Slashdot Mirror


"Accidental" Download Sending 22-Year-Old Man To Prison

An anonymous reader writes "Two years ago, Matthew White searched Limewire for porn. He was looking for 'College Girls Gone Wild,' but ended up downloading some images of child pornography. This was accidental, according to White, and he quickly deleted the images. A year later, the FBI showed up on his family's doorstep and asked to search the computer. After thorough sleuthing, the FBI found some images 'deep within the hard drive.' According to White, the investigators agreed that he himself could not have accessed the files anymore. Matthew now faces 20 years in jail for possession of child pornography. On advice from his lawyer, he intends to plead guilty so that he will 'hopefully' end up with 3.5 years in jail, 10 years probation and a registration as a sex offender. 'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately. They may confiscate your computer, but it's better than the alternative.'"

36 of 1,127 comments (clear)

  1. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Absolutely ridiculous

    1. Re:Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah, the blurb says the guy did erase it. The investigators found it in a "deep" scan. Which means they just used a block editor.

      FWIW, there are loads of ways you could have this happen to you. Like this for instance I recall a story where a church bought a new computer and it was full of porn too, but I can't find the story.

      BTW, posting as AC to tell my story. This happened to me once and I wasn't even looking for porn. I've had two downloads through bittorrent that weren't what they claimed to be. One was a cd full of kiddie stuff claiming to be an engineering application. Terrified me! I deleted it and used bcwipe about a dozen times.

    2. Re:Anonymous Coward by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My post below is relevant to your interests.

      The FBI malware is invisible until it causes your wipe to fail (pay particular attention to wiping the recycle bin, even if there's nothing in it). In that case, the best solution for a failed wipe is to format and then wipe the entire drive.

      As others have wisely noted, calling the FBI would be a bad idea. Those bust-hungry thugs would interrogate you and then twist your words into a confession of guilt before making a media circus of the whole thing. You'd think they'd be busy with real crime.

    3. Re:Anonymous Coward by TheLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > I'd suspect that it wasn't just one file that was old. The FBI doesn't just show up to random people's houses to look for child porn.

      They don't. But they can show up when people click on bait links that the FBI themselves plant:

      http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9899151-38.html

      So Mr Smythe one day accidentally clicks and downloads a child porn image. He deletes it.

      Then maybe a year later, Mr Smythe is looking for porn, and clicks on various links, and by mistake (or curiosity) clicks on "Minors having sex".

      And the next day the FBI kick down his door, and search his computer for child porn.

      They find nothing, except one _deleted_ child porn image.

      From the article - the FBI won't provide any files: "The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images."

      Think that can't happen? Why not? The "Justice System" has been merrily charging children for "distributing child porn" when they consensually send each other nude pics of themselves.

      They love to say they are protecting the children. But it's clearly a lie!

      How can you say you are protecting children when you are charging _children_, threatening them with decades in prison and actually sending some of them to prison for _consensual_[1] sex.

      Which do you think will scar the child more and for longer? Being "touched" by the Government or being touched by the average pervert?

      [1] How do you think you would feel if you were a 14 year old girl, have a 17 year old boyfriend, and you two have sex a few times (hey it feels good right?) and then sometime later, the cops take him away and The Government sends him to prison for a few decades and everyone says bad things about him and that he did a very bad thing to you. So who is scarring who for life here? If it was clearly consensual, maybe just let the minor decide whether it was rape or not, when the minor achieves legal adulthood.

      --
    4. Re:Anonymous Coward by TheLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about curiosity?

      There were lots of people who received email with attached encrypted zipfiles containing malware ( http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39147909,00.htm ), and would enter the included passwords to access and run them. Some even feel a sort of compulsion to do it.

      Then there's the case of "Traci Lords". She was a porn star who lied about her age and appeared in porn films and even Penthouse magazine when she was 15. So guess how many people might possess child porn unknowingly? Apparently those pictures and films are considered child porn by US laws.

      Also think before you google for "Traci Lords" or similar stuff. Nowadays it is common for Google to automatically include pics as part of search results. I wonder how accurate the filters are at excluding stuff that is legally considered child porn in jurisdictions that you might wander into one day.

      Do you feel lucky?

