A Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge who sharply criticized punishment guidelines for failing to distinguish between dangerous offenders and those who pose little threat. Full Article
Related posts
-
A $5 Billion Proposal to Fight Online Child Sexual Abuse
New legislation would try to curb the illegal imagery with record levels of funding for law... -
Why Will This FBI Agent Not Be Prosecuted for Child Porn?
We don’t know why the Department of Justice declined to prosecute the supervisory FBI analyst who... -
Should psychotherapists be required to report patients who look at child porn?
For years, California law required psychotherapists to report any patient who admitted developing, duplicating, printing or...
A friend sent me this article also. What can this mean for future arrests of this type? Is it possible that this judge with common sense could turn tides? Would it affect those who were sentenced and served six years and are now out on supervised release to have their sentence reduced to served time and be let off parole? What could this mean??????????
I read this and was shocked that a judge would actually treat a defendant as an individual in this case and set a sentence based on the facts of this individual’s case and not simply some blanket set of BS “mandatory minimums.”
I have a new hero in judge Jack Weinstein. What a rebel this judge is…imagine the nerve to examine facts and circumstance and take those into account before passing judgement.
Actually thinking of the long term effects on others as well as the accused.
If all judges were this intelligent and wise the justice system might actually start working again…as it is right now that thing is hopefully broken!
Thank you Judge Jack Weinstein for the bravery to make an unpopular decision and bringing back sanity and justice to a very dysfunctional system!
This is a step in the right direction. The article says that a number of judges already disregard the mandatory sentencing guidelines which I view as a positive thing. The people whining about the judges decision really need to consider the harm these harsh mandatory sentencing guidelines do to children. I’d also like to see some proof of their claims.
Awesome!Congrats to the defendant. Now get that judge to review and reverse his fellow judges decisions. Still have to deal with registration, but a avalanche starts with a single snow flake ( and a lot of force!)
Very cool to read this. Just like those who watch violent movies don’t act up on it and become murderers. Good to see that some people still use common sense in this country.
No one ever mentions that the harsh sentences may be a motivating factor in many crimes, especially sex crimes. Sexual urges become more intense in dangerous situations, and the greater the danger the more the trill. Sure, after someone is caught, the consequences become very real and they wake up from their high, but it is too late to be a deterrent. If we would learn how the mind works we could break the cycle before it is a cycle, not with force, but with understanding, and save everyone as a result.
Judge Weinstein is a man of immense courage. Few would be so brave…knowing the backlash he is going to receive after his decision. The fact that he wrote a 98 page document to explain (justify) the sentence he was about to impose shows how unpopular his decision was going to be. Perhaps he had the courage to do what he did because of his age. I do NOT want to discount what Judge Weinstein did…but I’m not sure he (or any other judge for that matter) would be willing to do the same thing if they were far from retirement.
I firmly believe that we are still in the infancy when it comes to arrests for possession of CP. The number of arrests each year is on the rise and picking up steam. It’s apparently much easier for law enforcement to track down and arrest possessors of CP than it is to do the same for producers of it. So thousands of men all over the county and the world are serving unreasonably long prison sentences for possession…sentences that should have been handed out to people producing it. Since they rarely catch those people (I rarely read about it in the news)…the courts make examples/spectacles out of those caught possessing it. In my case…law enforcement found three illegal files among over 1.5TB of legal adult pornography. Of course no attention or mention was made of the fact that I was a porn addict/hoarder with over 1.5TB of legal porn on my computer. I had been using P2P to bulk download pornography for over 6 months. I was fortunately in that mine was a state/county case and not a fed case. Most non-fed cases in CA result in a 6-month sentence.
Leniency for anyone arrested for possession is something that most (the public, the media, etc) consider appalling. They seem to confuse possessors with producers. I wish people that are experts in the area of pornography addiction would speak up/talk about how this can happen to even the nicest guys. Reason being…even nice guys can become addicted to pornography. There is a lot of shame when it comes to it and few are willing to admit to it and seek help for it. Left unchecked long enough…it could get you arrested and change your life forever.
Although I did not read the judge’s decision I am certain that he and many others understand the collateral consequences of a sexual offense conviction. This defendant may only serve a week in jail, but his life and the lives of his family will be forever changed for the worse due to the stigma associated with sex offender registration. The victim advocates that complain about the small sentence need to understand how much of a punishment that stigma is. If registration did not exist then I would agree that 5 days is not an appropriate punishment. But, coupled with registration and the stigma that goes with it, this man, like myself will spend every day for the rest of his life regretting his decisions and suffering the consequences. At my sentencing the judge told me flat out that my main form of punishment would be struggling to live a satisfying and productive life after losing everything I had worked hard to accomplish. He thus sentenced me to 30 days in county jail and 2 yrs of probation for a non-contact internet sting while the prosecuter and sentencing report called for 6 months and 3 yrs.
This judge should be ashamed of himself. The defendant still got screwed. Seven years of supervised release and the fine for two dozen pieces of content? Also exactly what does sexual assault mean in this case? Were the men merely exposing their penises to the 3 year old girls, was there physical contact, who determined that the interaction was sexual? Are those individuals trust worthy and according to who? Do statements from the men exist clarifying their actions? If not then what right does the government have to speak as if the government’s perspective is absolutely true? What about the girls? What are their unbiased thoughts and feelings in retrospect?
Glad the judge spoke out against harsh sentences, but he still gave out a harsh sentence. Let alone the whole regulation BS that is registration. One small step forward and two backwards. Finally no child pornography case will ever address the root issue because if it made it to a prosecutor its already too late for prevention of anything. Prevention requires action prior to an offense ever happening and that doesn’t mean catching the bad person. It means preventing someone who might one day be at risk for becoming the bad person from going down those paths and also stopping one day victims from ever reaching their at risk status. Which admittedly is harder than reacting afterwards.