Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
Interesting court decision.
This court ruled that the mere act of having child porn in a shared folder when using P2P programs does NOT necessarily constitute distribution of child porn.
http://tinyurl.com/nqrm8p7
Here is the important passage from the decision-----
"""David George Husmann placed various images of child pornography in a shared computer folder connected to a file sharing network. Based on that conduct, a jury convicted him of three counts of distributing child pornography. At trial, the government did not present evidence that any person had actually downloaded or obtained the materials that Husmann made available. The issue we address is whether the mere act of placing child pornography materials in a shared computer folder, available to other users of a file sharing network, constitutes distribution of child pornography. We conclude it does not. A conviction for distributing child pornography cannot be sustained without evidence that another person actually downloaded or obtained the images stored in the shared folder. Accordingly, we vacate Husmann’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and remand for resentencing."""
rewdiazepam
This court ruled that the mere act of having child porn in a shared folder when using P2P programs does NOT necessarily constitute distribution of child porn.
http://tinyurl.com/nqrm8p7
Here is the important passage from the decision-----
"""David George Husmann placed various images of child pornography in a shared computer folder connected to a file sharing network. Based on that conduct, a jury convicted him of three counts of distributing child pornography. At trial, the government did not present evidence that any person had actually downloaded or obtained the materials that Husmann made available. The issue we address is whether the mere act of placing child pornography materials in a shared computer folder, available to other users of a file sharing network, constitutes distribution of child pornography. We conclude it does not. A conviction for distributing child pornography cannot be sustained without evidence that another person actually downloaded or obtained the images stored in the shared folder. Accordingly, we vacate Husmann’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and remand for resentencing."""
rewdiazepam
This cannot be anything but good for us.
rewdiazepam
Remember....they will use anything they can to get any type conviction.
@coolrich Conspiracy to distribute may carry the same penalty but to prove it there would need to be proof that he actually conspired with another person. In the decision the court defined distribution as transferring possession or control of something to another person and since there was no proof another person took possession of the images the guilty verdicts were vacated. Any ruling on conspiracy would likely follow the same logic in that proof of communication with another concerning distribution would be required.
@FaithFlower Believe it or not that step is being worked on. There is a possibility it's actually illegal for police to initiate the transfer of any images.