      --
    5. Re:Anonymous Coward by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is why I always have East Tec Eraser. Hell this is the Internet, you never know when some maladjusted troll is gonna pull some sick shit thinking it is his version of a Rickroll. I'd love to see them recover something I deleted with East Tec, since it does a 7 times random wipe as standard and even wipes the free space is you so desire.

      That said TFA sounds fishy to me. Either the guy has a lot more shit on there than TFA, his lawyer sucks balls, or he is an idiot. I know that when a friend of mine got drug into some bullshit thanks to his vicious bitch ex-wife (who got the 15 year old stepdaughter to say he grabbed her tits in return for promises of a car) it cost him a $100,000 home that had been in his family 3 generations to clear his name, even though the bitch kept changing stories and even the cops thought she was lying, so sadly this poor bastard may be going to jail simply because he doesn't have enough money to fight. In most places the "public pretenders" are a joke, and will tell you to plead guilty to anything rather than have to deal with a trial, at least that is the way it is around here.

      Welcome to America, where deleted images can land you in prison and where there isn't any justice without $$$$. I'm just glad my grandfather who fought in WW2 against evil fascist shit isn't around anymore to see how far we have fallen. Hell you could probably power the entire south with the revolutions that man is turning in his grave.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    6. Re:Anonymous Coward by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Possession of photos or videos (like Brooke Shields' Pretty Baby) shouldn't even be considered a crime. Whoever CREATED the image should go to jail, because he/she directly injured a minor, but not the possessor who did not harm anyone.

      "The War on Images" is as insane as the War on Drugs..... except even dumber. It's reached the point where you can even draw *cartoons* of children having sex or masturbating (think Japanese hentai/anime). Where's the victim in that case? No where.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    7. Re:Anonymous Coward by Kaboom13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The presumption of innocence IS THE CORRECT ATTITUDE. Humans have an illogical tendency to jump to conclusions, presume guilt, and go on witch hunts. Presuming innocence until proven guilty by facts is the best way to stop that irrational behavior and protect the innocent. Someone who like child porn and intentionally seeks it out (and is therefore believed to be directly or indirectly a danger to children, the whole reasoning behind child porn being illegal in the first place) is not going to download one video, delete it, and never download it again. Everything about the circumstances points to his story being correct, Limewire is famous for misnamed files, and its not the first time I've heard of there being kiddie porn on it. He did not have a collection, nor did he have it even saved, it was clearly deleted. There is no evidence he distributed it, sought it, or wanted it. If there is more to this case the FBI needs to reveal it, of course they won't have to because they have used the fact the legal system is rigged in their favor in this kind of case to scare him into a plea bargain.

      I know someone who is happily married, with 2 children. Their family has a very difficult time finding a place to live. The reason? When the Father was 18, he had consensual sex with his future wife, who was 16. Her family found out and pressed statutory rape charges. As a result, he is on the sex offender list, which is especially ironic because the "punishment" now hurts the supposed victim, and her children. The state has done far more harm to her then he ever did.

      The police have no interest in justice. Every time you see a policemen, do not think he is there to protect you, or seek justice. His sole purpose is to be a crony to a politician, whether that politician is the DA, or the Mayor, or the governor, or the President. His job is to implicate as many people as possible in as many violations of the law as possible, to be used against them at his masters discretion. Every politician wants to look tough on crime, especially on pedophiles, and keep the population certain that HE is the one standing between their children and the groping hands of molesters. So the police are encouraged to round up as many people who can be labeled pedophiles as possible, and make sure the public is constantly reminded they are walking amongst them.

      Just look at this article. The FBI tells people if you download child porn accidentally, call the authorities immediately. Presumably so they can offer you a plea "bargain" like this guy for turning yourself in, and only give you 3.5 years, plus 10 years parole, and a lifetime of discrimination on the sex offenders list. It is the exact opposite of what any competent lawyer would tell you to do, which is never admit to anything, never talk to the police, never allow them in your house, car, or computer without a warrant.

  2. What's a district attorney to do... by bobdotorg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's a district attorney to do when someone anonymously sends the D.A. an email with kiddie porn attached? Technically, the D.A. downloaded it.

