Judge's Random, Unrelated Rant Against Facebook Leads To Child Porn Sentence Being Overturned
from the wtf? dept
I recognize that there are some people out there who really just don't like social networking or Twitter or Facebook, but I'm often amazed at how this sometimes leads people to blame other societal woes on those kinds of things. That apparently happened with a judge in a child porn case. The actual case itself sounds somewhat horrifying. A 56-year old woman, Laura Culver, was sentenced to 8 years in prison for collaborating with another person, Edgardo Sensi, to film an 8-year-old girl engaging in sexually explicit content. As I said: horrifying. Assuming all that is true, I'm happy to see them get locked up for a long, long time (in fact, 8 years seems too short).However, that sentencing has now been sent back to the lower court, because the judge who issued the sentence apparently spent a significant amount of time at the sentencing blaming Facebook for child pornography and attacking Mark Zuckerberg. While the full transcript is sealed (due to the fact that the case involves a minor), the ruling to redo the sentencing includes some details:
In justifying its decision to impose a sentence of eight years instead of six, the district court referenced “Facebook, and things like it, and society has changed.” ... The court speculated that the proliferation of Facebook would facilitate an increase in child pornography cases. The court said it hoped Mark Zuckerberg (who founded Facebook) was “enjoying all his money because . . . he’s going to hurt a lot of people . . . .”Just one problem: the case had nothing to do with Facebook. In fact, it had nothing to do with the internet. And yet the judge claimed that he upped her sentence because of Facebook:
Culver is correct that the court’s lengthy discussion of Facebook had no clear connection to the facts of her case. It is plain error for a district court to rely upon its own unsupported theory of deterrence at sentencing, especially where, as here, that theory has little application to the actual facts of the case itself.... This error undoubtedly affected Culver’s substantial rights; the court stated that it would have granted a sentence of six years if not for its concerns about Facebook and general deterrence. See Sentencing Hr’g Tr. at 42 (“[W]hat we’re looking at is general deterrence, and the general deterrence is very important, and frankly, that’s why I went to eight [years] instead of six.”).While the government defended the judge's rant, the appeals court points out that given the lack of any connection to the internet at all in this case, it clearly didn't make any sense:
The government argues that the district court was merely concerned about the extent to which various new technologies may facilitate child pornography, rather than Facebook specifically. In that sense, Facebook was a reference to the internet, using synecdoche. But the government does not explain (because it cannot) the role of new technology in this case. Culver did not use the internet to commit her crime, and it should not have played a predominant role in her sentencing.The court further notes that a sentence of 8 years may be entirely appropriate. In fact, it points out that this is below the minimum sentencing guidelines, though it sounds like the court gave Culver a "lower" sentence for cooperating against Sensi, but still notes that the "particularly abhorrent" nature of her crime may still mean that the eventual sentence (or even more) is appropriate, but "that discretion should be exercised without the influence of procedural error."
Indeed. Oh, and in case you're wondering, the judge in question, Warren Eginton, appears to be nearing 90 years old, which may explains some of his misplaced hatred for things like Facebook.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: luddite, rant, sentencing, warren eginton
Companies: facebook
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Substitute one word, and is apt for Mike's mania:
And I think it's obvious that this item ALSO fits into Mike's pro-Facebook, pro-Zuckerberg template -- otherwise, it's got no relation to tech, is just a legal anomaly that'll soon be corrected.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Maybe it is time to make sure that Judges know not only the law, but are connected to reality.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
News flash
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Substitute one word, and is apt for Mike's mania:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Substitute one word, and is apt for Mike's mania:
I didn't think it pro-Facebook or pro-Zuckerberg (did you read the article?). I thought it about the ignorance and biases of a judge, and injecting his ignorance into a sentencing. While I agree with his longer sentence, he should have used rational reasons to support it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Ditto
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: News flash
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
While not all old people are out of touch with present day society and culture, many are.
