomes – up to two years in prison and a $5,000 fine, along with civil liability. However, a well-constructed defense can challenge intent, consent, identification, and procedural legality.

If you are charged with revenge porn or related offenses, you need representation that understands both the law and the sensitive context. Penalties are high, and legal battles can be complex, but you don’t have to face them alone.

For more information or to ask questions, please contact our office to speak with an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer at (301) 870-1200. We are Waldorf, MD, Criminal defense lawyers. Our address is 2670 Crain Highway, Waldorf, MD 20601.