« Fascinating exploration of modern data on modern mass incarceration | Main | "Remodeling American Sentencing: A Blueprint for Moving Past Mass Incarceration" »

May 21, 2014

Should I be hopeful Amy can now recover more restitution after major child porn bust in NYC?

The question in the title of this post is my (perhaps weak) effort to put some kind of positive spin on this depressing new story from CNN headlined "Cop, rabbi, scoutmaster among arrests in child porn bust."  Here are just some of the ugly basics:

They are people children are supposed to trust: A New York Police Department officer, a Fire Department of New York paramedic, a rabbi and a scoutmaster were among more than 70 people arrested in a major child porn bust, authorities said Wednesday.

One of those arrested -- a supervisor with the Transportation Security Administration -- allegedly traveled to the Dominican Republic to have sex with children, a law enforcement official said. He allegedly made more than 50 trips there.

The investigation, involving agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as well as New York authorities, began as part of an undercover operation into peer-to-peer networks, authorities told reporters Wednesday.  The suspects, who do not appear to know one another, were able to search files using graphic terms and descriptions. Software continuously scanned files and automatically uploaded images to personal computers, laptops and mobile phones.

Special Agent in Charge James Hayes, head of Homeland Security Investigations New York, called the arrests the largest enforcement operation in New York "targeting predators (who) possess, produce or distribute sexually explicit images of children." The activity, he said, has "reached epidemic proportions."

"The backgrounds of many of the individuals ... is shocking," Hayes said. "These defendants come from all walks of life ... This operation puts the lie to the classic stereotypical profile that child predators are nothing more than unemployed drifters. Many of the defendants are, in fact, well-educated and successful in private and professional lives. They work as registered nurses, paramedics, caretakers for mentally ill adults, computer programers and architects."

The continuing operation resulted in 71 arrests -- including one woman -- and the seizure of nearly 600 devices, including desktop and laptop computers, tablets, smartphones and thumb drives with tens of thousands of sexually explicit images and videos of children, Hayes said.

The pornographic images of children were shared at no charge, authorities said. About a third of the suspects remain in custody, and the others were released on bonds ranging from $30,000 to $500,000. Hayes said the January arrest of Brian Fanelli, chief of the Mount Pleasant Police Department in upstate Valhalla, New York, on child pornography violations helped lead to the other defendants.

A few months ago, I asked in the title of this post a serious question that comes to mind now again: "Just how many prominent, successful men are child porn fiends?".  As the title of this post suggests, following the Supreme Court's messy "split-the-difference" approach to child porn restitution in its recent Paroline ruling (basis here), I am hoping a silver lining to this dark cloud might be that CP crimes committed too often by persons "well-educated and successful in private and professional lives" might now mean more restitution getting paid to the unfortunate victims of these crimes.

A few (of many) prior posts on Paroline and child porn issues:

May 21, 2014 at 06:00 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e201a73dc89a32970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Should I be hopeful Amy can now recover more restitution after major child porn bust in NYC?:

Comments

This post stands in nice contrast to the court costs post since it's the rich that'll get hit harder here.

I had thought previously that Ex Post Facto laws would have precluded a Congressional fix to give the specific victim restitution. However, thinking about it now, the crime of possession of child pornography occurs at the moment you're caught (or, more accurately, it occurs continuously). Given this, if Congress changed the restitution scheme and you still possessed it after, you'd be culpable under the new punishment. I previously thought the Court split the baby because they wanted to avoid ex post facto problems. Instead, it seems they just didn't trust Congress to fix it.

Posted by: Erik M | May 21, 2014 8:08:10 PM

Eric M:

Constitutional Rights for previous possessors of CP, or that all encompassing STEREOTYPE-Sex-Offenders - perish the thought!!!

Posted by: albeed | May 21, 2014 9:29:02 PM

Good.The actual offender need pay, rather than some nebulous
overarching party, as when a slip and fall victim at a
college recovers monies from the state university system.

Posted by: Adamakis | May 21, 2014 9:52:50 PM

"This operation puts the lie to the classic stereotypical profile that child predators are nothing more than unemployed drifters."

No it doesn't, because they likely will be, after fines, restitution, and extremely restrictive sex offender laws make it impossible for them to ever hold a job again, and leaves them no place to live except underneath remote industrial bridges or the most distant of rural places.

Posted by: Allen | May 21, 2014 10:19:43 PM

Boy Scout leader. Tells you something. Never let your kid join the Scouts or be a choir boy in a catholic church.

Posted by: Liberty1st | May 21, 2014 10:46:43 PM

personally the only thing that amy and her crook lawyer haven't gotten that they dissever would be a plot 8 foot long and 6 foot deep!

as for this bit!

