We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Two centuries not out Had the defendant actually murdered the children whose images have (presumably) given him so much furtive pleasure, would he be any worse off now?
The US Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by a high school teacher from Arizona sentenced to 200 years in jail for possessing child pornography…
If the 52-year-old had been tried in a federal court or lived elsewhere he would have received a lighter sentence.
190 years tops. With good behaviour he could have been out and about in, say, just over a century.
Indeed, the prosecutor had asked for a 340-year sentence but the trial judge imposed the minimum of 10 years for each of 20 images – to be served consecutively for a total of 200 years without the possibility of probation, early release or pardon.
So he gets what amounts, for all practical purposes, to a death sentence for possessing vile and twisted photographs. I wonder if there is a historical parallel here? Or does it set one?
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
I guess that depends on whether or not you consider lethal injection or the gas chamber worse.
There’s a wider point to be discussed here- what actually should be the punishment, if Libertarians controlled the law and law courts? Shouldn’t we try to find out who took the photos, and why (I remember that some people were dubious about pictures taken by parents of their own kids in the bath- innocent pictures which could be misinterpreted.) I suppose an Anarcho-Capitalist would opt to pay an insurance fine. What are your preferred options?
Of course they confiscated the computer; they looked at the images themselves to make a judgement; they are of course equally guilty.
After the teacher is taken to prison, they should burn the judiciary and police involved at the stake to purify the area.
Fire cleans.
Indeed, following nick g:
Do we actually know that the photos in question were “vile and twisted” according to a rational criterion? US laws are generally more liberal than UK laws on this topic, but the rhetoric of the paedophile panic is often circular when analysed: “indecent” photos, indecent because someone – a categorical paedophile – might take pleasure from them, constitute “abuse” by definition, which makes the possesor an “abuser” (which conveys a transitive sense regardless of contact) and therefore a categorical paedophile. There is not in general even a requirement for what’s portrayed to be otherwise criminal for the photographer or possessor of the photograph to be prosecuted.
And even if they were, how culpable is possession? What’s being punished here looks like thought crime. Or a status crime, since no particular thought is imputed. Or perhaps a crime of order of affect, since a prosecutor or jury, in order to impute indecency (in English law at least) may have to enter into the mind of a hypothetical observer and reconstruct a reaction to the material.
How about those racists who reproduce with approval early 20th century photographs of lynchings? Is enjoying murderer and torture like that sufficient to ground criminal liability? If not, then why’s it different?
What ought the status of “True Crime” to be? It is a massively popular genre that sells a lot of books, films and newspapers. People make a good living from the widespread pleasure among the general population in reading about, or seeing reconstructions of (mostly violent, and frequently sexually violent) crimes.
I’ve just had 3 points put on my drivers licence because I watched 5 minutes of “Police Wildest Videos” while waiting for Mrs Emma Peel to come on my screen.
Surely the law needs to connect the crime with the image and with the image taker, distributor and then the image viewer.
If the image taker was not committing a crime (i.e. innocent family photo) then next is of the distribution and resale being for ‘gain’§. If not for ‘gain’, then a person looking at the picture? Is that a “crime” in the true sense? You could argue a yes if it became known to the photo’s subject(s) that this had occured.
I am not familiar with all the issues of this case, but I am in favour of removal of proven paedophiles from the community. Not death, but removal. I prefer that a basic “leper colony” arrangement be made where paedophilees can volunteer to exclude themselves for the rest of their lives before they commit a crime. Once they commit a crime, however, then that dark, cold, windswept Scottish Island with unheated damp stone cells awaits where they work the treadmill to boil their water and have to scavenge eggs from the cliffs with no harness.
§ gain could be drawing in traffic for other purposes, bait, advertising, merchanising, sales of related material etc
I also believe that pictures that have been photoshopped to give the impression that they are children is also considered a crime. Why not filming simulated violence then as well? Where is the rational argument once you start on this path? Are we simply to trust the legislators, police and prosecutors that other victimless behaviour won’t be turned into criminal activities?
