Visiting Child Pornography Websites Is a Crime—Appeals Court

Viewing child pornography on the Internet constitutes the crime of “possessing” or “controlling“ such matter, in violation of Penal Code §311.11, the Court of Appeal for this district held yesterday.

The court also said that viewing the images constitutes possession inasmuch as a PC automatically captures the images, downloading them to the cache, and that causing them to be visible on the screen amounts to control. Full Article

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Even if it was your first computer and you had no idea windows computers download and store images by default?

“The court also said that viewing the images constitutes possession inasmuch as a PC automatically captures the images, downloading them to the cache, and that causing them to be visible on the screen amounts to control.”

Is this why whoever it is that controls what is said about you in the public record says things like “distribution” “for sale” “for trade” “for profit” “criminal enterprise” etc, even though you had absolutely no idea where to sell, distribute anything for trade or profit?

“The observation was dictum because Cantil-Sakauye went on to say that the defendant in the case “knowingly possessed or controlled images of child pornography,” including his controlling the images by manipulating them on his PC.”

Is this why one judge will call something that is red white, and another judge will rule it’s purple when it’s actually red?

““[T]he federal and state statutes are different and subject to different interpretations,” the jurist wrote, noting that the court in Tecklenburg came to the same conclusion.”

Do states rewrite federal laws already in place to suite them, thus creating different interpretations/confusion?

OK, so next they will say that THINKING ABOUT CP is a crime. One stop closer to thought police. Come on…I think there are more than enough laws about this without adding something like this.

It sounds more like censorship than anything else. The are trying to scare people into not exploring anything for fear that they might click on the “wrong” sort of link and end up in jail or worse…on the SEX OFFENDER LIST.

How about the FBI getting into trouble for “possession” for controlling the “darknet” servers they recently intercepted for the purpose of placing malware onto the machines of those visiting.. so they can collect information about each PC that can lead to arrests?

They were in fact, guilty of possession.

We all know that FBI and law encroachment personnel are exempt from the laws that put Joe Average in jail/prison. We also know that FBI possesses and transmits thousands of kiddie porn images from some dark corner office while they’re doing God-knows-what behind closed doors and getting their jollies. Perhaps the greatest sexual thrill the FBI gets is planting kiddie porn images into unsuspecting computer hard drives so they can make a no brainer arrest and protect the rest of mankind from potential child abusers and child traffickers, then get their names out there as the good guys. These days, law encroachment personnel are rarely considered the good guys, but are fast becomming the norm for law breaking and living above the law. If ever cops of any kind have a vendetta against you, they will find exactly what they want to find. Be vigilant, cautious and very, very afraid of this government.

why are these sites even up?

i understand that it’s illegal to view, what about the guy who put the site up?