"I had thought previously that Ex Post Facto laws would have precluded a Congressional fix to give the specific victim restitution. However, thinking about it now, the crime of possession of child pornography occurs at the moment you're caught (or, more accurately, it occurs continuously). Given this, if Congress changed the restitution scheme and you still possessed it after, you'd be culpable under the new punishment."

Can we all say NO SHIT! of course that would be legal even under the ex post part of the constitution. Sorry Ex Post is not a law. Since Constitution trumps law.

Posted by: rodsmith | May 22, 2014 1:23:18 AM

Again. I hate to be repetitive, but this post is repetitive.

The damage to Amy must be demonstrated, and not assumed. Why? We do not want a penny going to the lawyer.

Cross claims should be filed against those who let her uncle loose to abuse her, and against the Victim Notification System, that repeatedly torments with notices.

Over and over again, because the lawyer is so stupid: should I have to pay the estate of the women I saw beheaded on Youtube for stealing from the Drug Cartel? Should the 1000's of other viewers? Should I have to pay the victims of the drunk Russian driver going against traffic and crashing because I downloaded the recording? Should the entire nation pay the estate of the murder victim of OJ Simpson because they watched his slow car chase?

Naturally, we need e-discovery of all the computers of the prosecutors, those vile feminist running dogs, those of the judge, and those of the jury. Refer all CP to the FBI for investigation, and there will be plenty since the federal government is the biggest downloader of all.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | May 22, 2014 2:36:21 AM

Supremacy Claus has it right, although child porn is more serious that what is stated, it can be analogous in the sense of a torture video or beheading or beating video, if a teenager is beaten or a child or beheaded as in certain islamic countries, should viewers or people who posses the video face forfeiture of all their assets and placed on a registry, don't think so. Unfortunately, the courts won't do anything about it.

Posted by: Alex | May 22, 2014 4:15:27 AM

"The suspects, who do not appear to know one another,"

"The images... were shared at no charge"

They don't know each other, they don't communicate, there's no money exchanged, but this is definitely a marketplace that behaves according to supply and demand.

Posted by: NickS | May 22, 2014 6:34:00 PM

NickS are you stupid? How do you demand something if you don't communicate to the supplier what you want. The material exists free of charge. The feds downloaded it the same way the defendants downloaded it, so there is no relation between the producer and possessor. 100 people do not demand child porn, it is usually a close communication between two pedophiles who create material then one of them releases it publicaly, from there on its unstoppable. She doesn't deserve restitution because no one in particular is causing her harm, besides her uncle. She is suffering from depression and paranoia, but that should dissappear after she gets 3.4mil right?

Posted by: Nero | May 28, 2014 7:58:02 PM

The dominate narrative used by law Enforcement is, Every image of a child being abused is hurting the child in the image; However I find if you dig deep the real truth emerges. Unfortunately thousands are in prison waiting for that truth to come out. Potential Jurors need to be told about, "jury nullification" for the sake of the TAX PAYERS. Only those that hurt a real child should go to jail. Using the logical fallacy "Every image of a child being abused actually harms the child" drum beat goes on thousand more will be in incarceration for NO contact, NO victim crimes.

The following from Inquision21.com

The dominant narrative:

The case was sensational. A single American man, Matthew Mancuso, a millionaire divorcee from suburban Pittsburgh, adopted 5-year-old Masha Allen from a Russian orphanage in 1998 with the assistance of a US adoption agency. Over the next five years, he used her as both his sex slave and as a child porn model to be shared with a small private circle on the Internet. After years of abuse, police located her by identifying some backgrounds in the images, such as images of her in Disney World in Florida. While Allen was the surname finally given to her, her original name was in Russian. After her rescue, her adoptive father Mancuso was sentenced to many years in prison and Masha was finally given a real adoptive mother.

Masha’s new government protectors were Betzi White and her assistant Michelle Rager. Masha bravely went before a Congressional Committee, spoke to national newspapers and other media and appeared on Oprah. Masha’s Law was passed, tripling sentences for sex offenders.

US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan was the law enforcement official who rescued Masha from Matthew Mancuso, the man who adopted her from Russia. She was intimately involved with every step of the case. Mary Beth Buchanan is described as ‘the government’s most aggressive opponent of the spread of pornography in the nation’. One report is that ‘She is scornful of prosecutors who have avoided taking on obscenity cases. Unlike her counterparts, she said in a recent interview, “I’m not afraid of the challenges, legal or otherwise, here.” It went on “Ms. Buchanan said she selected cases that she hoped would have deterrent effects on other pornographers.”

“We want producers to know that these things are not tolerated,” she said.

ANOTHER VERSION of the Masha story !!

A happy ending for Masha and society? Far from it. Take society first. The draconian Masha’s Law worsened the plight of families of those accused of involvement in child pornography and that of homeless sex offenders. But no happy outcome for Masha either.

