- Posted March 02, 2011
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
New York U.S. appeals court upholds child porn sentence Court finds digital alterations are not protected under the First Amendment
By Michael Virtanen
Associated Press
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -- A federal appeals court on Monday upheld the child pornography conviction of a New York man who superimposed the faces of teenage girls onto sexually explicit photographs of nude adults in his computer.
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals panel said John C. Hotaling's digital alterations are not expressive free speech protected under the First Amendment. The 50-year-old argued that his fantasies didn't actually hurt or exploit any children. Hotaling is in prison.
While there was no evidence Hotaling distributed the images, the three judges said the pictures showed the faces of six identifiable girls, who were "at risk" of damage to their reputations and psychological harm from knowing their images were exploited by a trusted adult. The panel cited evidence that the images had been formatted for possible Internet distribution, and that child porn now is circulated online primarily from one trafficker directly to another.
Federal public defender Gene Primomo said they are "strongly considering" an appeal, requesting a hearing before a full Second Circuit panel. "I'm sure the client wants to do it."
"They found an exception to the First Amendment based on something that he could have done with the pictures. He didn't do that," Primomo said. "We find all the time when you're dealing with child pornography that judicial gymnastics are exercised to try to determine these kind of things."
"I think it's a Supreme Court issue," he said. "I don't see how it's not."
In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that "virtual" child pornography, computer-generated images that did not depict actual minors, was protected under the First Amendment because it did not harm any children through its production and continued existence.
Congress subsequently changed the law to prohibit sexually explicit computer-generated images or other depictions of any "identifiable minor," including one whose image was used in creating, adapting or modifying a depiction. In 2005, the 8th Circuit appeals court ruled in another child pornography case that imposing the face of one minor on the body of another in an explicit pose was not protected speech.
The appeals panel Monday also rejected Hotaling's challenge that the statute as applied to him was overly broad and vague. They upheld his 78-month sentence for a single count of possessing child pornography, including an increase for an image showing "sadistic conduct" of one girl handcuffed and wearing a dog collar.
"I can see people saying, 'Why would the government go after this?'" said Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Spina. "But there's more to the story."
Hotaling was initially the subject of a state police investigation that he sent sexually suggestive Internet messages to a teenage girl. A search warrant was executed at his Sharon Springs home in 2005. His computer was seized, and it showed the altered images with the faces of underage girls from pictures taken with his digital camera, according to original criminal complaint.
Published: Wed, Mar 2, 2011
headlines Detroit
headlines National
- Lucy Lang, NY inspector general, has always wanted rules evenly applied
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- 2024 Year in Review: Integrated legal AI and more effective case management
- How to ensure your legal team is well-prepared for the shifting privacy landscape
- Judge denies bid by former Duane Morris partner to stop his wife’s funeral
- Attorney discipline records short of disbarment would be expunged after 8 years under state bar plan