Where would you have this ‘leper colony’ Tim? What about the people living there already? I’m sure the residents of mildly inhabited hebridean islands would find something to say about having a colony of potentially dangerous people living amongst them. Unless you offered to relocate and compensate them handsomely I don’t think they’d be too enamoured of the idea.
The subject is a tricky one, but it skates awfully close to trying to police what goes on in people’s heads. How long before we have ‘Paedophile Reprogramming Centers’ springing up at the behest of the Daily Mail *SPIT* reading masses. Then you are not only skating on thin ice, you’ve pulled up all the warning signs and are charging admission. (Replace ‘Paedophile’ with any of the following; Atheist, Moslem, dissident, individualist, libertarian, you see my point)
As to those who actually act on their desires, throw them in with the rest of the prison population and let them take their chances with all the other criminals.
The law treats differently drug producers/distributors and drug users, users being given much lighter sentences. Why shouldn’t the same approach apply to child pornography? (Of course, if it was up to me, I would legalise drugs, but not child pornography, but it’s not up to me…)
TimC,
You are guilty. Clearly you watch BBC 4!
My uncle has a disused croft on the Orkneys which would fit the bill perfectly for your colony. Nimbys aren’t a problem. The Island of Eday’s population is falling at a catastrophic rate.
Alisa,
The drug analogy is right. In the UK there was a lot of legal wrangling when it was realised that the old “obscene publications” act wasn’t too much use for internet images. We now have an offense of making obscene images which essentially means downloading them (I think that covers them being cached by the browser) as well as being actively downloaded. When a conviction is reported I constantly have to remind myself that “making obscene images of children” is not quite what it sounds like.
Which brings us back to Thaddeus’ point. I think we’ve got to have some scaling in sentencing. After the South London shootings I’m expecting another crack-down on guns. Merely carrying gets you in a lot of bother already. If they up the sentence for that any further you just might as well shoot somebody.
I have no problem with this sentance. My rational is this. Persons whom wiew this material create demand for it to be created. It being the documentation of child rape for the pleasure of others. The child is victemized once during the brutality of the rape and again everytime this material is viewed by someone. Comparing this to drug crimes or thought crimes is ridiculous as there are real victems here. Innocent children. As a father of a 1 month old boy I would have no problem brutally beating to death or near death or imprisoning for the rest of their life a person whom was found to possess photographs or video of my son being victemized in this manner and having for the purpose of sexual gratification.
“You can’t go to jail for what you’re thinking.” Hey, that really dates me, doesn’t it? Presumably the “Mr. Bigs” of child porn production and distribution are beyond US jurisdiction, so Pedophile Crazy USA takes out its frustration on the mug punter. Surely no fair-minded person can seriously believe that in the case under debate, the punishment fits the crime. What would be the sentence for multiple hands-on child sexual abuse? A million years perhaps? To the end of time? The United States of Torture has a mediaeval criminal justice system.
A quote at the bottom of the BBC article
What is so hard for Europeans to understand? Especially considering that Europeans are going through the similar thing with their EU experiement. Is the US one country, or is it 50 countries? Is Europe one country, or is it 12, 18 or 20 countries? Whatever the number is up to… I can’t keep track anymore.
If laws are administered on a state by state basis, then yes, there is going to be “differences in sentencing policy across the US”. It would be as if there are 50 different countries. It’s not a big mystery. It’s fairly simple and been consistant for over 200 years now. One facet of Libertarianism is de centraliztion of power, so this should not be very difficult to understand.
Anyway, here’s a link to a pdf file of the SC petition if anyone is interested in a little more detail than the BBC srticle provides.
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/06-349.pdf
Ian: Ah, but lots of “child pornography” doesn’t involve any rape at all (being just pictures of children who are merely naked, not being raped). In fact, under US law, it doesn’t even have to involve anyone under the age of 18, as computer-generated images that represent minors count.
So that’s a non-starter, as far as any of this goes; there’s every possibility that not a single picture this man ever looked at involved a child being raped, and if that’s the case, he couldn’t be contributing to it by increasing demand.
(Mind you, I don’t think the argument is bad in itself, when applied to those who actually do create demand for the actual rape of children to produce images of same – just that I don’t think we can assume that’s the case here.)
