Forum - View topic

NEWS: Voice Actor Scott Freeman Convicted of Possession of Child Pornography

At this point, his last name is ironic to what he got himself into.

At this point, his last name is ironic to what he got himself into.

Also, I think 3 whole years is quite too harsh as long as he isn't actually courting or making such porn.

There's nobody that purposefully commits a crime to then serve 5-15 years (that's the average prison sentence) in a place that they have an insanely high chance of getting raped, assaulted, or murdered. That's just a myth to somehow explain repeat offenders. The reason there are repeat offenders is because their lives are irrecoverably ruined, so crime is the only chance to escape from life-long poverty (which I said earlier). The solution to said issue would be to somehow give former prisoners a second chance at a better life I.E. rehabilitate them rather than simply punish them.
Onto your point. Making prison an even worse place to be in won't improve anything; poverty begets prisoners, not well maintained prisons.

All of you are forgetting that watching hentai is an automatic charge for possession of child porn still in the legal systems of the world. There is no such charge that exist that indicates possession of hentai. Everybody is forgetting that people are still being charged with possession of child porn while it is hentai. The issue is not resolved.

In both Jared Fogle and Scott Freeman's cases, there is no information about the matters involved in the cases and people start believing that the law is right in labeling them sex offenders and be done with them. There is no information being released so people are just jumping to conclusions.

In both Jared Fogle and Scott Freeman's cases, there is no information about the matters involved in the cases and people start believing that the law is right in labeling them sex offenders and be done with them. There is no information being released so people are just jumping to conclusions.

SwordKing wrote:

In both Jared Fogle and Scott Freeman's cases, there is no information about the matters involved in the cases and people start believing that the law is right in labeling them sex offenders and be done with them. There is no information being released so people are just jumping to conclusions.

One problem with this: Scott Freeman has pleaded guilty to eight counts of real child porn. Eight. For all I know, the prosecutor's more-than-sufficient evidence that would have strongly convinced the jury his wrongdoing was what led him to take the plea (a very lenient one at that).

As far as I'm concerned, Scott is right where he's at, in prison, where he can't cause anymore harm with his pedophilia. Besides, it's the victims that are in need of help, not the convicted child pornographer.

i'm sure they can appeal if they think they are wrongfully convicted..

but with sex offenders .. the chance of wrongfully convicted is low..

since you have to committed the crime multiple times or caught in the act for many cases

so how many times should one molested or raped a child to consider enough proofs for the verdict ?

personally i have no sympathy for these freaks.. if they are turned on by looking at some naked pictures of children.. they should seek psychological help... before it's too late..

since it will be either a registered sex offender, in jail for rape, killed by parents or on the run from the law for rape and murder charges. etc..

Shippoyasha wrote:

Also, I think 3 whole years is quite too harsh as long as he isn't actually courting or making such porn.

If he'd been doing either of those then he wouldn't have been able to plea bargain down to only three years. The penalties for those (especially the last one) are immensely stiffer.

[Public Defender Troy Stabenow] compares the long child pornography sentences with those given to online predators who drive hundreds of miles to engage in sex with minors they met in online chat groups. The mandatory minimum federal sentence for those offenders is 10 years, while receiving child porn carries a five-year mandatory sentence.But under the guidelines set by the U.S. Sentencing Commission -- a federal agency tasked with turning legislation into rules that guide judges on sentencing -- child pornography viewers often accumulate penalties, known as "enhancements," that magnify recommended sentences for individuals who use a computer, have a large number of images or possess images of prepubescent children, among other things. As a result, the recommended sentences for viewers can easily be higher than those for predators.

In 1990, Congress criminalized the possession of child pornography, and later passed legislation to significantly increase penalties for these offenses. In 1991, a person with no criminal history who possessed violent child pornography images and movies and shared them with others would face a maximum of two years in prison in federal cases. Today, that same person could face more than 20 years, Mr. Stabenow notes.

A good article for the number people in this thread asking "Why would you defend a pedophile?" What if I told you Federal judges are doing it too? In court?

TL;DR Judges arguing against mandatory minimum sentences =/= internet users excusing child porn possession with things like 'but what if they were 17? Age of consent laws suck anyways!"