<p>^^ And I doubt that guy would have admitted guilt since he wasn’t guilty.</p>
<p>*They met during freshman orientation and were really good friends all through college.
He had a good job, owned his own home and had a girlfriend when he was arrested for possession of child porn (among other charges).
He has been on house arrest at his parent’s house as the case proceeded and they plea bargained. He will serve 8 years, can earn time off for good behavior and will serve the last year or so at a half way house.
My d has been in touch since she found out - via another college friend who saw him on the news. *</p>
<p>So good friends through college, but not good enough that she knew what was going on in his life until another friend told her about the news report.</p>
<p>I only mention it because with facebook, cell phones, IM’s, email, twitter, etc. etc. most college age people are only all too cognizant of everything that is happening with their good friends. So to be totally without updated contact seems a bit " old- fashioned".</p>
<p>^^^Also, it seems rather gullible to me that your D is taking her friend’s version of events on faith. He is probably underplaying his culpability, saying that he is not allowed to discuss it. I understand that she would WANT it to be some sort of huge misunderstanding, but if I were the OP, I would make sure to remind her that he is most likely guilty of more than making bad choices.</p>
<p>Emerald, the study you brought up in your #40 post, is known as the Butler Study. It is totally bogus. The government created the study so as to get money for the prisons, using a ridiculously low number of men (and then projecting it to all the thousands who are arrested), about 25 or so (which for a research study is already inadequate). The men were already self-selected. That is, they were already in prison for possession. Then, if they “volunteered” to say they had sex with a youngster, they could stay in a safe place. If they didn’t volunteer that, they lost a certain amount of freedoms. Guess what, 85% volunteered. Dah! totally bogus.</p>
<p>Other posters wondered why this guy pleaded guilty. There was no bribery, most likely. It’s cut-and-dried. The guy had the pictures on his computer. There’s no question. The law does not take into account motivation, or not knowing the law. The prosecutor just gets to decide how merciful he/she is, because they hold all the cards (the computer really). Get him for pure possession, get him for distribution. The law does extend his prison time depending on the number of pictures and whether the pictures had youngsters vs 15 year olds. and whether the pictures were soft porn or lewd.</p>
<p>Why do I feel sympathy for the guy? Why are we wasting a young man’s life (and destroy his family)? Because he had these pictures on his computer? He’ll go to prison for 8 horrible years. That should be more than enough to pay his debt to society, but our system wants to destroy it further. Get him listed on the national sex offender registry. Then, what kind of options will he have as a known “sex offender”? Live under a bridge in Florida maybe? it’s true the young victims suffered, but do they have to tell their neighbors? Their employer? Be forced to live in certain places? That’s why they are both victims.</p>
<p>
The young victims had it far worse than the couple of items you mentioned.</p>
<p>We’re all conjecturing on this case with some thinking the guy was somehow railroaded or an innocent bystander in this or that the offense is negligible. Others, like me, are more inclined to think that there was likely a pretty good reason he was sentenced to 8 years after a plea bargain (implying it would have been a longer sentence otherwise). None of us know the details except perhaps the OP but I’m surprised so many assume or consider this as a trivial matter. Perhaps if we knew the details some of us would change our minds on this case.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>nystudent, your logic is so flawed, it is ridiculous. Re-read what I wrote. Some drugs are highly addictive that there is no such thing as their “recreational” use. Have you ever dealt with a crack baby? Or a bunch of little kids thrown out of their apartment because their parents are so high all the time that they are unable to pay the rent? Or a woman beaten up so badly by her druggie BF that her face looks like a piece of cheap steak? Betcha you haven’t. These are the victims I’m talking about.</p>
<p>I’ll add another point: when you get high on certain drugs, chances are pretty good that you are supporting the warlords of Afghanistan and the Taliban. I’m not talking about pot that you get from your corner medicinal pot dispensary here.</p>
<p>ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad, I agree - the young victims are going through hell in a handbasket called post-traumatic stress disorder (and even more).</p>
<p>To be clear - this man is guilty as charged. He fully admits his guilt.</p>
<p>ebeeee - your post -
This is how she feels.</p>
<p>Now, let me be clear. She is not in love with him. She is disgusted by his actions. The story broke in May, she called him and they have spoken, maybe 3-4 times. His parents live a couple of hours away and she is going to see him before he leaves. I think she would like to see his parents as well. </p>
<p>EK - he had completely dropped his college friends, deleted his facebook etc. I think that he was doing bad things and dropped out rather than face them. They have been out of college for a number of years and live in different states.</p>
<p>He was headed for trial in Sept when he plead his case. I didn’t detail all the charges but the Feds we compared what he got to what he could have gotten - he got a good deal. That I know. Jury trials don’t have a hard time finding these guys guilty - the mandatory sentences would have been over 20 years.