    --
    __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
  3. Call the FBI? by phase_9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Oh HAI, I just downloaded some kiddie pron... by mistake of course you understand"
    yeah, I can see that one working out well...

  4. Public Defender by mbone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Matt is pleading guilty on the advice of his public defender in hopes of getting a three and a half year sentence.

    In other words, he doesn't have the money to actually fight this.

    1. Re:Public Defender by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are trojans released and monitored on Limewire by the FBI. They are designed to ensnare people who search for certain keywords in the hopes that they will have downloaded other "objectionable content", which is why LEO usually waits for the marks to collect more "evidence" to be used against themselves. The trojan is designed to catch people who would download objectionable content and then immediately delete it, as TFA indicates.

      The trojans cannot be deleted. They cannot be seen, even if the user has full administrative access including the ability to see and modify hidden and system files. The trojans may be found accidentally when a wipe on a hitherto unknown file fails. The trojans run on Windows.

      tl;dr - Don't run Windows if you need horrific pornography to get your rocks off. And no, the above did not happen to me.

    2. Re:Public Defender by NoYob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Matt is pleading guilty on the advice of his public defender in hopes of getting a three and a half year sentence.

      In other words, he doesn't have the money to actually fight this.

      Many public defenders are lawyers called upon by the courts and they're not making the billable hours they need by doing it. So, the quicker they get rid of the case the more apt they are to get back to business.

      Regardless of what happens now. The kid's life is over. His name is all over the place and employers who do any sort of background check will find this.

      He will have to spend the rest of his life on some sort of public aid. He may become a bitter angry person that cannot contribute to society even if he wants to contribute. What a goddamn waste.

      --
      It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
  5. Bad Ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DO NOT CALL THE AUTHORITIES

    Worst idea ever. If you actually have undeleted CP on your computer you will get 20 years.
    The only safe thing to do is destroy the hard drive.

  6. the real lesson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If the FBI shows up at your door and asks to search your computer, the correct answer is 'No.'

  7. Re:Don't plead guilty by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh and the advice of going to the FBI is stupid. Don't talk to the police!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

  8. self-incrimination by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately.'

    At which point you've just confessed to trafficking in child porn. No, the proper thing to do is have a secure file deletion utility to nuke all evidence on your system.

  9. Insanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Child porn has just become way too much of a boogeyman these days. Even if he had downloaded the images to look at - what harm would it have caused? He didn't ruin some girls life by looking at pictures that already exist.

    Personally, just to get around stupid cases like this, I'd say that simple POSSESSION of child pornography shouldn't even be illegal. The point is the harm done to the actual children. By that token PRODUCTION should be illegal as that's when the harm is done. BUYING it (through cash or barter) should also be illegal as it finances production of more material. Other than that? Having a picture or video on your hard drive hurts no one, and it isn't going to turn someone into a stark raving mad child molester anymore than playing GTA turns them into a murderer.

    If simple possession were not against the law then every one of these borderline gray area cases like this would go away.

  10. Another victim in the war on child porn by QCompson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my opinion, it's irrelevant whether or not he downloaded the images on purpose. The connection between downloading an image off of limewire and the sexual abuse of a child is so tenuous it's absurd. The only way people can justify it is to make up crazy hypotheticals and market demand theories which are used in no other context.

  11. I think the right move would be... by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... to fire his attorney and enter a plea of not guilty. If I were him I would fight to the end to avoid the felony conviction. They said he is in his early twenties with no criminal record - why screw that up now? Even if he spent years fighting the charges, and drove himself to bankruptcy in the process, it would still be less of a problem to his future than taking the felony conviction and serving 3.5 years in prison.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  12. Prison Sentences by Iskender · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whatever the (dis)merits of the application of the law are here you Americans really, really need to shorten your prison sentences.

    Where I live (Finland), it's hard to actually be imprisoned for 20 years even if you murder someone. Sure, technically killers get lifetime sentences, but they are mostly let out after a decade or so.

    And despite us technically having lots of killers and other criminals on the loose, this country is very safe. I believe the science actually says that prisons manufacture and "enhance" criminals.

