custom ad
NewsNovember 5, 2007

A recently added provision of the federal law governing child pornography prosecutions prevents defense attorneys and hired experts working for the defense from obtaining their own copies of the evidence in a case, as per the rules of disclosure. The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 maintains that any pornographic images found on a computer that has been seized as evidence cannot be duplicated...

A recently added provision of the federal law governing child pornography prosecutions prevents defense attorneys and hired experts working for the defense from obtaining their own copies of the evidence in a case, as per the rules of disclosure.

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 maintains that any pornographic images found on a computer that has been seized as evidence cannot be duplicated.

Since disclosure rules dictate that both parties in a case have equal access to the evidence, theoretically this could interfere with those rules, but locally, problems have not yet arisen in dealing with the provision.

"It's a new law. Everybody's still trying to figure out what it means," said assistant federal prosecutor Abbie Crites-Leoni.

Though any images pertinent to the case must remain on the original computer to prevent them from being duplicated and keep copies from falling into the wrong hands, it has yet to present a conflict between the parties, she said.

"If a defense attorney wanted to see them, he could view them here," said Lt. Jerry Bledsoe, of the Scott County Sheriff's Office. Bledsoe recently underwent computer forensics training to become certified in the field.

Receive Daily Headlines FREESign up today!

Crites-Leoni said the prosecutor in the case will schedule a meeting with the defense attorneys where they can view the evidence themselves in a secure location and bring their own forensics experts to do so.

Some forensic experts think the law prevents them from making a justified defense because they can't use their own set-up and equipment to examine the evidence, said Ken Nix, founder of the Computer Task Force in St. Louis.

Though it may be less convenient than furnishing the defense with its own copies, the law prevents victims of child pornography from the possibility of further victimization, he said.

The law may also be protecting attorneys as well.

If an attorney did receive an individual copy of the images, technically, he could be prosecuted for possession of child pornography, though that hasn't happened yet, Nix said.

bdicosmo@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 245

Story Tags
Advertisement

Connect with the Southeast Missourian Newsroom:

For corrections to this story or other insights for the editor, click here. To submit a letter to the editor, click here. To learn about the Southeast Missourian’s AI Policy, click here.

Advertisement
Receive Daily Headlines FREESign up today!