Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Police arrest man for child pornography after tipoff from burglars
The Inquisitr ^

Posted on 10/06/2011 10:16:19 PM PDT by Borough Park

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: Psalm 144

And a good defense attorney will question their motives. Is there proof that the CD’s came from his home?


21 posted on 10/06/2011 11:00:22 PM PDT by doc1019 (You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

Not applicable. The State was not involved in the initial illegal seizure of evidence, according to the story. Had the State prompted the burglars, maybe. This is akin to a civilian trespasser reporting a pot plantation, not an unwarranted intrusion by law enforcement.


22 posted on 10/06/2011 11:06:17 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

And a good defense attorney will question their motives. Is there proof that the CD’s came from his home?

******************************

The first point is irrelevant. Chain of custody is relevant, which is why I said that if the seized materials are clean the defendant has a case.


23 posted on 10/06/2011 11:08:03 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

In the event of an illegal act itself? One could argue it for days, but no matter—the perv has been outed and will rightly be shunned.


24 posted on 10/06/2011 11:13:05 PM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-eyed killer of the deep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

Look, as a retired police officer, I have watched how a good defense attorney can sink a prosecuting attorney over something like this. The fact that they let the burgers off for their testimony is a start.

As for chain of custody, the miscreants that gave the CD’s to the police doesn’t give credence to any chain of custody.


25 posted on 10/06/2011 11:14:24 PM PDT by doc1019 (You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cracker45

“Yep, I can tell you’re a college “perfesser” alright, by the punctuation and questionable ethics!”

Really. So you think I was defending the guy? I just wondered why the police would believe the robbers.

OK, by the same reasoning I infer that you are a Ron Paul supporter, right?


26 posted on 10/06/2011 11:21:30 PM PDT by garjog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

“In the event of an illegal act itself?”

It depends on who did the illegal act. For the Exclusionary Rule and so on to apply, “illegally seized” means specifically that a government actor or proxy violated the law to obtain the evidence, not that the evidence was obtained in the course of a crime by a private citizen.

All of this is rooted in court decisions on the workings of the Fourth Amendment, which puts a curb on -government- actions. It was not even applied to the states until 1961, but only to the US government. It does not apply to private persons.


27 posted on 10/06/2011 11:21:42 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: doc1019
They raided this home on the results of a home burglary? And dropped the charges on the buglers.
How do they know that the files collected came from the defendant? They could have been part of the burgers home stash, etc, etc.


LOL, buglers, burgers, what's next, boogers?

Oh wait, the booger is the child porn dirtbag.

"Buglers, Burgers and Boogers, oh my!"

(just having some fun with ya, Doc ;)
28 posted on 10/06/2011 11:22:37 PM PDT by mkjessup (If you're not part of the solution to getting rid of 0bama, you're part of the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Borough Park

“The Huffington Post reports that the Merced County Sheriff’s Department decided not to arrest the two burglars.”

Excellent decision. Let them go. They could have saved themselves by staying quiet.


29 posted on 10/06/2011 11:23:05 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

Those must have been some really poor prosecutors you watched, more than the defense attorneys being good.

This is not a hard case to win if the seized materials are inculpatory as well. If the ONLY incriminating evidence is what the two burglars brought in, then a case could be made that there is reasonable doubt that it was ever in the defendant’s possession.

I have more problems with the approach to possession of child porn as a status crime in itself, without proof of intent. It is too easy to be planted, even remotely.


30 posted on 10/06/2011 11:29:24 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup

Excuse me all to hell for getting too fast on the fingers. You and I know what I meant to say! Burglars, ashat, burglars.


31 posted on 10/06/2011 11:30:50 PM PDT by doc1019 (You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
This is not a hard case to win if the seized materials are inculpatory as well. If the ONLY incriminating evidence is what the two burglars brought in, then a case could be made that there is reasonable doubt that it was ever in the defendant’s possession.

My point exactly.

32 posted on 10/06/2011 11:36:53 PM PDT by doc1019 (You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer

He can’t stay in the community and wherever he lives, somebody will look him up for his sexual offender status and try and chase him out of the community.


33 posted on 10/06/2011 11:38:14 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Borough Park

Lots of potential for mischief on this one. I know it’s really a problem, but whenever “child porn” is brought against someone, my BS flag goes up. Especially when it’s ‘discovered’ by questionable means.


34 posted on 10/06/2011 11:39:38 PM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
Call me a cynic, but I think it's entirely possible that some policemen leaned on some reliable crooks to help them get evidence against a suspect that they couldn't secure a warrant against:

"We burglarized a house, officer, and stole these CD-ROMs of all unlikely things and we took them straight home and looked at them and found that kiddie porn you told us to find... Er, I mean, we found kiddy porn on them so we did the Christian thing and turned ourselves in so you policemen could catch that bad man! So now you're going to look the other way on that illegal chop-shop we were running out of that phony auto repair business where we had all those stolen cars, right?"

Right.

The ATF does stuff like this all the time, as you might have heard recently.

35 posted on 10/07/2011 12:04:15 AM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bob
How so? Would an attorney be able to challenge the evidence on a "chain of custody" basis?

It's not his stuff the kids broke in and put it there.

36 posted on 10/07/2011 12:05:34 AM PDT by Total Package (TOLEDO, OHIO THE MRSA INFECTION IN THE STATE and the death of freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: doc1019
Excuse me all to hell for getting too fast on the fingers

Oh no worries Doc, it's the typos that create such hilarious results sometimes, I've had a bunch myself.
37 posted on 10/07/2011 12:16:17 AM PDT by mkjessup (If you're not part of the solution to getting rid of 0bama, you're part of the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: The KG9 Kid
Your theory makes some sense, because blank CD ROMS are very inexpensive, while the burglars didn't touch the expensive computer and accessories. Hmmm...

And the kids say they broke in specifically to steal 'empty' CD ROMS? What made them expect to find a huge stack of CDs in the first place? Sorta like stealing paper plates and leaving the sterling silverware alone.

38 posted on 10/07/2011 12:55:26 AM PDT by ARepublicanForAllReasons (Crony Capitalism & Union boot-licking Marxist politicians are our undoing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Borough Park

My first and only thought is that it was foolish for both of them to turn themselves in. It would have been more logical to flip a coin.


39 posted on 10/07/2011 1:28:38 AM PDT by Melas (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: garjog

NOT even close! I think Ron Paul is a crackpot and wouldn’t even trust him to guard my yard! He would surrender it to a bunch of potheads if they promised to vote for him!

JC


40 posted on 10/07/2011 1:40:50 AM PDT by cracker45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson