Source: Dawinder S. Sidhu & Kelsey Robinson
Drug offenses lie at the heart of the movement for criminal justice reform, and
for good reason. Drug policy is defined by severe and disproportionate penalties
owing to a retributive, factually flawed, and hurried congressional process. These
central characteristics apply to the child pornography context as well. Though drug
sentencing is problematic enough, child pornography sentencing is arguably worse.
The U.S. Sentencing Commission has disavowed the child pornography sentencing
guidelines and invited judges to vary from them. Judges have done just that, varying
in sixty-three percent of all cases, more than any other offense type.
In this Article, we identify the common issues with drug and child pornography sentencing and outline the doctrinal implications of this shared foundation, especially as to district court discretion which varies under Kimbrough v. United States. We also suggest how improvement to the uniquely distressed area of child pornography policy can inform criminal justice reform more generally, especially as to substantive reasonableness review under Gall v. United States, mandatory minimum sentences, and sunset provisions for penalty levels.
Following the confirmation hearing of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, child
pornography law became part of the national conversation at policy and public
levels. We aim to seize on this newfound interest and ensure that both this area of
law and criminal justice reform more generally are enriched and enhanced.
Read the article below:
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE
“The only unnatural sexual behavior is none at all.” — S. Freud
The majority of the current federal judiciary KNOW that the sentencing “laws” are unreasonable and irrational, and thus, deviate from the sentencing guidelines (as noted, in the majority of cp cases, including my own). We are forever hopeful that we will attain “relief” from such draconian schemes through SCOTUS or federal legislative reform. I am not holding my breath on either front.
However, relief MAY come through either (1) passage of reform legislation on the STATE level, or (2) through state judicial rulings. If you are fortunate enough to reside in a state that reforms cp sentencing schemes, than you have hit the lotto. Congratulations. BUT, justice should NOT be a based on ‘geographic good fortune’, but rather upon moral principles on which all laws should rest.
Happy Thanksgiving.
The “eye crime” thing is just beyond ridiculous! If you “see” or “watch” any other crime, are you also a contributor to that crime?
I do find it so hypocritical that watching a child being murdered ( which has occurred on multiple media sites) is perfectly legal, but looking at a pic of a child posing provocatively is grounds for arrest at the very least. Even watching an adult being sadisticly tortured has no penal code enforcement. Am I condoning any of it? Absolutely not. Is the law enforced evenly among equal offenses? Never will be. But people have given passive consent by not addressing the issue until it is a epidemic size problem, which online pornography has been determined to be health care professionals. It seems individual freedoms such as viewing choices are based on a few influential people’s viewpoints and ability to control the purse strings of politicians that can then enforce ( or in our cases, impose ) their will. I’m of the view that Jeffery Epstein would have gone about his life with impunity had it not been for him ruffling the feathers of the wrong person(s).
The internet is undefeated and the FBI can’t stop the people making videos like this because 60% of these types of videos are made over seas.
The issue with feds is, they’re interested in anybody who watches such type videos, in the name of international security and public safety or if it just saves one person.
I can’t lie it’s both kind of extreme the crime and the punishment.
I hope those who have been found guilty of “production” dont get left behind like they are with CASOMB recommendations (viewers/possessors of CP get a lower tier while “production” folks will remain on tier 3). These people charged with “production” includes bf/gf who take images of one another while never uploading/downloading illegal images nor even visiting any websites containing illegal images, yet they are a tier 3 in California (Tier 2 scheduled under SORNA).