When it becomes manifestly obvious that an old judge injects irrational biases into a sentencing, I don't think it is ageist to raise the question of being out of touch due to age. These particular biases are clearly age based. Young people use these new technologies disproportionally more than old people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Ditto
Fact is: some people simply hate facebook. This judge, on the other hand, hates it for purely irrational reasons ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
According to the appeals court, "An eight-year sentence was still a twenty percent reduction below the bottom of the recommended Guidelines range." Which means she very well may get ten years, instead of eight, when she's re-sentenced.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: News flash
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Ditto
Forget the magic number for Facebook. Imagine what a graph would look like showing the use of all sorts of new technologies (even early automobiles, or telephones) by age -- and perhaps newness of the technology.
There may be other reasons people like or dislike Facebook, regardless of age. More generally, look at things the judge is actually ranting at. "Facebook and things like it, and society has changed". That shows he cannot clearly articulate what he is complaining about, despite judges presumably being skilled at using language.
The judge clearly has an anti technology bias that is age related. That is not ageist. That is just obvious about this particular individual.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Ditto
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Substitute one word, and is apt for Mike's mania:
Hey Blue, you ever gonna respond to anyone who disputes the crap you spew forth and label as "facts"?
You know that every time you fail to do so it reenforces the sentiment that you are full of shit, don't you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The placement of that hatred is entirely appropriate. It's just irrelevant to the case.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Ditto
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What an asshole...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: News flash
Old man yells at cloud. Blames cloud for earthquake, but not rain.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Some of us case about due process.
"I wouldn't care if the judge increased her sentence because he didn't like her shoes."
Perhaps you wouldn't care if he increased HER sentence. But what if he was upping YOUR sentence for an invalid reason? Or the sentence of some poor guy arrested for changing his MAC address in a closet? Nah, THAT could never happen...
Justice should be demanded in ALL cases, not just the ones where we like the defendant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
20 years after everyone else is forced into retirements, the judges come along. Really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Substitute one word, and is apt for OOTBs mania:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blame Kodak for making film or camera makers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
> agism, as long is it affects someone else.
It's hardly ageism to note that virtually every other profession (other than the self-employed) have mandatory retirement ages, yet for some reason we let judges sit up on the bench making decisions with far-reaching impact on both individuals and society in general until they keel over in their robes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
With age brings wisdom however it doesn't translate well to technology.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
In any case the judge may have a point because Facebook did increase children exposure to strangers. Btu then again Facebook is not to blame. Bad parenting is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Anyone who cares about rule of law cares deeply about why judges make their rulings. That we all might agree with the result doesn't mean we should ignore problems with how the result was obtained.
You might not care about justice, but I (and I hope most people) do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Slightly off topic: Please don't correct other people's spelling with incorrect spelling of your own. It's spelled 'ageism'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
I assume you mean fate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
not all old people are like this, and some young people are....hell, for all the fun people made of ted stevens, at least he tried and at least he got that net neutrality was important....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ditto
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Agism...Really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ditto
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cruel and unusual?
Hasn't it been found unconstitutional to give someone a harsher sentence in order to make an example of them as a deterrent?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
the court would like you to get off it's lawn
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Makes me think of ned flanders.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Substitute one word, and is apt for Mike's mania:
Check the user name - probably not, or at least he did so with his usual lack of comprehension of what was actually written.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Ditto
As for the judge's age, I think it is relevant to some degree. He seems to be harbouring a misplaced hatred for a service that didn't exist until he was 80 years old, and wasn't available to the general public until he was 82. It's not exactly misplaced to believe that his age might have something to do with his fear of this technology, or his apparently lack of understanding of its usage or relevance to the cases in front of him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Ditto
Come now, you know the whole data/anecdote thing! Age has a great deal to do with social networking use:
http://pewinternet.org/Commentary/2012/March/Pew-Internet-Social-Networking-full-detail.aspx
No other factor they studied (race, sex, income, education, urbanity) had as big a correlation with social network use as age.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ditto
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ditto
Yeah I have no idea, I doubt if anyone has studied that.
In that study, I also wonder if they looked at regular usage vs. occasional usage
Don't know, but I'd bet somebody has.
It's also worth noting that the lower usage for older demographics on the report are for social networking as a whole, whereas the criticism above is solely regarding one network, singled out against all others.
Actually I think he said Facebook and things like it. So FB was the only one named but not intended as the only target of his judicial wrath.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We are all under the sentence of death.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]