Politics US court says just viewing child porn is not a crime

Roanapur

Manga Editor
上級員 / Jyoukuuin / Sr. Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
277
Reaction score
28
Gender
Male
Country
United States
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/02/us_web_ruling_overturned/

A US court has said the existence of child pornography images in the cache of a man's computer did not mean that man had committed a crime under state law. The Court of Appeals in Georgia has reversed the man's conviction.

A forensic computer analyst for the US Secret Service had testified in court that Edward Ray Barton's laptop computer had been used to view 106 images of child pornography on the internet.

Barton was convicted on 106 counts of the sexual exploitation of children and jailed. Under appeal, though, three judges in the state of Georgia ruled that Barton did not break the law, which says that a person must have knowing possession of the images.

The images were stored on the hard drive of the computer, but only in the cache, a local store of files accessed on the internet designed to speed up browsing. Those images are not readily accessible without special software which he did not have, said the Secret Service expert.

The court said this could not count as a knowing possession of the files and that there was no evidence that Barton had consciously saved the files for later use.

Judge Yvette Miller said other cases had debated whether or not files had to be consciously saved in order for a crime to be committed.

"None of those decisions, however, found that a defendant may be convicted of possessing child pornography stored in his computer's temporary internet file folders, also known as cache files, absent some evidence that the defendant was aware those files existed," said Judge Miller in the court's opinion.

She said in order to convict, the state had to show that a defendant took some action to save or download images, or that the defendant knew that the computer automatically saved files.

"There was no way that Barton could have learned of the cache files in the normal course of using his computer," said Judge Miller. "Nor did the state present any circumstantial evidence that would have allowed the jury to infer Barton's knowledge of these files, i.e. they did not show that Barton was an experienced or sophisticated computer user who would have been aware of this automatic storage process."

The decision will not set a precedent across the US because it relates only to Georgia's sexual exploitation laws, although many state laws on sexual exploitation carry similar requirements that a prosecution be based on knowing possession.

Last year a Pennsylvania court issued an opinion similar to that of Judge Miller. Judge Richard Klein said that a man who admitted viewing 370 images of child pornography had not broken the law because he had not sought to retain the images. Pennsylvania state law also criminalises "knowing possession" of images not the viewing of them.

"We note that it is well within the power of the Legislature to criminalize the act of viewing child pornography on a web site without saving the image," Judge Klein said in his opinion. "The language used, however, is simply 'possession'. Because this is a penal statute with an ambiguous term when it comes to computer technology, it must be construed strictly and in favour of the defendant."

In January this year, however, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania withdrew Judge Klein's opinion and said the case can receive a full court hearing. Judge Klein had argued it was wrong to convict the defendant in the case because a person had a right to advance notice that an act was illegal and criminal.

In the UK no such ambiguity exists. The Protection of Children Act makes it a crime to view images of child pornography irrespective of whether or not images are saved or stored.
........

While this is great for someone that just happens to lend out their laptop to someone, and ends up getting in trouble because of what that person looked at..... how often does this scenario actually happen?
 

kirios

Banned
中級員 / Chuukyuuin / Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
216
Reaction score
0
Age
32
Gender
Male
Country
Paraguay
:lol omg.... this people is suck the EEUU Justice is suck
 

Do Kesubei

Registered User
中級員 / Chuukyuuin / Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
135
Reaction score
28
Gender
Male
Country
United States
Hmm. So, if I understand it correctly, the man isn't being accused of viewing the images, he's accused of possession. However, because he didn't willingly or consciously download and store the images on his computer, he is innocent. Also, viewing of child porn in Georgia is not illegal...? Or, is viewing child porn illegal, but because he is not on trial for viewing images, only possession, he is being let off of the hook? Weird...

Anyway, this is only Georgia, not the entire US. Bush passed (or tried to pass) a bill that makes it practically illegal to view Lolicon artwork, so I doubt that viewing child porn is not a crime.
 

rabb

Registered User
英雄メンバー / Eiyuu Menbaa / Hero Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
1,572
Reaction score
26
Age
33
Gender
Male
Country
United States
Hmm. So, if I understand it correctly, the man isn't being accused of viewing the images, he's accused of possession. However, because he didn't willingly or consciously download and store the images on his computer, he is innocent. Also, viewing of child porn in Georgia is not illegal...? Or, is viewing child porn illegal, but because he is not on trial for viewing images, only possession, he is being let off of the hook? Weird...

Anyway, this is only Georgia, not the entire US. Bush passed (or tried to pass) a bill that makes it practically illegal to view Lolicon artwork, so I doubt that viewing child porn is not a crime.
viewing it in Georgia is illegal, in PA, it is not illegal, so long as you dont save it.

haterade, i doubt that that happens very often.
 

Az3r

Registered User
英雄メンバー / Eiyuu Menbaa / Hero Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
602
Reaction score
72
Gender
Male
Country
Indonesia
So, to summarize, A is innocent for viewing the child porn because he didn't own the files and hardwares, instead B is guilty because he possess them (assuming B lends them to A)?
Pffft..., a nice one. :neutral What if A and B are associating in getting the porn material (i.e. downloading)? Happy day for A. I bet there will be a lot of sick pervs out there who will try to find a loophole of this law.
Anyway, I'm not from US, but I respect your country's law decision and authority. It's just....
 

theshizzle

Banned
中級員 / Chuukyuuin / Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
230
Reaction score
0
Age
111
Gender
Male
Country
Orkney Islands
yeah child porn and all other porn should be illegal..
 

Roanapur

Manga Editor
上級員 / Jyoukuuin / Sr. Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
277
Reaction score
28
Gender
Male
Country
United States
So, to summarize, A is innocent for viewing the child porn because he didn't own the files and hardwares, instead B is guilty because he possess them (assuming B lends them to A)?
I think you got a little mixed up.

If you are the owner of whatever kind of internet-accessible computer, and someone borrows it for a set period of time, yet authorities find child porn stored in the cache, you are not liable.

all other porn should be illegal..
Whoa, whoa, whoa... let's not get ahead of ourselves...
 

Az3r

Registered User
英雄メンバー / Eiyuu Menbaa / Hero Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
602
Reaction score
72
Gender
Male
Country
Indonesia
Oops. My bad. But still, that's not right. Like I said, there are many possible loophole. :(
 

Roanapur

Manga Editor
上級員 / Jyoukuuin / Sr. Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
277
Reaction score
28
Gender
Male
Country
United States
Nothing to be sorry about.

And yeah, anyone with a brain and the desire to not get in legal trouble could get around that law easily.
 
Top