My quarrel with the post, however, is calling this a “death sentence”; the State did not sentence the defendant to death, but to what is always called a “life sentence” – the rest of his life in prison. If it had sentenced him to be killed, that would be a death sentence.
The fact that a life sentence means he will eventually die in prison doesn’t change the long-standing and clear meanings of the phrases “life sentence” and “death sentence”.
From the petition “The sentence for sexually assaulting a child under twelve [in Arizona] is the same as for possessing a single image of that assault.”
Obviously, some deeply messed up sentencing guidelines.
Glad I don’t live in Arizona any more.
J
From what I understand, in many prisons in the US, being a child molester can be a death sentence. For whatever reason child molesters are frowned upon by other members of the prison population.
Admittedly this could be something I just saw on TV : )
Meh. Perverts like this are a permanent threat to society. Put them away in prison. Had he been a young man I might have reservations about the sentence, but since I think 20 or 30 years would be a fair sentence anyway is pretty much six one, half dozen the other.
Not sure I care over much if it is an honest-to-goodness ‘hands on’ child molester… what I do have a real problem with is a double century for looking at a bunch of pictures. That is truly, truly monstrous.
If looking at pictures gets perverts 200 years in there is no real incentive not to be ‘hands on.’
Presumably the “Mr. Bigs” of child porn production and distribution …
Gosh collectivist authoritarian thinking gets everywhere, doesn’t it? I wouldn’t presume there are any Mr Bigs. Even “organised crime” of the conventional sort, not mediated by peer to peer sharing, is largely mythical: an interpretation of masses of weakly interconnected connected small groups and franchises, and of shifting shapeless ad hoc clandestine activity, as a collection of large heirarchical organisations, put about by people whose main or only working experience is of large heirarchical organisations.
Presumably the “Mr. Bigs” of child porn production and distribution …
Gosh collectivist authoritarian thinking gets everywhere, doesn’t it? I wouldn’t presume there are any Mr Bigs. Even “organised crime” of the conventional sort, not mediated by peer to peer sharing, is largely mythical: an interpretation of masses of weakly interconnected connected small groups and franchises, and of shifting shapeless ad hoc clandestine activity, as a collection of large heirarchical organisations, put about by people whose main or only working experience is of large heirarchical organisations.
guy,
You’ve also just described the Islamic terrorist menace the other great “something must be done of the C21st”.
Resident Alien,
My thinking exactly.
I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the 800lb gorilla in the room. The major way in which kiddy-porn users are tracked down is “Operation Ore” which is a police/governmental IT thing. We all know how spectacularly 100% accurate such projects are. There have been people who have had their collars felt and were completely innocent. Once you’ve been nabbed they confiscate your machine(s) and go through every file with a fine tooth comb (hey, maybe you’re into ASCII art kiddy-porn). This takes a long time. In the meantime you are publicly vilified as a kiddy-fiddler. Some of the innocent were victims of identity theft (you wouldn’t pay for kiddy porn with your own credit card now would you?) And some of them have topped themselves.
That may be the gorilla but the 250lb Orang was brought up by Sigivald. Lewis Carroll would have been jailed for life for his antics and yet there is not a shred of evidence that he ever in anyway harmed a child. There is also very little evidence that he found his numerous nude photos of little girls erotic as opposed to merely artistic. The dividing line between porn and art is endlessly (and pointlessly) debated. It has become even more blurred since the internet unleashed niche porn on the world because most of it, most people would find difficult to classify as pornographic because it is a turn-on for only a tiny sliver of the populace. Similarly there is a thriving industry of “prostitutes” who charge men 200 quid an hour for the man to clean the prozzie’s kitchen floor with a tooth-brush while she criticises his efforts in the most stringent terms and he calls her “mistress”. There is no sex or nudity involved.
I’m forever trying to convince my wife to get into this trade. Unfortunately her usual retort is to offer me a “freebie” and I hate cleaning the kitchen floor.
Yes, Nick M. I’m aware of that.
What really concerns me about this case is that the pictures were found on his computer. Consider this, you don’t check your email for a few days, someone emails you a file of kiddie porn, calls the police and says that you have kiddie porn on your computer.
