Man's life Over, Cops Decide He Watched Child Porn in First Class

Hawk and BillRM are two others that make me want to do so.

One question why swat teams to serve warrants on a households that someone in it had download illegal computer files?

The difference is that those who claim that they plead guilty of one charge for the crime only because going to court could have resulted in four other guilty verdicts for the same act because of the charge loading practice have a good argument that they were bullied by the state into taking the plea bargain

But these aren't exactly innocent people.

Otherwise it could be a year or more before you can legally even talk to your wife let alone go home.

In the case of child pornography, however, the state can display the actual pornography at trial. That's rather damning evidence, don't you think?

Then we had domestic cases where the state does not had a case however by having a no contract order in place against both the wishes of the man and the woman the deal often offer is if you plead guilty we will had the court removed the no contact order.

Otherwise it could be a year or more before you can legally even talk to your wife let alone go home.

Those up for child porn law violations are some of the least likely to get a fair jury trial for the same reason that child rapists are the most hated (and I think the most likely to end up with a shank) in prison. The state has a great deal of leverage in getting guilty pleas from the innocent, which is why it should be working overtime to make sure that alleged child pornographers get an even break. The state is on the wrong side of justice here, which compounds its moral failure.

The state is on the wrong side of justice here..

The thumbnail image, combined with the computer forensics expert's testimony, provided sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the defendant had, at one time, possessed the full-size images required for conviction.

The man was guilty

The question is guilty of what?

The government proved the defendent had had the full size images at one time and he still retained the thumbnail of those images. There was no "accidental" thumbnail deposited in his computer. He had downloaded the child pornography images--intentionally.

California man accused of having massive child porn collection
Dec 2, 2011
By Alex Dobuzinskis

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A Southern California man was arrested on Friday and accused of possessing what prosecutors called one of the largest child pornography collections ever recovered.

Michael Peterson, a 58-year-old pipefitter, was taken into custody at his home in Ontario, about 35 miles east of Los Angeles, on charges of possessing, receiving and distributing child pornography.

Acting on a search warrant, federal agents had raided Peterson's home in July and seized computers and several hard drives with 500,000 images and 7,500 videos of suspected child pornography, U.S. District Attorney's spokesman Thom Mrozek said.

"It's not uncommon for us to see collections of thousands and sometimes tens of thousands of images, but in this case we have over half a million images being stored on numerous devices," Mrozek said.

"It may in fact be the largest child pornography collection ever discovered in the United States," he said.

The children in the images and videos range in age from 18 months to 17 years old and were either nude or involved in sexually explicit acts, the criminal complaint filed against Peterson said.

When Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents raided Peterson's home, they found two laptops on a table with a half-eaten bowl of cereal, one of them actively downloading child porn through a peer-to-peer network, the criminal complaint said.

Virginia Kice, a spokeswoman for ICE, said that episode demonstrated how much time Peterson devoted to collecting child pornography online.

"It's someone who's a prolific user, and it's frankly a frightening thought," Kice said.

Authorities found Peterson after an undercover federal agent downloaded child pornography from him through a peer-to-peer sharing website, and tracked down the Internet Protocol number on Peterson's computer, the complaint said.

ICE agents led the investigation that nabbed Peterson because the agency is charged with investigating cases of child pornography, Kice said. U.S. authorities have not accused Peterson of producing child pornography himself.

He faces a maximum sentence of 50 years in prison if convicted. An attorney for Peterson could not be reached for comment.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/02/us-child-porn-idUSTRE7B12KM20111202

BillRM wrote:

Otherwise it could be a year or more before you can legally even talk to your wife let alone go home.

To what state or municipality are you referring?

Hawkeye, I don't think they will have to bully this guy into taking a plea deal. Would you suggest he go to trial?

I see no reason why people accused of crimes involving child pornography would be less likely to get a fair jury trial than anyone else. The state still has to produce the evidence of child pornography to get a conviction.