Indiana attorney arrested on child pornography charges

When it comes to the worst that a person can do child pornography ranks right up there with child molestation and murder. Just look at this comment that was left with one of the news stories about this case. "Guys like Hasler can't be rehabilitated. They just need to be euthanized [sic]."


Anderson Indiana attorney Samuel Hasler was arrested by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] on 09 March 2010 at his Anderson law office. ICE executed a search warrant and took a computer and external hard drive that they claim Hasler used to send images of child pornography to an undercover police officer.

A press release by ICE states that "If convicted, Hasler faces up to 20 years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and up to a lifetime of supervised release following any prison sentences imposed." 18 USC 2252 defines the violation of possession of child pornography. The federal sentencing guidelines provide the following;

§2G2.2. Trafficking in Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor; Receiving, Transporting, Shipping, Soliciting, or Advertising Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor; Possessing Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor with Intent to Traffic; Possessing Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor
(a) Base Offense Level:
(1) 18, if the defendant is convicted of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b), § 2252(a)(4), § 2252A(a)(5), or § 2252A(a)(7).
(2) 22, otherwise

Without any upward revisions for prior criminal history of other aggravating factors the sentencing range is 27-33 months and 41-51 months.

In Maryland earlier this year a police officer was arrested by FBI agents on child pornography possession charges after a girl, age 17, sent photos of herself to him. The article about this states that the relationship between the two included over 1300 electronic exchanges. Note that he was arrested because of the images that she produced of herself were sent to his phone by her.

This abcNews 20/20 episode is about a high school boy who was arrested for child pornography after it was placed on his computer in a "drive-by" attack. That is when a third party uses malicious software to hack into your computer and park files there for later retrieval or to send out spam messages.

The response from the prosecuting attorney, "This young man does need to be taught that he will be responsible for what is on his computer." Thus, even if you do not know it is on there prosecutors say you have the responsibility to ensure that you have the same skills of computer forensic examiners that charge hundreds of dollars an hour to discover that malicious content or hidden files are there or periodically hire them to find and remove the material.

While not condoning child pornography possession or distribution I do have to take issue with the hard-line stance that prosecutors take and their insistence that these children are psychologically damaged for life by these images. There are plenty of women out there that you have seen in movies or other pop culture venues that had exposed their breast to the camera when they were age 18 and have had no psychological damage from it.

There are also girls who are a few months shy of 18 years that do the same in front of the bathroom mirror. I have previously written about the most prolific producers of child pornography in the United States: high school girls. Some never show those images to anyone else, some send them to a boyfriend.

I think it is inappropriate to say that these girls are being psychologically damaged by doing that and that they should be incarcerated for much of their adult life and then monitored for the rest of it as a sex offender. I feel there is greater psychological damage that comes from prosecuting these children and labeling them as sex offenders for life.

The Indiana General Assembly has also seen that it may be better to educate students that are engaging in "sexting" rather than branding them for life as child pornographers. Senate Bill 224 was enacted into law this year. It provides that a commission shall be established to study this issue among other things including that:

A school corporation may offer classes, instruction, or programs regarding the potential risks and consequences of creating and sharing sexually suggestive or sexually explicit materials through cellular telephones, social networking web sites, computer networks, and other digital media.

What is disturbing about many of the comments from people posting to news stories about arrest like this, not convictions, is their absolute disdain for for our law, the Founding Fathers and our military personnel who supposedly fight to preserve and defend our constitution. Many of these commentators do not know the facts of the case yet seem insistent on making judgment. We have established a presumption of innocence for a reason. Look back at that 20/20 episode. That could be you.

The ICE press release reminds us of this "The public is reminded that a complaint is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

Well intentioned laws are too often expanded and so rigidly enforced that they can do more harm than good. We must remain vigilant in the presumption of innocence and if serving as jurors apply the law in a rational manner. As voters we must banish prosecutors who will not apply the law in a rational manner and instead want to ruin people's lives because their computer was subject to attack by a hacker.

As of printing according to the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana this case has not been docketed.

Subscribe

Indiana Custodial Rights Advocates

©2010 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in it's entirety with credit given.