A modest proposal: Make defendants pay damages for child porn

Under federal law, people who download child porn can theoretically be ordered to pay damages to the child who was victimized by the photo. In Texas, prosecutors tried to get one defendant to pay $3.4 million to the child whose photos he downloaded, but the judge refused to go along. From the Christian Science Monitor:

Congress did not stop there. The law includes a provision for mandatory payment of "the full amount of the victim's losses" without regard to the economic circumstances of the defendant or whether the victim has received or might receive compensation from other sources.

Thus, federal prosecutors sought $3,367,854 in restitution from Paroline – the full amount of compensation for Amy's earlier sexual abuse and the ongoing traffic in her images.

Judge Davis said it was too much. An order requiring Paroline to pay Amy the entire estimated restitution would violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on excessive punishments, the judge said in an 18-page opinion.

Comments

[Unbelievable]

I tend to agree that the 3.3 Million is excessive. However, it seems that some kind of penalty should be assessed and given to the victim.

In many cases these guys wont have the money to pay for such a penalty. I would also suggest that since the govt seizes property from these guys in most cases, that the property be sold and the money given to the victim .. though i doubt they will do that.

[Kevin]

I wish my picture was taken...

[Keith G. in P.V.]

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children apparently has pictures of "Amy." Ergo, they are in possession of child porn and should be brought to court. If indeed they have the picture or pictures, they should be forced to pay $3.3 million to "Amy" because downloading the picture constitutes furthering the demand for such filth.

Sounds logical for a LEO or a feel-good legislator.

[Tom K]

If the government seizes property they'll keep the money themselves.

[Stifled Freedom]

This is ridiculous. Congress made another politically correct mess out of hysterics over porngraphy.

What about the people who organized the shoot and took the photographs? And how do you rationally quantify the damages anyway.....rationally?? Not hysterically which is what this really is.

The poetic justice of it is how many "Christians" are going to end up paying. Nationwhide, we have dockets full of religious zealots busted for child moletstion and child porn posession already. Shouldn't the church kick in too?

[Stifled Freedom]

When you think about it, this is really a means for the federal govt to profit from child pornography.

The judge did the right thing on this. The govt would have kept the money.

[Stifled Freedom]

Perhaps the Christian Science monitor could kick some money to cover for thier own.

[Boogaloo Shrimp]

I'm glad to see that some judges are refusing to go along with this completely stupid law.

[Chuck McRizzo]

Moral City USA, how the hell did you bring the church heck ANY church into this. Child Porn isn't just something that "christians" are about you'd hope that all people would view the exploitation of children to be disgusting.

Maybe you could kick in some money for making a dumb comment.

[No One You Know]

Chuck - I don't think anyone brought any church into the discussion...the Christian Science Monitor is a newspaper where the article appeared.

[Chuck McRizzo]

"The poetic justice of it is how many "Christians" are going to end up paying. Nationwhide, we have dockets full of religious zealots busted for child moletstion and child porn posession already. Shouldn't the church kick in too?"

Yup I win again.

[Chuck McRizzo]

And to anyone who needs a connect the dots, "Christians" + church. Meaning specific entity of a christian fellowship/ church per mr. moral city usa should kick in funds. I saw any moron who brings any religion into a discussion that has nothing to pertain to that situation should throw money into the moron jar.

[A. Lomonte]

Another triumph for child porn "lookers"! It is amazing how many judges encourage child exploitation. It gives the child porn industry a warm fuzzy feeling just knowing that there are judges looking out for their best interest. And a big thanks goes out to all you guys that go along with it. After all, according to New York and Oklahoma Federal Judges, "looking" is not so bad. Why should guys who like child porn be persecuted when they have federal judges backing their behavior, gives those guys a big pat on the back and leave them in peace with their child porn. The law is making a clear statement that they just don't care so why should you!