This attorney represented abuse survivors. He was just arrested in child porn case.

submitted by [deleted] from lawandcrime.com

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]weavilsatemyface 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I'm always suspicious when somebody is claimed to have downloaded child porn. Nine times out of ten, the cops look at the accused's porn folder. They find fifty thousand images. Three of them are somewhat questionable images where it is not immediately obvious that the person is over-18. It doesn't matter whether the porn star is or isn't actually over 18, kiddie porn reverses the usual onus of proof. If the porn actor looks "young", the onus is on the defendant to prove that the actor is of legal age. And by young I don't mean six years old young, I mean "could be 15 or 16" young.

Cops go to the media and say "Person X downloaded 50,000 of the worst most hard core child porn images!" and the media laps it up.

Then, 18 months of hell later, with the person's reputation destroyed, their personal life in tatters, their job gone, and owing tens of thousands to their lawyers, it comes to trial. The judge looks at the actual evidence, sees how weak it is, and says "Don't do it again" and releases the person on a bond and with a permanent sex offender record.

[–]Musky 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

People have been sentenced for possessing nudes even though they aren't considered pornographic. It's weird because there are a number of instances of famous underage nude images from people like Jessica Biel, Olivia Dunn, and Drew Barrymore that are perfectly legal, but that same kind of image of someone else can get you in big trouble.

[–]IMissPorn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Federal authorities described female child victims estimated to be somewhere between 5 t0 8 years old, 6 to 10, and 9 to 11

So... unless the feds are totally lying (which is absolutely possible) we're not dealing with something like you describe. I do think it's a bit sus that they claim they burst in while he was actually in the midst of downloading CP, though. I've heard that one before, and it's possible of course, but it seems a little too good to be true.

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

We don't know and we can't know because the media will never report on it. Chances are we'll never even hear whether he is convicted or what sentence he gets. But think about it: here is a guy who has made his entire career about fighting people who abuse kids, and ... he's an abuser of kids? Stranger things have happened, but it seems pretty unlikely. What enemies has he made? Who's case was he working on when this went down? Who wanted to fuck him up?

The great thing about kiddie porn charges is that even if charges are dropped, his reputation is now fucked and he will never, ever clear his name. Anyone googling him will always know him as "that attorney who was downloading kiddie porn". He'll be lucky to get a job mopping floors even if he is innocent.

Let's suppose he was downloading kiddie porn. The feds knew exactly who he was instantly, and had a team ready to raid him. Sounds awfully convenient. Maybe they were already watching him as part of a legitimate investigation? Could be. Or perhaps they knew what was on his laptop because they put it there? Or because they were serving the files and it was entrapment? We'll never know because the US courts go real easy on FBI entrapment.

We don't know where the truth lies, and none of the parties involved can be trusted: not the cops, not the prosecutor, not the media reporting on the case.

[–]Alphix 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Especially with the speed of the connections today. 1 gig of images (a lot of images) takes a few seconds at most.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    The police has a CSAM database and knows very well what image is CSAM and what is not.

    Ah yes, the police who cannot open their mouth without lying, who lie about every single thing, but they would never lie about kiddie porn. Suuuure they don't.

    [–]weavilsatemyface 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    We know the cops lie and plant evidence. Why do we think that they never lie and plant evidence in child porn cases? "BuT tHe coPS WoULd nEVeR d0 ThAT!"

    Even assuming that any of this story is true, and has been correctly reported, and the lawyer hasn't just been stitched up big time so he can be Epsteined in pre-trial detention, peer2peer sharing of kiddie porn is almost certainly an FBI sting operation, which in a just world would count as entrapment. The question is, did the attorney know he was downloading kiddie porn, or was this "sweetie" folder buried deep inside some some other download?

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

    peer2peer sharing of kiddie porn is almost certainly an FBI sting operation

    Yeah, hard to believe anyone would knowingly do this, especially a lawyer familiar with these kinds of cases, there is no anonymity on a P2P network

    [–]Alphix 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    This is why I only download images of women with mega plastic boobs. Not a chance they're minors.

    Nah but kidding aside, this is beyond suspect. The cops smash his door in, and he's still on his bed downloading CP? How long does it take to turn off a laptop?

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

    Interesting situation. More than most people, he could claim it's "not what it looks like", although this isn't a legal defense to my knowledge, barring some actual official role. But assuming it is what it looks like (i.e. he's a pedo), one has to wonder how that's connected to his previous work with abuse victims. Was he getting off on their stories? Or was he actually trying to do the right thing out of guilt over his own feelings? Hard to believe it's just a coincidence.

    Whatever else can be said, anyone who downloads illegal porn from P2P networks these days is an idiot. The wild west days of the internet are long gone and a child abuse lawyer of all people should well know that.

    [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I wonder if it was a set up.