For around two years after 2007, James Marsh, Masha’s former lawyer, and I (Brian Rothery, Editor.) tried with no success to stop the FBI publishing images of the ‘rescued’ Masha, including the uncropped one above(One can see the photo on the web site), which was on the front page of an entrapment web site titled mycandidteens.com and hosted by the large Californian server DreamHost. We were ignored with what could be described only as contempt. I tried to enlist the help of her ‘saviour’ and ‘child protector’ Mary Beth Buchanan, but the only result we saw was that even more provocative images of underaged girls appeared on the front page of the entrapment site. It was not possible to research inside the site for reasons that should be obvious.

Finally the images of Masha and other little girls were removed from the front page, but the site remains active at the time of writing with dodgy link titles that suggest that it is still very much an entrapment site. Readers are strongly advised not to access it.

I first learned about Masha being used by the FBI on January 24 2008 and my US informants wrongly criticized James Marsh, her lawyer. Quoting the source:“(We made) numerous abuse reports and complaints to the hosting company which were ignored as well as numerous attempts to contact Mr. Marsh himself to no avail.”

But James Marsh wrote to me on February 1 2008: “For the record, neither me nor anyone associated with my firm has seen Masha Allen for almost two years.

“When I discovered the existence of the site www.mycandidteens.com in December 2007, I immediately informed the government officials responsible for Masha's health and safety, Betzi White and her assistant Michelle Rager, that they should exert every effort to investigate www.mycandidteens.com. Obviously they have failed to do anything to protect their ward.

“Also for the record, we haven't brought any lawsuits under Masha's Law and my position concerning her situation could not be clearer: http://www.childlaw.us/masha-allen/

“Masha was never rescued, acquired or head-hunted (at least not by me); her adoptive mother (recruited by her rescuers) retained me in late June 2005 to uncover the truth about her government-approved international adoption by Matthew Mancuso. I did not learn about the mycandidteens site until December 2007, I have never even heard of Dream Host until now, and yes it does appear that Masha continues to be exploited over and over again.

“Your questions and inquiries are most appropriately addressed to the government officials, judges, social workers and lawyers who are currently responsible for Masha's well-being. James R. Marsh, Esq.”

This is most interesting and revealing. James Marsh informed the government about the Masha images in December 2007. This question must now be asked of Masha’s government protectors, Betzi White and her assistant Michelle Rager. Why was Masha still being exploited by images of her being offered thus? Has the most famous girl ever rescued from abusers and child pornographers become titillating bait to be used to entrap so-called predators? Are you complicit in this? Is there a connection between her now being vanished and her images suddenly re-appearing?

And as James Marsh suggested, I asked the government officials, judges, social workers and other lawyers who are currently responsible for Masha's well-being, “Has her well-being just been a sham to you? Where are any of you now? And which of you is still involved in her continuing exploitation?”

Perhaps we should have expected no better from the US government. Here is James Marsh on his blog (http://www.childlaw.us/masha-allen/): "When Masha was rescued, she was placed with a young single foster parent with her own history of sexual abuse, given an unlicensed Christian therapist and a Medicaid card. When the FBI reportedly 'moved her to another part of the country' a few months after her adoption, Masha was taken from the only community she knew and her thin support system was shattered. She began an unstable lifestyle which continues to this day. No therapists, no medical team, no house or meaningful compensation. Just a prayer and a press release and a one way ticket to nowhere."

And, having now read so many pious outburst from all those who celebrated her rescue, and wondering why they seem to no longer care, perhaps it's understandable for me to conclude that they were far more interested in the opportunity to introduce the draconian Masha's Law than they were in either Masha herself or any other little girl.

As for the worldwide description of Masha being a famous child porn star, she would probably have never become famous (infamous?) were it not for the way her rescuers promoted her for their own ends, publicly identifying her.

A few more quotes about and by Mary Beth Buchanan in the Pennsylvania Tribune-Review: "The Internet has given predators access to children they previously would not have had. Children are often too trusting of adults." Question for you, Mary Beth Buchanan – Why was Masha sexually exploited by a government agency?

(Despite the swelling ranks of online predators), "We are doing a better job of catching these people (including through her Pennsylvania Crimes Against Children Task Force). Question for you, Mary Beth Buchanan – Why don’t you now catch the organization exploiting Masha?

Quote from the Tribune-Review: ‘U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan attributes the increase to greater Internet use among offenders and more skill by law enforcement agencies in tracking them down’. "The volume is so much greater, but the severity is also a lot worse," said Buchanan, who prosecuted such cases as an assistant U.S. attorney and formed a regional Crimes Against Children Task Force. "I think that people are still surprised at the level of violence that many of these predators will engage in." Question for you, Mary Beth Buchanan – is some of the greater Internet use among offenders caused by activities such as that which still displays images of Masha online and if so why don’t you stop it?