He was investigate by ICE. Trust me - they know their business. They had discovered he paid (with a credit card, I assume) to access a website with child porn. Then they found it on the computer. His parents paid for a really good lawyer. I don’t really want to say more than that. One more thing - he leaves Dec 1 but doesn’t know where he is going yet. The Feds like to send you far away from your familiy - so visiting in prison doesn’t seem likely.
google Operation Emissary. There have been three phases and it is nationwide.</p>
<p>Parents - talk to your sons and daughters about the dangers. I can’t say that enough. I am sure his parents never thought it could happen to their son - they must be devastated. He comes from a good middle class family. He never did drugs, never even drank underage in college.</p>
<p>I must say I am shocked by the number of people that are excusing what this guy did. All the he didn’t know it was illegal, he might have just been curious, just looking at it is not bad…Disgusting all of it. This guy knowingly from the sounds of it sought child porn period. I don’t care what level of porn it was, it takes a sick sick person to look that up. And I do not buy for one minute that he thought it was ok to look at pictures, sites, that were from another country. Does this guy never watch the news to see what happens to these people. In this day in age there is no excuse to say you did not know such things are illegal. </p>
<p>Those that are taking this lightly imagine someone took pictures of your young child or a friends child or a relatives child for pornographic reasons. Would you still think it is ok or the person did not know it was illegal to look at such pictures? I would never and could never like something like this is ok.</p>
<p>If a friend of my child’s got arrested and he admitted to doing the things this guy is charged with I would not want them to go and visit him. This is a sick sick person. I couldn’t stop them but I would make my feelings known about it.</p>
<p>I have no sympathy for the guy and what his life will be like after he gets out or what his life will be like while in the big house.</p>
<p>I do feel sympathy–people who seek out child porn are often drawn to it because they were victims themselves. And so the consequences spread and spread. Prison keeps people off the streets for a while, then turns them back more tortured, and dangerous, than they were. We don’t have a good answer for this, but we need to be looking for one.</p>
<p>If I ever accidentally came across a child porn site on the internet I would immediately notify the local police and the FBI as I am sure most normal people would. This “college educated” guy is nothing more than a punk and a pedifile that should spend his time in a jail cell being victimized himself.</p>
<p>As for crimes that are deemed by many to be victimless…there are NO victimless crimes. Whenever there is money exchanged for any illegal act then rest assured someone is going to be a victim. There are those that feel prostitution is a victimless crime because the girls are selling themselves and receiving money for sex acts. Prostitutes are victims…many are addicts or have been turned into addicts by pimps…others have been sold into prostitution…many have been prostituting since the age of 14 or 15. Arent these girls victims?
I am surprised by the appearance of pity that some of you have for this piece of nothing. I am appalled that parents on this site have not been more disgusted by this post and the suggestion of excuses that came along with it. I consider myself a fairly tolerant person but this is rediculus.</p>
<p>Rebelcats - what I said was my other daughter’s bf who is 19 years old was under the impression that child porn on foreign websites was not illegal. Trust me I straightened him out. This is a very smart kid - perhaps there are others who are also under this impression?