    1. Re:Prison Sentences by bzipitidoo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Politics drives it. In the US, no politician dares look soft on crime. Advocating ridiculously long sentences is a quick and easy way to bolster an image. And failing to be tough is an even quicker way to end a political career. Huckabee is getting flak because one man he let out early has shot and killed 4 police officers. Type "Dukakis" into a search engine and one of the first things that shows up is Willie Horton.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    2. Re:Prison Sentences by DavidTC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And frankly, and I say this as Democrat, Huckabee's decision wasn't wrong. 100+ years for the crimes was crazy. Even letting him out via parole wasn't unreasonable.

      He then apparently went crazy. Actual mental illness, which he didn't have any sign of when they were letting him out.

      The point he should been locked up is when he ended up in police custody again a while back. It would have been nice if someone had noticed he was batshit insane at that time, held a competency hearing, and locked him up on that while he was helped.

      But we stopped caring about the mentally ill in this society a while back.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  13. Re:Call the cops by dissy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The summary states that if you accidentally download kiddie porn you need to call the cops asap. Typically, people who are guilty or trying to hide something don't call the cops on themselves.

    Yes but the summary also states that accidentally downloading child porn will get you 22 years in prison.

    No thank you, I will not be calling the cops to have myself sent to prison for 22 years for not doing anything wrong.

  14. Re:Call the cops by Collapsing+Empire · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The law makes no distinction if the child porn you possess was obtained accidentally or intentionally.

    Its just like buying a used car from a drug dealer and going across a border checkpoint.. The sniffing dogs smell some dope that got stashed underneath the seat and YOU are the one who gets put in prison.

    I'm not a libertarian but even I can see how utterly broke and immoral the system has become to get to such a point.

    Calling the cops is a complete gamble. The cops will likely say "you have child porn, I am required to arrest you and charge you with possession, you can explain it to the judge".

    Best thing to do is a low-level multi-pass format, or a new HD. But that is if you *know* that you downloaded CP. If you don't know, cops may bust down your door some months later, seize your computer, then charge you once they find a thumbnail in some cache folder that was deleted 4 months ago.

  15. do the math by digitalsushi · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do the math. What's the most popular porn? Girls as close to 18 as possible. Combine that with user submitted porn. Combine that with typical porn viewing habits, i.e. way too much. Now do some stats. Who's leftover that doesn't have something illegal in their cache? No one who looks at lots of porn, that's for sure. Face it. If someone doesn't like you, they can mess your life up financially, politically, emotionally, really anything they fell like if they are malicious.

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  16. Re:No by Spatial · · Score: 5, Informative

    Because the words "Child porn" deactivate the cerebral cortex.

    You can't expect thought on the subject. You can't expect a rational examination of the arguments, actions or context. People are stupid enough to begin with; when you bring this subject into the fold any trace of intelligence completely disappears.

  17. My $.02 by sexybomber · · Score: 5, Informative

    I posted something similar to this in the comments to the article, but I thought I would start the discussion here too. For those of you who are inclined to rip on the public defender for letting this guy take the plea, bear in mind that the PD is probably handling about a thousand other cases (no exaggeration), not to mention that he barely makes a living wage. Public Defenders' offices are criminally underfunded compared to the DAs, who have the full backing of the State.

    Matt White's attorney probably had no choice but to take the plea and dispose of the case quickly. The system is designed so that the PDs can't take anything to trial on account of the sheer volume of cases they have to manage; they're forced to plead everything out and pray they get a good deal. (If they took even a small fraction of their cases to trial, their other clients would be waiting for years to have their cases heard, and there's this pesky little piece of paper that guarantees people the right to a speedy trial. (Of course, it also guarantees the right to effective counsel, but the bar for what constitutes "effective" is ridiculously low.)

    It's a win-win for the people who matter: the DA gets to scratch another kill mark into his desk, the prison system gets another warm body it can use to justify its budget, the politicians who depend on prisons to keep the headcounts in their districts high get another "constituent" who can't vote, plus they get to claim they're "tough on crime" and are "protecting the children".

    The fact that an (arguably) innocent man has his life ruined as a result doesn't even factor into the equation. He and the public defender are pawns. It's not that the $ystem hates them, it's that, to the people who run the show, they truly, truly do not matter.

