MA Sex Crime and Child Pornography Involves Overseas Victims

Federal Authorities Prosecute Sex Crimes Involving Children Overseas

by Samuel Goldberg

Yesterday, Attorney Sam's Take began discussing the plight of a certain Mr. Galant (hereinafter the "Defendant") in connection with certain federal criminal allegations which allegedly took place in the Dominican republic. They involved various sex crimes involving children.

Over the last years, we have discussed many federal cases and how they usually built. If you take the international aspect of this matter out of it, this case seems to be a typical federal prosecution. Not that the Commonwealth never uses such tactics, but the federal prosecutors have built it to an art form.

Just tell me you haven't heard this one before...

Suspect A comes into contact with law-enforcement. Suspect A is in possession of stolen materials. Suspect A is in trouble. However, suspect A says that she knows about suspect D, and suspect D has committed even greater crimes. And, by the way, suspect A is a critical witness against suspect D.

Isn't that what happened in this case? The 14-year-old young lady (Hereinafter the "Girl") Was found in possession of the Defendant's credit card and withdrawing money from his account. She then explained how he had apparently broken their agreements and had illicit sexual relations with her and a couple of friends.

    "But Sam, are you saying that the only evidence against the defendant is what the complainant said happened?"

No. Apparently, photographs were seized which reflected the Girll in positions which made the photographs child pornography. Further, I would imagine that federal investigators were able to find other evidence which supported the Girl's claims. An example of this would be airline tickets that the Defendant used on his trips to the Dominican Republic. .

However, the start of this information leads back to the Girl. Further, without her testimony, these prosecutions cannot be made successfully.

"I was under the impression that the case is only prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which it happens. In other words, Massachusetts would not prosecute a case where the fax took place in California. Here, it seems like the United States is prosecuting a case where the facts occurred, or allegedly occurred, in the Dominican Republic. What gives?"

You are correct, generally. As with most things, there is no "always" or "never" in the criminal justice system. There are exceptions. There are certain areas in which the United States will prosecute someone for actions they allegedly took in another country. Many of these types of cases also are subject to treaties between countries. The sex trade, when it involves children, is one such area. Further, some of the allegations I said to have taken place in the United States.

I should point out however, this would not be the first time that a United States citizen was prosecuted for apps he allegedly did overseas. In fact, it was not so long ago, where someone was tried and convicted of very similar crimes, only, in that case, involving little boys.

I have often told you that, because of computers and the Internet, the United States has become smaller in terms of the sharing of information. One state can easily share information with another state these days. Law enforcement is generally on top of those developments. As time goes by, particularly when it comes to crimes which are getting a lot of attention, I believe you will see that the world becomes a smaller place for the same reason.

Of course, all criminal prosecutions have their issues and weaknesses. In cases like this, there are even more such issues. There are issues of reality, such as getting the Girl, and perhaps her friends, to come to the United States to testify. The more complicated the case, the more there I'll likely to be issues which should be examined by defense counsel.

And they will be. Assuming that defense counsel is aware to look for them.

That's where your choice of an experienced criminal defense attorney comes into play.

But then, I am now being repetitive. And if you don't know my message on that subject by now, you're just not reading.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this post or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Attorney John E. MacDonald at 401.421.1440.

To learn more about John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Child Welfare False Child Abuse Accusation

