Article 21: Special Proceedings and Actions · Last amended 2010 · Last verified July 22, 2026
In one sentenceThis section closes off three specific defenses in a case brought under the Exploited Children’s Civil Remedy Act, so a defendant cannot escape liability by arguing ignorance of the child’s identity, absence from the depiction, or lack of personal involvement in the acts it portrays.
Full Text of § 25-21,295
Text size
It is not a defense to a cause of action brought pursuant to the Exploited Children's Civil Remedy Act that the defendant:
(1) Did not know the participant or portrayed observer appearing in the visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct;
(2) Did not appear in the visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct containing the participant or portrayed observer; or
(3) Did not commit, assist with the commission of, or personally observe the commission of acts of sexually explicit conduct portrayed in the visual depiction containing the participant or portrayed observer.
Source
Laws 2010, LB728, § 6.
Plain-English Summary
Section 25-21,295 narrows what a defendant can argue in a civil action brought under the Exploited Children’s Civil Remedy Act. It is not a defense that the defendant did not know the participant or portrayed observer appearing in the depiction. It is not a defense that the defendant did not personally appear in the depiction. And it is not a defense that the defendant did not commit, assist with the commission of, or personally observe the acts of sexually explicit conduct the depiction portrays.
Taken together, these three unavailable defenses reach beyond the person who directly created a depiction to anyone in the chain who knowingly and willfully distributed or actively acquired it, or who aided or assisted with any of that — matching the broad scope of liability section 25-21,292 sets out. A defendant cannot avoid responsibility by pointing to distance from the original act of exploitation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a defendant avoid liability by arguing they never met or knew the child in the depiction?
No. Section 25-21,295 states that not knowing the participant or portrayed observer is not a defense.
Can a defendant argue they were never in the depiction themselves?
No. Not appearing in the depiction is listed as an unavailable defense.
Can a defendant argue they didn’t personally commit or watch the underlying acts?
No. Not committing, assisting with the commission of, or personally observing the acts of sexually explicit conduct is also an unavailable defense.
Why does the act rule out these defenses?
It matches the reach of the cause of action in section 25-21,292, which covers not just creators but anyone who knowingly and willfully distributed, actively acquired, or aided or assisted with the depiction.
Does this section limit any other defenses a defendant might raise?
No. It addresses only the three specific defenses it names; it does not otherwise restrict the defenses available in the action.
Source & verification. Section text and the amendment-history citation are
reproduced verbatim from the Nebraska Legislature, Revisor of Statutes, enacted by the
Nebraska Legislature. Last verified July 22, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as:defenses not available exploited children actliability without personal knowledge child exploitationdistributor liability child sexual abuse material nebraskadefense limitations civil remedy actunavailable defenses section 25-21295