Bye bye to the world, hello sing sing.
For the sake of argument let’s say those involved in producing child pornography and posting it on a website carry 80% of culpability. Which means the end user/consumer which some argue create the demand are 20% culpable. Surely that culpability has to divided by the number of subscribers, albeit the fewer the subscribers the smaller the demand. All getting a little nebulous, so consider this: Authority’s ulterior motive is to generate the necessary justification to control the Internet. And pornography together with justifying terrorism is the route being taken. Hence the US Criminal Justice System makes viewing child pornography such a heinous crime.
I can’t understand how others seeing documentation of a crime makes the victim somehow more victimized. Sure, such crimes involve an invasion of privacy, but is that in any way the same as the crime itself? I don’t think it comes close. The crimes of kidnapping, sexual assault, sexual abuse, and rape pretty much cover all of the necessary criminal charges needed to stop the distributors of the vilest of child porn. Laws like Arizona’s make that very difficult, however.
Since having a single image of filth carries such a heavy sentence, there is no incentive for someone who comes across one to notify authorities. Take away that disincentive and those who produce such images could be found much more easily, I think.
Even perverts have some morals. And they’re very good at finding their filth. Why not turn that into a positive for society? Let the pedophiles look at pedophilia (I’d rather they look than touch) as long as they are willing to be monitored. I think a keyboard army of registered pedophiles could track down most of the producers of child porn in about two years.
And afterwards? Let them use their keyboards in a one-handed manner for the rest of their perverted lives. As a parent, I’d rather have the world’s perverts looking at pictures of stolen flesh than at the stolen flesh itself. It’s a deal that might be worth making, sickening as it is. As in all bad situations, “compared to what?” is a fair thing to ask.
Terry Wrist,
Yup, and also, If someone did send me such an image I’d cleanse the HD and forget about it. There is not a chance in hell that I’d tell the cops to help get the scumbag behind it because I have no desire for my computers to be seized for an indefinite period and for me to end up in Strangeways as a potential nonce.
Ooops, sorry I didn’t read your post jon!
Jon, if the individual never knew their innocent family photo was used, but then found out it was posted somewhere, then I suspect the effect could be catastrophic.
Mandrill: The leper colony or a out-and-out prison, either way it would need to exist. A leper colony would hardly be an “open” colony! As to an island, I was thinking of an uninhabited/deserted island, not wishing to inflict convicted pdo’s as neighbours to the good people of Scotland.
…I was thinking of an uninhabited/deserted island.
Are there any left? Where?
Jon, if the individual never knew their innocent family photo was used, but then found out it was posted somewhere, then I suspect the effect could be catastrophic.
Exactly. Until recently my husband ran a photo lab. They stopped accepting pictures of naked babies innocently taken by their parents, for fear of being accused of child pornography. I absolutely agree with Jon in principle, but in our culture we tend to throw out the baby (as it were) along with the water.
Alisa- that’s exactly the sort of thing I remember reading about somewhere! But I was also hoping to start a discussion on general principles- what should be crimes, and what should be punishments? In the anarcho-capitalist book ‘The Probability Broach’, most disputes are settled through Insurance companies acting as law courts, and if you don’t like the sentence, you can always have a duel with the opponents! I thought it was all science fiction, until an Australian Cop, of Middle-Eastern parentage, killed a drug-dealer because of some harm to his family honour. He was jailed for a few years, and was then released. If the drug dealer had had any friends, his life could have been in danger, but he’s still alive. (We’d have heard about it if he was killed)……
From the petition “The sentence for sexually assaulting a child under twelve [in Arizona] is the same as for possessing a single image of that assault.”
Obviously, some deeply messed up sentencing guidelines.
Glad I don’t live in Arizona any more.
Posted by Perry de Havilland at March 3, 2007 01:42 AM
Why are you a child molester?
If looking at pictures gets perverts 200 years in there is no real incentive not to be ‘hands on.’
Posted by ResidentAlien at March 3, 2007 01:51 AM
True but it might encourage someone to leave Arizona to do so.