Ashcroft Says Patriot Act Got Child Porn Convictions

[mongo]

WASHINGTON - When suspected child molester Terry Adkins and his wife got bagged for child porn and other sexual assaults, and a Pennsylvania girl was rescued from the abductor she met on the Internet, prosecutors had two sections of the Patriot Act to thank in large part for it.

<snip>

And at least one criminal justice analyst says he would not be surprised to learn some Patriot Act supporters might try to intimidate Patriot Act opponents by accusing them of therefore supporting child porn and/or child sex abuse if they oppose the Act.

<snip>

Ashcroft said law enforcement used section 210 of the Patriot Act to investigate Adkins over sexual assaults of children at public libraries and local parks, using the section to get "key information from an Internet service provider," information that helped investigators get a search warrant for the Adkins' home, where evidence turned up enough to charge and prosecute them for 100 counts of receiving and possessing child porn.

Whole article. WARNING! From ADULT VIDEO NEWS, may contain sexually explicit content.
http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=131358

Now, let me just say I am very much against child porn, but the thing is they are already using the patriot act for uses other than "terrorism".

Ashcroft has also hired new federal prosecutors to go after ADULT Obsenity. I wonder how may legit ADULT entertainment business men are already under the watchfull eye of big brother. I know I live my life like there was a bug in every room....

[MidwestTransplant]

1. I guarantee more Freepers watch "adult obsenity" than people here.

[mongo]

5. No way.

I would say most of my customers are (relatively) liberal, or at least non-religious. A lot of them bitch to me about the damn churches whenever someone starts making noise about closing me down.

Porn is a very mainstream, middle-america type of thing now. I advertise on the oldies station. Lots of couples come in to pick out movies together. I get families where one stays out front with the kids (in the lingerie shop) while the other shops the back room.

You seem to be implying something in your message.

[w13rd0]

11. Most of the types people see actually "busted" for....

...the backalley kiddie porn stuff, seem to come from highly repressed holier-than-thou backgrounds. I think that's what's being implied by the poster, which I would not disagree with.

[Cat Atomic]

17. Do you think there's a difference between people who

buy... I guess you'd call it "mainstream" porn, and illegal stuff like kiddie porn? I'd be interested to hear your answer.

I assume you don't sell any kiddie porn, but I wonder if you might notice any similar divide between the "mainstream" customers and the more taboo, fetish-type customers? Different crowd, or the same?

I sometimes wonder if many of the sexual repression folks aren't just trying to control up their own attraction to certain taboos.

[mongo]

18. No kiddie porn here...

You really can't peg peoples tastes. Older, single guys seem to buy more of the rougher, less tastefull stuff.

I have one cross-dresser, (s)he buys straight porn. Couples don't come in to buy she-male porn.

Every once in a while I have a couple come in who will look at every movie in the place and walk out with the most extreme videos they find. My guess is that they are freepers who get titillated watching porn and then can "report" on it to morality in media, who will forward a complaint to your local US attorney office.

http://www.moralityinmedia.org/

[onehandle]

2. It's a Floor Wax AND a Dessert Topping!

What Can't the Patriot Act do? Buy some today!

[shadu]

3. What the hell do they mean by 'Adult Obscenity'?

And what does it have to do with The Patriot Act?

[mongo]

7. adult obsenity definition

THE "MILLER" TEST


The required guidelines for determining obscenity are set out in the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Miller v. California, 4l3 U.S. l5, 24-25 (1973), Smith v. United States, 431 U.S. 291, 301-02, 309 (1977), and Pope v. Illinois, 481 U.S. 497, 500-01 (1987), comprising the following three-prong test:



Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion);

AND


Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, would find that the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct (i.e.: ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated; masturbation; excretory functions; lewd exhibition of the genitals; or sado-masochistic sexual abuse);

AND


Whether a reasonable person would find that the work, taken

as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or

scientific value.



NOTE: ("hard-core sexual conduct" vs. "hard-core pornography")

In Miller, the Supreme Court stated that any material which depicts or describes "hard-core sexual conduct" can be found obscene. The Court's examples of such "hard-core" conduct were set out in Miller (413 U.S. at 25) as "ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated", and "masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibitions of the genitals".

In a legal sense, therefore, "hard-core pornography" can be either simulated sex or it can be actual, explicit sex and either type can be found obscene in any given community.


However, the term "hard-core pornography" is used in the pornography industry for films and magazines which show penetration clearly visible. This explicit type of "hard-core pornography" has been held by the courts as material which clearly fits within the definition of obscenity and lacks First Amendment protection.

(See: Taylor, "Hard-Core Pornography: A Proposal For A Per Se Rule", 21 U. Mich. J.L. Ref. 255 (1988).)


On the Federal level, they have only been going after defacation videos and rape scenes, but I can still be arrested any day of the week for selling ANY explicit video.

It has nothing to do with the patriot act, except they are using it to go after things other than "terrorism".

[ibegurpard]

4. You are correct

That the Patriot Act is being used to try to go after other things is very disturbing indeed. I don't think anyone would be upset to see purveyors of child pornography being nabbed but the Patriot Act was supposedly designed to provide tools for law enforcement to fight terrorism. Child pornography is disgusting and repugnant and needs to be stopped but its not terrorism. What are they going to use it for next?

[POed_Ex_Repub]

6. Just goes to show how broad the act is doesn't it?

Paving the way closer to an Orwellian future every day.

[madrchsod]

14. they will use it against us

the handwriting is on the wall and some of "our" fellow democrats have the spray can in their hand

[Wapsie B]

8. Just a reminder to those repugs

in favor of the Patriot Act, someday Hillary might have those same powers. Or a woman just like her.

:evilgrin:

[Mz Pip]

9. Aren't there regular

laws that go after child porn???? I don't see where they could not have nabbed this creep with the current lasws. If someone wants to strengthen the laws against child porn then legislate it and be specific about it.

This Patriot Act seems to be about a whole lot more than getting terrorists.

MzPip
:dem:

[POed_Ex_Repub]

10. The laws for conviction are the same... however...

What's different is the method of obtaining evidence. With the patriot act those powers are greatly expanded. Things like looking at someone's history of checking out library books.

[mongo]

13. Or sneaking into your home without notice

On the signature of a judge in DC.

[madrchsod]

12. they don`t have to use

the "act" to get this slime..they were cracking these rings before asscrap`s bullshit..we both know this is just one little step to shut down "porn" while the local sports station in chicago has adds running constantly about strip clubs and dick stifferens...not to mention ky`s dick warmer commercials on television..what would ole` marquis de sade think?-nothing ever changes-just the names?

[leesa]

15. Oh terrific. I was so worried about the terror of child porn.

After all, if it's underground, the rich corporations can't make a buck off it.

[Boredtodeath]

16. The republican obsession with sex

Particularly, John Ashcroft's.

[sandnsea]

19. Nope, that won't work

They're admitting they're doing the exact thing Americans don't want them to do, use the Patriot Act to go after anybody except terrorists. People were willing to accept the Patriot Act as long as it was only used on terrorists, now they're openly admitting they have every intention to violate anybody's rights whenever they want to with this Act. I hope they keep harping on this, only makes it easier to show them for the Constitution haters that they are.

Why does the Right hate the Constitution?

[mongo]

20. Exactly

And they are using it against the worst of society - for now anyway.

Against the patriot act? You must be a pedophile!

It's for the children. Won't someone think of the Children?