The first woman Masha was placed with after her rescue lost an action against her pastor for sexual assault. She also claimed that her parents were in a satanic cult and forced her to participate in human sacrifices. Buchanan was aware of this woman's history. Now Masha is suing the state because of her post-rescue treatment. It seems that when you are being abused the next worse thing to have happen you is to be rescued by the state.

Earlier quotes from Masha

"How can so many people enjoy the horrible things that happened to me?

"I know that these pictures will never end and that the abuse from them will go on forever. ...

"I want every single person who downloads my picture to go to jail and really be punished as much as possible. They are as bad as Matthew. ..

"Child pornography is not a victimless crime. I am a victim, and I still suffer everyday and every time someone sees me being abused."

So from her own mouth, all you government-paid protectors of Masha and other victims like her, listen -

"I still suffer everyday and every time someone sees me being abused."

"They are as bad as Matthew."

"I know that these pictures will never end and that the abuse from them will go on forever. ..."

How right she was.

Note on mycandidteens.com

From the index page. Welcome to mycandidteens.com. Summer price is $19.95, 100 000 pictures,everyday update.

Candid upskirt, candid pantyhose, candid park, candid beach, candid school girls, contribution, amatuer models posing, contribution from gymnastic girls, candid street shots, private shots. (All of which was beside Masha's image above.)

More information

Information received February 3 2008."(This web site) is the same one that has been spamming tens of thousands of images per day to legal newsgroups recently. - - - general teen porn designed to get people to then go and look at the site that may then entrap them.

"This is very similar to a site caled sweatsweet that did the same thing a few years ago and was also likely a FBI run site - - -."

"It is also worth remembering that the idiots brought this girl to public knowledge as they published her photo in an attempt to locate her and her abuser but unknown to them she had already been located and was needlessly thrust into the public limelight to bolster egos and this then meant she had no choice but to be used again by the Americans in their own publicity campaign."

Up to 2009, despite trying to ask more questions from officials in the US, it became obvious that the authorities did not have any interest in what this writer or the other objectors had to say about their continued exploitation of Masha as, blatantly, they still had her online.

So why did they then blatantly add more sexually explicit images of other young girls to the front page? Forget the cheek of it. I, for example, was not surprised that they have a contempt for me or any other writer or journalist. That fact may, however, be of concern to every decent US citizen who becomes aware of it.

There is one possible reason. They were upping the ante and stopping any further investigation of this web site. Up to now few would have dared go beyond the index page, for fear of what they might acquire on their hard drives, but by placing extra explicit images of other young girls right on the index page, they were ensuring that anyone who attempted to expose them, or even criticize them for this exploitation, would be instantly criminalized. This is so brazen that it is truly organized crime. Hopefully, some more Americans will awake from their sleepwalk and begin to see what kind of state their legislators and police have created.

How the American police create crimes

(This was written before the Masha story above, but Masha's story gives it new significance.)

The manufacturing of crimes by the police is a very big industry in America, but it is part of the even bigger industry of the organized crime where the police, the legal profession and the judiciary act together to defraud and criminalize innocent citizens.

In a devastating indictment of the American justice system, the US writer, Paul Craig Roberts, has described some of the activities of the US police in an article titled ‘How the Police Create Crimes’. We were aware that the US police were legally using child pornography to entrap men over the Internet and also posing as underage girls and boys to ensnare men into meetings where they would be arrested and, even in some cases, filmed for television programmes. Stories have also been coming in to this web site about malicious women using help from male FBI agents and police to entrap their ex-husbands and boy friends and for years we have been hearing that the security services use women (all over the world incidentally) to entrap and ruin men who may be politically undesirable to American causes. Roberts now reports that the American police are planting attractive women half naked in parks, who entice passing males, engage them in conversation, pretend to begin to seduce them and ask to see their penises. When the foolish men comply, the police with their cameras still running pounce on them in triumph.

Does the beauty of the child revolt her beholder

There was another example of how a dominant narrative can distort values and even deny and assault beauty itself when a 2008 exhibition by Australian photographer Bill Henson was shut down by the authorities and Henson investigated by the police for breaching child pornography laws. The image causing the greatest controversy was that of a beautiful 13 year old girl posing topless, her lower half shaded in darkness. Climbing on to the bandwagon that followed from Australian child protectionists, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd described that image and those of other youngsters in the exhibition as ‘revolting’. While his remark was published, no-one appears to have subjected it to any form of analysis. In the semantic world which I occupy that remark could not make his view of the matter clearer. He, the prime minister of Australia, finds the body of a 13 year old girl revolting.
***********************************************************************
I would like to apologize to James Marsh myself for thinking without knowing the truth.

http://1truthmovement.blogspot.co.uk/

Posted by: Frank Gillice | May 29, 2014 1:20:25 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB