ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings

General News

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 “knowingly possessed child pornography” in violation of federal law. We don’t know how many images he or she possessed. We don’t know the identity of the child or children who were exploited for the sexual gratification of this FBI supervisory analyst. We don’t know what vile sex acts the child was coerced into performing. We don’t know whether the supervisory FBI analyst supervised cases involving child pornography or whether he or she steered law enforcement away from criminals with similar tendencies. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Eric

    When I was incarcerated, around 2008-2011, I forget the exact year, but an article was spreading around the prison like wildfire. It said some inspections of the pentagon computers revealed that a considerable percentage of them contained various degrees of CP. We all waited in anticipation for some of the big fish to fall and get a taste of their own medicine, but weeks and months went byand you heard less and less about it until it just vanished into thin air. I have friends that are still there to this day serving unimaginable sentences for CP; seventeen and twenty years. Just another Jeffrey Epstien case where the connected can indulge with impunity, and the rest of us are set up in stings to show the masses how hard the DOJ is working to protect the most innocent among us.

    • TS

      @Eric

      I know the story of which you refer to here. Don’t be so sure things didn’t happen. If military, the people in the DoD were taken care of according to the UCMJ. If civilian, things were taken care of most likely as well. To what degree or satisfaction? Who knows. They wouldn’t pub that info necessarily since DoD keeps those things in house more often than not. A citizen/reporter would need to be following up on it to see where it went.

      • Facts should matter

        They most likely got fired and forfeited their pensions in exchange for not being prosecuted. Of course these things are swept under the rug without public disclosure. Society quickly moves on and forgets when it quickly fades from the news cycles.

        Congress is full of child molesters that were caught also, i.e, Dennis Hastert and
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley_scandal (this guy got off easy).

        • Bill from CA

          @Facts should matter

          And also if I may add, Anthony Weiner who got 2 years for sexting a teenager. Any regular Joe would’ve gotten 10 years for that! This double standard really sickens me…

        • AJ

          @Facts should matter:
          “(this guy got off easy)”
          —–
          I’m not sure you meant the double-entendre, but I love it!

  2. Truth Justice American Way

    Since FBI, U.S. Atty.’s Office and/or DOJ are not pursuing an indictment, then I believe it incumbant upon these fine public serviants to immediately provide information of the offense to local/State law enforcement agencies. After all, the FBI and the U.S. DOJ (those brave and courageous souls all) now hold particularized knowledge of a STATE CRIME being committed.

    I would think that sworn federal law enforcement agents hold a special duty – an over-riding and compelling moral obligation – to immediately report such despicable and vile crimes to their respective local and/or state authorities – if it helps to save just one child.

    As you can see from a 2014 case (link below), an FBI employee (in this case, a fingerprint analyst), was indicted and prosecuted for a similar offense. In that case, the prosecution was brought about by the State of West Virginia (but not the U.S. Atty’s. Office or the DOJ – those brave and courageous souls all).

    Perhaps it is the same FBI analyst as in the present case. Can we rule that out?

    November 29 2014 FBI employee from Greene charged with child pornography

    http://www.heraldstandard.com/gcm/news/local_news/fbi-employee-from-greene-charged-with-child-pornography/article_e4f542fe-14c9-5182-8ee9-7d2b24953b0b.html?mode=jqm

    A fingerprint examiner with the FBI in Clarksburg, W.Va., was recently arrested on charges of disseminating child pornography from his Greene County home.

    The charges were filed by the state Attorney General’s Bureau of Special Investigation — Child Predator Section after an agent was able to download files depicting children in sexual situations from the suspect’s computer through file sharing.

    • Curtis Brasher

      This story expresses my exact feelings and they should be prosecuted as strongly as the “offender” who was entrapped by them.

  3. G4Change

    …and that government of cops, by the cops, for the cops…

  4. Tim in WI

    Why no prosecutions?
    The reason is simple. Any lawyer who’d submit discovery requests concerning the modus used to surveil the use of the machine would soon learn the specific software used to do so is owned by private entities and not the government.

    Most of the regular people who’ve gotten their charges dropped for CP cases have done so by insisting on that discovery through their lawyers. The cases are dropped precisely because these firms do not want their patented software and underhanded techniques to become understood by the general public, producers of websites nor their potential competitors.

  5. Saddles

    FBI people looking at child porn or teenaged porn. I am sure that has happened but I’m sure many of some are brushed under the rug. Well Tim gave the theory its all about computers but I beg to differ. Why is a thousand dollar question and so cynical and self centered. Law enforcements are above the law of their good book. They don’t even use the right book with their guidance.

    Nothing wrong with technology but anything can be used for good or bad. Even a gun or a sling shot. This increase in technology is a bit much or should one go on a computer and find the answer to were this covid-19 came from. Even the human brain will not figure that one out with all this theory and speculation. Computers are not the answer in everything and those men that are playing this harlotry game are just as guilty with this inducement.
    Sure we all hate this mess and yes many officials I’m sure have dabbled into teenage sex actrivities but its when they induce it on another that it becomes messy and those ministers or servants of God are just as guilty by using these crafty methods. What if they wanted to induce you into something else just as crafty or should one open their cam or want you to talk dirty to them. So who is doing the reaping and who is doing the sowing? I don’t think that person would want someone coming down to meet them for a game of cards, but in a sense it is a game.

    So everyone has sin or is seduced by this nature. Are not we all carnal. I just Janice would trash much of this registry ordeal as it is no good for anyone. And I thought law enforcment were peace makers.

    • Cyndy T

      The USA no longer has law enforcement. They are State sponsored terrorists

  6. AJ

    The answer to the question of why this person won’t be prosecuted is pretty well summed up in this paragraph from the press release:

    *****
    The OIG obtained and forensically examined the SIA’s personal and FBI issued devices. Our
    examination identified pornographic images on the SIA’s personal devices, and the OIG took
    several steps to determine whether the images represented child pornography, including
    providing such images to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. None of the
    images were determined to be evidence of child pornography. No pornographic material, or
    evidence pertinent to the investigation, was identified on the SIA’s FBI-issued devices. Based
    on the SIA’s statements during the security interview, the OIG investigation concluded that the
    SIA had knowingly possessed child pornography, in violation of federal law and FBI policy.
    *****

    Two things of note: 1) though there was pornography on the devices (a conduct violation but not a crime) there were no images on the devices which rose to being CHILD pornography (perhaps they were nudist pictures, which skirt the law), and 2) the only evidence of child pornography possession is from the person himself/herself.

    Who on here thinks anyone can get a conviction–or perhaps even an indictment–when there is no physical evidence of a crime and the only evidence available is from the person of interest? The person of interest could 1) invoke the 5th and not testify against himself/herself and/or 2) could say s/he misunderstood what the definition of child pornography is. In short, there’s no “there there” for a prosecutor use. Note, too, that at the end of the document it says the OIG uses “preponderance of the evidence” for decisions, NOT “beyond reasonable doubt.” Those two standards are vastly different. There’s no way the evidence, as presented here, is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.