Judge’s Son Admits to 35 Counts of Trafficking Child Porn Involving Infants, Gets NO JAIL

submitted by codedtestament from (thefreethoughtproject.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]faustri 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What does "trafficking child porn" mean? I think I saw a stat where white men are over represented in this "trafficking". I don't want to ddg that :p

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It usually means sharing it. This could be as insidious as someone trading things intentionally in private chat rooms, or as innocent as someone downloading a mislabeled porn torrent and leaving it up seeding for two days. Depends entirely on what the prosecutor felt met the criteria for the charge. Prosecutorial discretion in how charges are levied is itself one of the largest flaws in our system.

This article is propaganda intended to shine a light on a legitimate problem (broken justice system), but omits too many details to draw conclusions from.

[–]BobQuixote 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Prosecutorial discretion is what makes it possible for your torrenter to not get such an inane charge.

How would you design the system instead?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Prosecutorial discretion is what makes it possible for your torrenter to not get such an inane charge.

How would you design the system instead?

That's the crux, isn't it. It's easy to point out problems but solutions are more difficult.

One of the things prosecutors frequently do is load up suspects with dozens of frivolous charges that wouldn't stick in court, to terrify the stupid into accepting plea arrangements. I think we need to look first and foremost at tightening up the procedures that facilitate indictment, under the current system you can indict a potato. At least some level of hard evidence of guilt or intent should be required to acquire an indictment/formal charge. Grand Juries shouldn't be rubber stamps for whatever charges prosecutors want to levy, they should act as a check and balance in the system.