« Is mass incarceration contributing to the dumbing down of America? | Main | Might SCOTUS take up Johnson retroactivity ASAP via Texas case appealed from district court? »
January 8, 2016
"Full Restitution for Child Pornography Victims: The Supreme Court's Paroline Decision and the Need for a Congressional Response"
The title of this post is the title of this notable paper authored by Paul Cassell and James Marsh now available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:
In this article, we have reviewed the legal issues surrounding restitution for child pornography victims. In our view, the Supreme Court’s Paroline decision failed to fully implement the congressional mandate that victims receive restitution for the “full amount” of their losses. Congress should move swiftly to ensure full restitution for child pornography victims by enacting the proposed Amy and Vicky Act — a more rational scheme for awarding restitution.
After the Supreme Court's Paroline ruling in April 2014, a number of reasonable folks reasonably predicted that Congress could and would move quickly to pass legislation to remedy the victim-oriented concerns stressed in this article. But, now nearly two years later, "Paroline fix" legislation seems stuck in Congress while victims like Amy and Vicky and others wait and wait for statutory reforms that, in the words of this article, would create "a more rational scheme for awarding restitution."
January 8, 2016 at 11:42 AM | Permalink
Comments
Any movement on CP restitution should be contingent on sanity in the prison sentences.
Posted by: Peanut Gallery | Jan 8, 2016 1:34:54 PM
"Paroline fix" legislation seems stuck in Congress (where it should never see the light of day) while 'Lawyers like Marsh and Cassell' and others wait and wait for their money gravy train to pull into the station', in the words of this article, would create "a more rational scheme for awarding large sums of money to two dirt bag lawyers and their associates."
Posted by: like it is | Jan 8, 2016 6:37:43 PM
I believe that full restitution should also come from the authority loosing the child predator on the public. Because sexual preference is likely congenital and immutable, the authorities should pay to the last button on the last shirt when their criminal proteges are set free.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jan 8, 2016 11:27:44 PM
Because the government has extensive knowledge of the pedophilia, it has malice. That justifies triple damages. To deter.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jan 9, 2016 1:25:59 AM
like it is:
Aren't you giving dirt bags a bad name? After all, dirt bags do help haul dirt and fertilizer, unlike these lawyers.
Posted by: albeed | Jan 9, 2016 7:27:30 AM
Isn't the Vicky/Amy CP something like 20 yrs. old already? Haven't the victims of whoever produced the CP (because as far as I'm concerned, those who ran across it accidently on the internet while downloading adult porn, are sort of victims too) received enough in exhorbitant restitution amounts to receive more than a lifetime of therapy? And haven't the lawyers (using the term loosely here) who are continuously making money off their Vicky/Amy retainer status clients, wealthy enough too?
Can those who ended up in prison because of an accidental "mouse click" receive "full amount" restitution for the years they've spent in prison and their depleted bank accounts, from those who produced the CP or the computer servers that allowed it on the internet?
If every "victim" of some trauma could collect "full amount" (and who decides what that is?) damages from everyone who's ever hurt them, this world would be nothing but a lawyer feeding frenzy. Oh, that's right, it is already.
Posted by: kat | Jan 10, 2016 12:01:38 PM
The uncle that filmed his rape of Amy is, naturally, judgment proof.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jan 11, 2016 8:28:17 AM