    So the moral of the story is: if you accidentally download CP, pull the plug on the computer, rip out the hard drive, and destroy it immediately. (Okay, maybe you can leave it powered up for the time it takes to back up your documents, &c., but no longer. It's hammer time.)

  18. Re:He's screwed NOW by dissy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is were the Internet shows its evil side.

    There was no internet in 1692.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials

    No, this is where HUMANITY shows its evil side.

  19. Re:FBI bait? by canajin56 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The FBI bait sites are awesome, because they don't care how downloaded the image, just that you made the request. So, people have found out what the bait images are, apparently, and like to "FBI Roll" people by either linking to them directly, or even better, putting them as a 1x1 image hidden somewhere on an innocuous page. That way you never even see it, but it's in your browser cache now, so when the FBI comes knocking after your download, it'll be there. Somebody needs to step this program up a notch, and start FBI rolling every major newscaster, reporter, media executive, and politician (big and small). Until that happens, nobody gives a shit. Nobody cares that some innocent guy goes to jail for 3.5 years and can never get a job ever again and dies homeless, nobody cares in the slightest. Nobody even cares when a 17 year old girl gets 10 years for taking a pic of her tits and sending it to her boyfriend. Because she's a pedophile, it says so right here in the charges, anybody defending her is also a pedophile. And in fact, since she's underage, anybody defending her is a DOUBLE pedophile. You can imagine, a double pedophile is not something you want to be. That's right, the war on child porn is so bad, people won't even care about a white, privileged, teenage girl! I think you'd have to get every last person in the house and senate indited at once, because if you even only got half of them, the other half would turn on them like rabid wolves, cheering and applauding that the bait system works.

    --
    ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
  20. Where do they keep finding 12 morons? by 2PAIRofACES · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have to assume this guy is not guilty, not because of the presumption of innocence, but rather by the lack of accessible cp on his computer. Pedophiles don't just quit cold turkey, and even if he is a pedophile, quit cold turkey (doesn't happen), hey great, he's fixed his problem on his own. Going with that:

    Where does the government keep finding 12 morons to vote guilty in the jury box? I know this particular guy's case isn't going to a jury, but his lawyer seems to think he's screwed if he does. With easy to explain facts like this, both the DA (who wouldn't bring charges that would hurt his win %) and defense thinks there is a high likely hood of conviction? Are you kidding me?

    And how many CRAZY guilty verdicts have we read about? Why are juries stacked with idiots too stupid to see that they could just as likely be in the defendant's seat for a multitude of offenses?

    Quick side story: *all numbers, except age are fudged to prevent recrimination* I'm 32 (so far so good on my plan to outlive Jesus) and have been on a Jury 1 time. It was a drug charge, which I kinda figured out during jury selection based on the questions I was asked, so I shaped my answers accordingly. It ended up being a trial of a 19 year old kid found with 5 marijuana plants in a "grow box" (nice setup, bought online for like 2k, could of built his own for 800). The prosecution presented their case, the defense only called the defendant, who swore up and down that they were only for personal use (we're not in a medical marijuana state), and the defendant pretty much begged for mercy. I swear at this point one of my co-juror's started to tear up. Final arguments came and went, and then the Judge, the last arbiter of law said (paraphrasing here) that we were only to determine if he possessed the plants, and if so, to find him guilty.

    We got back to the jury room and as I'm told we're not supposed to do, but always gets done regardless, we took a vote. 11-1. IANAL but I believed without knowing that if I gave my real reason for not wanting to convict that I'd be replaced (we had 2 alternates). I've never had to choose my wording so carefully, meanwhile the rest of the Jury kept saying things like : "the judge said we had to vote guilty" and "It doesn't matter if I think he did anything wrong, the judge said he did wrong" (that last one, I SWEAR TO GOD, was uttered word for word, i will never forget a syllable). It took 2 hours of carefully worded analogies to sway 1 other to my side, from there we got to 3 in 10 minutes, at 4, the whole room switched. Let me say that again, at 4 ppl, the remaining 8 switched over, not out of a sense of civic duty, but because they were tired and wanted to go home. WITH A MAN'S LIFE IN THE BALANCE.