False Accusation of Child Abuse

Parents Have Case for False Child-Abuser Label
By ERIN MCAULEY

HARRISBURG, PA. (CN) - Child-welfare workers cannot dismiss allegations that they falsely accused parents of abusing a 4-month-old who had in fact sustained injuries from a stroke and congenital rickets, a federal judge ruled.
     Jamel Billups and Jacqueline Rosario sued Franklin County and a host of Pennsylvania child-services entities six months ago for civil rights violations. The black couple claims that the Child Safety team at Penn State Hershey Medical Center accused them of child abuse when their daughter, L.B., suffered a stroke and showed signs of rickets on Oct. 19, 2009.
     Pennsylvania then allegedly seized L.B. and her 2-year-old brother, T.R., and sent them to foster homes. Jamel was jailed 414 days for a crime he did not commit, according to the complaint.
     The hospital, county, Office of Children, Youth and Families and Chambersburg Borough each filed separately with their individual employees to dismiss the claims.
     Chief U.S. District Judge Yvette Kane dismissed most claims last week, but said the Billups can proceed with due-process claims against Franklin County and two of its employees, Kari Coccagna and Minnie Tuner.
     Claims against the hospital and its staff failed largely for lack of evidence. Kane said they also improperly relied on Jamel Billup's incarceration and criminal prosecution. "The court finds that plaintiffs have not sufficiently pled that the medical center defendants, in examining L.B. and rendering conclusions on her injuries, 'consciously disregarded a great risk that there had been no abuse,'" Kane wrote, quoting precedent.
     Kathryn Crowell, the doctor who allegedly gave false incriminating testimony, has immunity from civil damages for her testimony, the 51-page decision states.
     Though the Billips say the child-abuse charges stemmed from the hospital's presumptions, the court found there was "reasonable and articulable evidence" of abuse.
     "Parent's rights to the care, custody and control of their children 'does not include a right to remain free from child abuse investigations,'" Kane wrote, quoting 3rd Circuit precedent. Parents "are not entitled to a presumption of innocence during the pendency of a child abuse investigation," she added.
     The Billups also failed to allege a discriminatory policy in the hospital's alleged treatment of staff members for unapproved testimony or reports. If a doctor's opinion does not align with that of the hospital, that worker is allegedly barred from identifying the hospital as his employer, minimizing the credence that their testimony can achieve.
     Kane also dismissed claims against the child-welfare office as duplicative of the claims against the county.
     Social workers Kari Coccanga and Minnie Tuner do not have immunity, however, from claims that they coerced the Billups into signing a "voluntary safety plan," which provided for unannounced home visits and forbade one-on-one time between the father and his children.
     Kane upheld due-process claims against Franklin County over the voluntary safety plan, but the county is not liable for failure to train and injunctive relief claims.
     Two other social workers, Tammie Lay and Dawn Watson, persuaded the judge to dismiss claims that they failed to properly conduct their own "independent medical non-presumption tainted burden shifting investigation."
     Chambersburg Borough and its employees dodged liability because the Billups' "claims do not implicate the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of substantive due process," the judge found.

Child Molestation in RI

Rhode Island Child Molestation

It is a most unfortunate reality that there are an average of 150-300 cases of child-molestation reported in the state of Rhode Island each year. Child Molestation falls under the category of Child Abuse, which is defined as endangering the physical or mental health of a child via excessive, or harmful punishment, sexual exploitation, neglect, or abandonment.

If you or anyone you know have information regarding the possible abuse of a child in the state of Rhode Island, you are legally required to immediately contact The Department for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) at (401) 528-3502.

Accusations and Convictions

Due to the seriousness of child abuse crimes, penalties in most states are severe, and even being implicated or accused of child molestation is enough to drastically change your life forever, even if you are completely innocent. A child abuse or child molestation charge on your record will undoubtedly affect your chances of gaining employment, especially if you intend to work around children, or as a public official.

What constitutes Child Molestation?

Child molestation has many forms, most typically of which include direct sexual contact such as touching, rubbing, or groping in a lewd or lascivious manner. However there are many more forms of child molestation that often accompany the most common forms of abuse. Some of these forms of sexual child abuse include:

・ Indecent verbal contact

・ Indecent written contact such as texts, emails, or letters

・ Video taping a child in a lewd or lascivious manner

・ Photographing a child in a lewd or lascivious manner

・ Using a child for financial gain via prostitution

Penalties for Child Molestation

The state of Rhode Island does not treat the crime of child abuse or child molestation lightly, and has mandated severe punishments for those convicted of the crime. First degree child molestation convictions carry a minimum of 6 years in prison, and a maximum of 30 years. Second degree child molestation convictions carry a minimum of 25 years in prison, and a maximum of life. Indecent soliciting of a child will result in a minimum of 5 years imprisonment.

Have you or your loved ones been accused of Child Molestation?

Because of the dangers involved with being accused of child molestation, you can not afford to waste precious time that can be used to build your defense. There are many individuals that are falsely accused every year, and are in some cases; wrongly convicted. Regardless of whether or not you are guilty, everyone deserves a legal defense.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.