Parents - ask your teenage or young adult sons.</p>
<p>momma-three - I agree with you but if you have sons how can you be positive this would not happen to one of them? What would you do if it did? His parents never expected this.</p>
<p>Over the past 5-6 years hundreds of men have been arrested and convicted for child pornography through ICE’s Operation Emissary. Their investigations are thorough and detailed. These are men who are fathers, husbands and professionals. I have no idea what becomes of them after they serve their time in federal prison.</p>
<p>Project Safe Childhood is an initiative by the DOJ that began in 2006:
[Project</a> Safe Childhood Home page](<a href=“http://www.projectsafechildhood.gov/]Project”>http://www.projectsafechildhood.gov/)</p>
<p>Here are some facts from their factsheet:
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As mentioned previously, such sites are typically based in countries where the material is either legal or (more often) legally ambiguous, where the US has either no jurisdiction or no cooperative agreement with local law enforcement, so that notifying the FBI or police accomplishes nothing, except possibly to make yourself a suspect. Furthermore, as these websites are not a secret, law enforcement is already aware of them; tens of thousands of calls every week from “concerned citizens” is not going to help the process along. The problem is not a lack of awareness that this material is out there; it’s gaining access to those responsible, which is exceedingly difficult.</p>
<p>Child porn isn’t images of Marge Simpson in Playboy, it isn’t even the cellphone video a Miss USA contestant took of herself and sent to a boyfriend when she was a minor.
This is what is being distributed.
</p>
<p>For those of you who seem more concerned about the man sentenced- don’t feel bad, I am sure he will make friends in prison. ;)</p>
<p>As far as I can tell, only one poster in this thread seems to be primarily interested in defending the accused. So let’s just acknowledge that we’re all appalled by child abuse and exploitation and want it to stop. There, enough said about that.</p>
<p>As for the Miss USA contestant with the underage video, you do realize that people are being prosecuted for that, too, right? What may seem like excessive sympathy for the accused may come from the fact that, in some jurisdictions, 21-year-olds having consensual sex with 17-year-olds are being prosecuted as zealously as perverts who molest or violently abuse 6-year-olds.</p>
<p>I would like to have the peace of mind of knowing that the men (for it is usually men) being jailed are truly sick and dangerous. I don’t have that confidence today. Examples of prosecutors spending the state’s resources to pursue dubious cases abound.</p>
<p>As for the Miss USA contestant with the underage video, you do realize that people are being prosecuted for that, too, right?</p>
<p>And I realize that middle school boys who swatted girls on their behind as they ran down the hall could be charged with sexual assault- but deflecting and trying to change the subject from adults charged with distributing child porn to " innocent definitions" , is part of the problem.
We are a nation of Puritans and we don’t want to admit that we eat our young.</p>
<p>As far as I can tell, only one poster in this thread seems to be primarily interested in defending the accused.</p>
<p>Would that be the elementary teacher who seems to think that since the sites are " foreign" it is OK?</p>
<p>I feel entirely unsympathetic towards this particular young man after googling Operation Emissary. From the California Chronicle:</p>
<p>"The investigation focused on a commercial website offering access to videos and images of hardcore child pornography. </p>
<p>The website, which was accessible via the Internet, alerted would be subscribers that subscribing to the website was illegal and warned them to be discreet about their purchase."</p>
<p>You don’t “accidentally” click on hard core porn when you have to use a credit card to subscribe to it. You can’t think what you are doing is legal when the website explicitly warns you that it is not. Additionally, a lot of those arrested had previous convictions for violent sexual acts against kids. A search of the home of one of those who did not, and who worked with children, turned up a homemade video of him having sex with an 8 year old. Another admitted he had sexually abused 4 little kids. </p>
<p>There may be cases in gray areas. This isn’t one of them.