    When we returned our verdict, the judge didn't look at what the foreman wrote (he opened it, looked at its general direction and refolded it), when the foreman not guilty, the Judge damn near fell out of his chair, the DA did a real life triple take, and the defense attorney looked like a deer in headlights. The point is that all 3 professionals INCLUDING the defense attorney, were shocked that the jury failed to rubber stamp guilty on this guy.

    After we were relieved 4 of the other jurors came to me and admitted thru conversation that they smoked pot and didn't want to vote guilty at all, but thought they had to because the judge had told them to. As they were talking, all I could think was, "So this is how democracy ends, with sheep"

    --
    "you know why? Because we got the bomb, thats why" -Dennis Leary
    1. Re:Where do they keep finding 12 morons? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Interesting - it sounds like what the judge did was correct - he instructed the jury on what the law was, that is that possession of the drug made the defendant guilty. What came out of the jury room was jury nullification (nullification of the law), that is the jury declared innocence despite the law. Supposedly this is quite a rare event.

      There is a long history of jury nullification, some of it quite ugly during periods where racial discrimination was the way things were.

      This one of the most controversial areas of law, and an area that all citizens who go to serve on juries should be aware of because it WONT be brought up in the courtroom. However the roots of it go very deep into English Common Law, and because the court cannot punish the jury for its verdicts and we have protection against double jeopardy, jury nullification is in fact a power of any jury.

    2. Re:Where do they keep finding 12 morons? by halln · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sounds like a good example where the Fully Informed Jury Association website should have been reviewed. From their site fija.org:

      "The primary function of the independent juror is not, as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical abuses of power by government. The Constitution guarantees you the right to trial by jury. This means that government must bring its case before a jury of The People if government wants to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property. Jurors can say no to government tyranny by refusing to convict."

  21. Re:Next time read at least the complete summary by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just took a look at that monkey attack lady that appeared on Oprah, did I just create demand for more monkey attacks on people?

  22. Re:Never volunteer anything to the cops by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most juries are pretty smart - I was on one, and the few dumbasses among the jury candidates were all weeded out. They are made up of the average joe citizen and despite what you may think, you yourself ARE the average joe citizen. You are not a legal expert, but you are a reasonably intelligent person perfectly able to recognize most bullshit when you hear it.

    Also, the requirements for conviction are note "I think you dunnit", they are things like A.)Intended to possess child porn, B.)actively sought out child porn, C.)actually did keep child porn in his position for a reasonable period of time. There may be more for child porn, but those are similar to the types of requirements for the felony theft case I sat on.

    Furthermore, the judge makes it very clear that you must believe each one of those criteria beyond a reasonable doubt. That's not "I'm pretty sure it's true", that's "There is no reasonable alternative". It also applies to each one individually, 2 out of 3 doesn't cut it. It does not mean it is impossible for it to have happened differently, it just means there is no other reasonable alternative. If there IS an alternative, and it is reasonable, there is no option but to aquit. You may be certain he did it, but his guilt has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Last but certainly not least, jurors are definitely aware that, with the stroke of a pen they are sending a man to jail for years. You are influencing the future of a man's life with this action, and it is not taken lightly. Even a case where a guy might get off in 6 months with good behavior, it's still heavy.

    Certainly innocent people go to jail, even with all of this. Evidence can be looked at more than one way, and sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. If the truth of what happened doesn't seem possible, the defendant is in jeopardy. But the odds are stacked against this, and are system is designed to prefer letting an innocent go free than sending a guilty man to jail.

    That's why I think this guy is full of shit. If what he says is the full truth, a third grader could keep him out of prison. A lawyer, even a public defender, doesn't tell you to take a plea unless he thinks you are screwed, and he certainly wouldn't think that if all this guy did were accidentally download a kiddy porn pic. Hell if what he said were true he could go to court, plead not guilty, and just sit there the entire trial, with no representation and never saying a word and the jury would almost certainly find him not guilty.

    In fact, if that deleted download were all they had against him, the Grand Jury would not have thought there was enough evidence to go to trial, and would have told the prosecuters to go pound sand.

    That he is pleading guilty instead of defending himself, especially when there hasn't been a plea bargain, tells me that he is guilty as sin and just trying to mitigate the damage by playing the victim.

    --
    Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller