TruthMovement an internet research-guide for students and scholars. Best viewed in Chrome Browser

Blog Search

Thursday, March 19, 2015

The Myth of Sex Trafficking and Sex Slavery, Research, Lies, Facts, Fact Sheet, Truth about Human Trafficking statistics and Prostitution

The Myth of Sex Trafficking and Sex Slavery, Research, Lies, Facts, Fact Sheet, Truth about Human Trafficking statistics and Prostitution

Judges Find Federal Child Porn Sentences Are Much Longer Than Jurors Consider Just; by Jacob Sullum

Judges Find Federal Child Porn Sentences Are Much Longer Than Jurors Consider JustIn one case, the term sought by prosecutors was 17 times longer than the jury recommended. by Jacob Sullum

It is not hard to see how we ended up with absurdly long sentences for possession of child pornography. No legislator wants to seem soft on people who like to look at this awful stuff (who are commonly equated with child molesters even if they have never laid a hand on a single kid), and there does not seem to be any political downside to demanding ever harsher punishments for them. The assumption seems to be that, as far as the public is concerned, there is no such thing as an excessively severe penalty for child pornography offenses, even when they do not involved production or profit.

A federal judge in Cleveland recently put that assumption to the test by polling jurors on the appropriate sentence for a man they had convicted of receiving, possessing, and distributing child pornography. On average, they recommended a prison term of 14 months—far shorter than the mandatory minimum (five years), the sentence recommended by prosecutors (20 years), or the term indicated by federal sentencing guidelines (27 years).

As Eli Hager notes in a piece published by The Marshall Project, it is highly unusual for a judge to consult jurors about sentencing, which outside of death penalty cases is generally considered beyond their purview. But U.S. District Judge James Gwin, an advocate of this approach, was curious to see whether the sentences allowed by law reflect the community's sense of just punishment. The defendant, Ryan Collins, was convicted last October after police found more than 1,500 child porn images on his computer. He was charged with distribution because he also had peer-to-peer file sharing software. Last week, taking a cue from the jury, Gwin sentenced Collins to five years, the minimum required by statute, which was one-quarter the term that prosecutors wanted but still four times longer than the jurors deemed fair.

Although notionally a cross-section of the community, the 12 jurors in Collins' case may not be a representative sample of the general public. But this is not the only federal jury that has implicitly questioned the sentences that members of Congress and the U.S. Sentencing Commission (which has to incorporate statutory minimums into its guidelines) have decided are appropriate in cases like this. Mark W. Bennett, a federal judge in Iowa, told Hager:

Every time I ever went back in the jury room and asked the jurors to write down what they thought would be an appropriate sentence, every time—even here, in one of the most conservative parts of Iowa, where we haven't had a "not guilty" verdict in seven or eight years—they would recommend a sentence way below the guidelines sentence.

That goes to show that the notion that the sentencing guidelines are in line with societal mores about what constitutes reasonable punishment—that's baloney.

Current sentences do not reflect public opinion so much as the opinion of mindlessly tough-on-crime legislators like Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who still thinks federal sentences for child pornography offenses are too lenient.

Reason TV's interview with Bill Keller, The Marshall Project's editor in chief:

This is How Child Molesting Cops are Treated in a Corrupt Police State; by Matt Agorist

This is How Child Molesting Cops are Treated in a Corrupt Police State

Fauquier County, VA — The special treatment a Virginia state trooper received, who was charged with with forcible sodomy on a minor, aggressive sexual battery and indecent liberties with a child, among other charges, will turn your stomach. reported in December on the details of the charges and the subsequent outcome of the plea bargain.

Christopher Allen Carson, 30, pleaded guilty to a felony count of criminal solicitation, a count of contributing to delinquency of a minor and one count of exposing his penis to a child. Carson also pleaded guilty to two counts of loaning pornographic videos to a child.

Judge Herman A. Whisenant Jr. accepted Carson’s pleas as part of a bargain on the day Carson was to face a jury trial. Carson was originally charged with forcible sodomy, aggressive sexual battery and indecent liberties with a child.

Whisenant recommended a sentence of nine years in prison, all but 30 days of which to be suspended, and two years of probation. As part of the plea agreement, Carson does not have to register as a sex offender. Also as part of the agreement, two additional active charges of forcible sodomy and indecent liberties with a child will be dropped.

This man orally forced himself onto a sleeping 7th grader and he will only be going to jail for 30 days. Let that sink in.

Also, Carson will not have to comply with Virginia’s Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry Act.

To put into perspective the level of special treatment given to Carson we can look at a similar case in which the honorable Judge Herman A. Whisenant Jr. presided. Donald Hausen, 35, racked up similarly disgusting charges of aggravated sexual battery, manufacturing child pornography, distribution of child pornography and possession of child pornography.

Whisenant gave him 66 years in jail and Hausen will also be required to register as a violent sex offender.

Hausen deserved this sentence, so did Carson. The only difference is that Christopher Allen Carson, was part of the team. Instead of being held to higher standards, like he should be, for being a police officer, Carson was given little to no punishment because of his badge.

Is this justice?

Joaquin Gonzalez Vicencio, 30, and Joaquin Berumen Cortes, 24, were caught growing marijuana in a forest in 2013 in Charlottesville, Va.. Neither one of these men had caused harm to anyone else.

Vicencio was sentenced to 11 years in a federal penitentiary and Cortes was sentenced to 10.

In America, child raping cops are let off while men trying to grow a plant are thrown in a cage. The deeper one digs into the corruption within court systems in the US, the more “Justice” looks like “Just Us.”