Google and read before you start saying that what happened to this young man could happen to anyone.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That would be the leading candidate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. I feel good about putting the guys away who are caught by methods such as this. I think that’s the key to making child porn prosecutions fair—remove the defense that the material could have been obtained “accidentally”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If I were victimized myself, then I’d have the irrefutable proof that I’m looking for, wouldn’t I? I don’t have a different opinion. If someone breaks into my place and steals a few things, I just want my stuff back and some compensation on top of that. If someone punches me in the face I want them to pay the medical bills and some compensation. I’d try to be as civil as possible. There’s no reason to lock a kid up, for example, for breaking into someone’s place and stealing their stuff. Just make them give it back and pay for damages.</p>
<p>I don’t trust the government to be fair to the idiot kid who breaks into people’s places for fun.</p>
<p>I’ve seen cases that I’m not at liberty to talk about from my internship this summer where the punishment clearly didn’t fit the crime at all and the prosecutors had no second thoughts about advocating it. Like 5 years state prison for a petty theft. Total value of stolen stuff: maximum $20. If I were the prosecutor, I’d have told the defendant to give the victim $200+maybe 20 hrs community service and dismiss the case.</p>
<p>I was sexually abused when I was a child- the case never came to trial.</p>
<p>How many cases like that do you imagine there are - or even how many criminals are able to walk free after four months of " therapy", as in the recent Missouri case I cited, and how many children will be haunted for their rest of their lives by the abuse?</p>
<p>I am supposed to be upset because a few people might have stricter sentences than they deserved?</p>
<p>Sorry, but I am more upset by those who make the abuse possible ( and profitable) , and if those victims were themselves victims as children, even more motivation for them to break the cycle.</p>
<p>There’s no reason to lock a kid up, for example, for breaking into someone’s place and stealing their stuff. Just make them give it back and pay for damages.</p>
<p>No actually- they should be locked up- because breaking into someones home- is pretty invasive and threatening.Get them help- but don’t slap them on the wrist- that isn’t doing them any favors.</p>
<p>EmerK, obviously I struck a chord by sounding sympathetic. Ha! Please don’t assume that teachers can’t actually care. Truth is, I did amount of tremendous research on this subject over the years as preparation to a thesis. I came away with the sad feeling that our country is wasting resources and energy prosecuting these cases. We could avoid all this if these sites were dismantled. But we don’t!!! It is absolutely true that the 50 year old men need to locked up and kept away from the innocent, but a 20-something year old? The laws are totally overboard (See The Economist August 8th edition, “America’s unjust sex laws”</p>
<p>Once the feds start tracking a computer, that’s it. Prison. But, instead of arresting some guy for a few pictures, they wait. They record how often that man goes on the sites, how many pictures, etc. Isn’t that far worse? Then, even to uncover what has been found on the computer (i.e.discovery), a prosecutor only goes down the hall to look. But the defense lawyer has to get special permission and often travel to a different location to see. (The rational: to limit showing the pictures to a defense lawyer.) Every step along the way, the prosecutor wins, from the get-go.</p>
<p>And what if that man has certain “issues”? Nope. The laws do not regard mental health issues justifiable (mentally ■■■■■■■■, depression, autism, previous abuse, etc), nor does “unknowing”. I have come across one guy, mid-20s, who has brain damage. He had been told not to go one certain sites, but b/c of his brain damage, his memory isn’t intact. In this case, even the prosecutor wanted to ‘excuse’ the case, but the judge wouldn’t allow it</p>
<p>Believe me when I say this stuff is wrong. My own kids know these sites are baaaad. although one of my kids didn’t “realize” the harsh consequences. But our country is getting overdone about harsh punishments, no tolerance, and the slightest slight is reason to go to court. State cases can be even more absurd. Some requiring 10 years for every picture.</p>
<p>I love your statistics. It just gets people even more crazed, until they realize it’s self-serving and poorly done research. For instance, the statistic you gave about “83 percent of people who had child pornography…” What is the definition of child p***? Wouldn’t that be underage youngsters? That’s like the Butler study asking men, who are already convicted if they would “acknowledge” certain behavior. ‘Yes’ meant they’d get certain freedoms, ‘no’ meant they’d be receive harsher punishments. (nothing was verified of course). </p>
<p>And when you state that the number of web sites is increasing, do you know if more children are being abused or is it the same picture (some 20+ years old) shown over and over? Is it a photo that was photo-shopped? Do you realize anyone drawing a picture of a kid might possibly convicted. The problem is that some of these men don’t distingusih the difference between ‘expressed behavior’ (which includes going online for free pictures) and keeping internal thoughts internal.</p>
<p>Our system is going totally overboard, with these laws, the harsh punishments, and how people interpret the bad guys. If we really want to do something, disengage these sites.</p>