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.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Indiana attorney arrested on child pornography charges
Monday, January 11, 2010
US Government establishes child porn network in the name of security
Child pornography laws have become so expansive that they now include prohibitions against adults portraying a person under the age of 18 appearing in the nude or simulated images. To the horror of some parents criminal charges have been brought against themselves for possession of photos so innocent as a girl who is two years of age sitting in a tub full of bubbles but having a breast fully exposed.
Now this absurdity of a well-intentioned law written by people without the insight or acumen to include safeguard provisions against such misapplication may be used against those charged with the duty to protect airline passengers. The Transportation Safety Administration [TSA] has been using scanning machines that allow security officers to see through outer and inner garments of the people walking through the machine. The "millimeter wave" (MMW) technology bounces radio-frequency waves off people to construct a 3-D image within a few seconds.
This has brought about the ire of some civil libertarians who contend that "seeing" through someones clothing without probable cause is a search as described in the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This argument, although valid, is not likely to stand, as whenever the government wants to do away with liberty the causes of security and safety are championed and the dull-minded populace and judges embrace it. However, the TSA counters that passengers are given the option of a traditional pat-down search.
The scanner operates in much the same way as a x-ray machine sees through your skin to the bone. Just as is done with x-rays a photographic image is produced. Unlike x-rays though the scanner produces a real-time video image on a monitor that is viewed by the security officers.
Likely you have heard of the recent attempt of a Nigerian born Muslim extremist to detonate a chemical reactant explosive that was strapped to his leg while on a jet bound for Detroit. This is the type of surreptitious activity that these scanners would reveal. The problem for the TSA is that to be effective everyone must be scanned.
Gone are the days when profiling was an effective tool as interceding security threats. Anyone who recalls the Vietnam war knows that children were used to deliver bombs to US soldiers. Children have been used in military action prior to and since that time. Even on the streets of our US cities and towns children as young as ten years of age are packing firearms and being used as drug couriers.
These scanners which are installed at at least six US airports cannot effectively prevent explosive materials from being carried onto airplanes unless each person passing through the security checkpoint has passed through the body scanner. As the monitors on these scanners show video images of the breast or pubic region of young girls walking through or the photographic like image of a young boys penis the United States Government is producing and possessing child pornography.
Most alarming though is that a parent who encourages or induces a child to pass through these body scanners to produce the naked image of the children's bodies have assisted in the production of child pornography. Don't think that the pedophiles producing this child pornography are going to get arrested for it. Do something the government doesn't like and see if you don't get arrested at an airport checkpoint. My advice to anyone considering taking a minor through an airport security check; take the train.
Your tax dollars, hard at work, establishing the worlds largest child-porn network.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Make a suggestion for me to write about.
Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.
Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions. 
