Legal News

Still More on Sentencing and Child Pornography

By Ashby Jones

Loyal LBers will know that in recent weeks, we’ve started beating the drum ever more strongly for the WSJ’s weekly Law Journal column. It’s a bit shameless, we know, but the column really is quite strong (we know, we know: here we go again).

So imagine our glee earlier today upon discovering a reason to reflect back upon a particularly strong Law Journal article from last fall. The article, by Amir Efrati, examined the criminal penalties for possession of child pornography. Efrati quoted several federal judges who had expressed alarm over what they viewed as excessive prison sentences for mere possession of child pornography: 20 years for downloading several pictures, that kind of thing. (Sixth Circuit judge Gilbert Merritt made approving reference to Efrati’s article in a dissent back in January of this year.)

The issue took center stage on Wednesday, when several federal judges testified before the U.S. Sentencing Commission in Chicago. The judges, echoing what others had said in Efrati’s article, told the panel that sentences for people convicted of possessing child pornography have become too severe. The commission suggested it will review the relevant guidelines. Click here for the story, from the National Law Journal.

“This is an area that requires the commission’s close consideration and possible corrective action,” Chief Judge Gerald Rosen of the Eastern District of Michigan told the panel, adding, “I know it’s an awkward area for all of us.”

The commission is holding a series of regional hearings in conjunction with the 25th anniversary of the Sentencing Reform Act, which established the commission, to get feedback from judges, prosecutors, probation officers, public-interest lawyers, public defenders and others on federal sentencing practices.

“I’m of the view that in many instances the sentences are simply too long,” said James Carr, the chief judge of the Northern District of Ohio, referring specifically to the guidelines for child pornography possession, gun possession and drug possession.

Rosen emphasized that he doesn’t condone possession of child pornography, but inveighed against a system that in some cases gives a person who has watched one video a maximum sentence that may be higher than someone sentenced for raping a child repeatedly over many years, he said.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on September 10, 2009 (boomark / email).