ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (11/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

 

General News

Federal Sentencing of Child Pornography: Production Offenses

Oct 13, 2021
This report updates and expands upon the Commission’s 2012 Report to the Congress: Federal Child Pornography Offenses. It provides the Commission’s most in-depth study of child pornography production offenses to date through an analysis of three primary factors that the Commission has identified as relevant to sentencing child pornography production offenders. Focusing on data related to child pornography production offenders’ proximity to the victim, participation in production, and propensity to engage in other abusive behaviors, this report provides insight into how offenders exploit victims and technology to produce child pornography and the factors courts consider in fashioning sentences for these offenses.

Download the PDF file .

Source: Federal Sentencing of Child Pornography: Production Offenses

See also: Federal Sentencing of Child Pornography:
Non-Production Offenses

Download the PDF file .

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
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email 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.  
 
Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Once again, the 80% myth is exposed. Once again, the sexual recidivism for non-production is stunningly low. Yet another helpful report to put under a judge’s nose. Other than inherent bias, I don’t see how any court can continue to support the States’ lies. Toss in the change in posture from the ALI, and it really starts to stink at the various capitols across the sinking ship Amerika.

@AJ Don’t forget Chris Smith because he knows everyone travels overseas for this type of thing in addition to other actions he believes occur. He’s Catholic, so should the recent Nun abuse story from Europe along with the Priest stories be reissued to him for his reading leisure?

The sexual recidivism rate for all non-production child pornography offenders was
4.3 percent (47 of the 1,093 offenders). An additional 7.3 percent of offenders were arrested or had their term of supervised release revoked for failing to register as a sex offender.143

No senator would ever act on these reports. ALI has voted on what it should be. There is a growing library of studies, facts, meta analysis of evidence of what it should be. Tha being said, mob rules. Public perception is everything. If a senator introduces a bill that reduces sex offender sentencing, and those who vote for it, it career suicide. History shows us The public need a witch to burn, and until the next witch appears, sex offenders are it.

As a congressman/woman (role playing):

Congress: I sit at home and occasionally go to my office (while succumbing to the notion I can’t have a Bourbon then or now). I guess I gotta go once in a while, sigh.
You other 330 million peons bow down. Let’s narrow it down. Those not in my state get lost.

Us: Ugh.

Congress: Those not in my district get lost. Those not contributing get lost. Those not contributing lots get lost. Oh ya, those not my color (gop/dem) get lost. Those… insert whatever, get lost. Whose left?

Us: We have facts.

Congress: Go get me another Bourbon. Good boy/girl. What was it said? Oh, yeah. Facts from scientists, biologists, geologist, economists, etc. Hmmm. How much money did they give?

Peon: None.

Congress: Next issue.

Us: There’s a virus invading the Earth and killing us.

Congress: Did it kill any of us important ones?

Us: A few. But it has killed 700,000 others.

Congress: Mayday mayday, report to our secret bunkers! Deport to space all who can afford 250k for 11 minutes of life! Freeze you eggs women so we can survive!!!! mayday mayday!!!

Not totally true, Governor Brown and Scott Weiner made huge changes to the SO laws in our favor and were well received for the most part.

Federal Judges Are Increasingly Rebelling Against ‘Overly Severe’ Penalties for Nonviolent Sex Offenders” “People convicted of possessing child pornography receive long sentences, but new data suggest they are rarely arrested for contact offenses after their release.”
This, from the Libertarian magazine of record, Reason Magazine and Jacob Sullum, their legal editor and stalwart defender of our, and others, rights.
None of this is news to any of us on this forum but it’s gratifying to see these draconian laws called out in a major publication such as Reason, even if I find that they tend to pull their punches just a little too much when the subject is “sex offenders,” but, hey, they do have to survive in this swamp, too.

Ask yourself how many Democratic or Republican publications would defend us. That’s why I’m a Libertarian.

Out of all the sex crimes that occur in America why are CP cases handed over to the FBI for federal sentencing, is it because of the severity of the crime, I dont know.
I do know, In order to get SB384 passed Scott Wiener had to sacrifice people involved in CP to the California DOJ.
Next year is almost here get ready because here they come.

Good luck

I think it is mostly the computer. Most every federal CP case gets an enhancemnet for using a computer, which is absurd. How would a person gain access to it without a computer.

Those computer enhancements are absurd. At least at the state level, many simply invoke using any kind of microprocessor—not the Internet—in any way during the crime as a sufficient element. Of course, this means any crime in which a cell phone ever played a role, or a touchstone phone, or a car (every car made in the past 30 years has a CAN controller), or a smart lock, or a GPS device should get this enhancement (many states have sexual and non-sexual versions). Of course, only sex offenses are really ever punished using this enhancement. To me, this is a classic case of an overly broad, ambiguous statute which is clearly unconstitutional. How does one challenge this?

Interstate commerce.

Most pornography in the United States isn’t illegal. So that in of itself is not a valid enough justification. If something is deemed offensive, harmful, disruptive to standard order, or inappropriate for the people engaged in it, then it can have a negative economic impact. Most federal content offenses are illegal because they were created, distributed, sold, bought, received, or possessed directly from interstate commerce or via methods created from interstate commerce. In other words let’s say someone managed to create an offensive piece of content completely from scratch without using any already made raw materials or components, but in the sale of the content they used a cash register. That cash register was made via interstate commerce and probably sent to the store in a car or other vehicle which were also made from tools created by interstate commerce. So if a federal agency wanted to charge those involved they definitely could on those grounds if needed.

Also it’s far from just the FBI that tackles federal CP cases.

12
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.