Absurd US sentencing as man gets 200 years for porn charges

[Izzy]

200 years WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE for this? For looking at pictures?

Even the Supreme Court wont intervene - if that isnt a breach of basic human rights i dont know what is! Let the punishment fit the crime, and 200 years for looking at pictures is...well.....

Absolutely barmy

The US Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by a high school teacher from Arizona sentenced to 200 years in jail for possessing child pornography.

Morton Berger had claimed the sentence was so disproportionate to his crime it breached the constitution.

If the 52-year-old had been tried in a federal court or lived elsewhere he would have received a lighter sentence.

But he was living in Arizona when he was caught with thousands of images of child abuse on his computer.

Stark differences

The state has the nation's toughest laws on child abuse and exploitation.

Indeed, the prosecutor had asked for a 340-year sentence but the trial judge imposed the minimum of 10 years for each of 20 images - to be served consecutively for a total of 200 years without the possibility of probation, early release or pardon.

Mr Berger's lawyers asked the Supreme Court to hear an appeal.

They argued the sentence was wildly disproportionate - much longer than that for rape or even second degree murder and claimed it amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.

The state of Arizona argued each image of child abuse was a separate crime so the sentences had to run consecutively.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal and gave no reason but the case has highlighted stark differences in sentencing policy across the US.

[BBF Rocks]

i'm glad, let that sick fuck rot in jail.

[polluxlm]

i'm glad, let that sick fuck rot in jail.

Why not give every criminal life, or death?

[axl_rose_700]

i'm glad, let that sick fuck rot in jail.

Why not give every criminal life, or death?

Yea why not

[Grouse]

only in America...

[polluxlm]

i'm glad, let that sick fuck rot in jail.

Why not give every criminal life, or death?

Yea why not

How contributing

[Drew]

Too bad he wasn't from Vermont. The judges in that state let child molestors run free a dozen a day. They'd be shocked that someone could be arrested for having images of child abuse on their computer.

He probably woud've been sentenced to three minutes standing in the corner than given lunch and ice cream and sent on his way.

[fieldsy]

The idea that rapists, actual abusers of children and murderers get less time in jail than this guy is what is absurd about this case.  I am not in anyway lessening his crime, it is sick, twisted and disgusting.  Believe me, I am a social worker and deal with stuff like this.

However, the punishment has to fit the crime and 200 years with no parole is what I would call.......very harsh.

[Elrothiel]

Holy fuck! Ya get less for killing someone!



Good thing though, child porn is SICK!!

He'll have a rotten time in jail he will! Don't drop the soap!

[The Dog]

Let the fucker rot.

[Neemo]

well if he is the one buying it the deamand is there for someone to create it....they should cut off his dick before they throw away the key IMO

[The Dog]

on second thought, the penalty is pretty excessive in comparison to the sentences of other sex crimes that are much worse.  he should do time, but 200 years, a life time, is a bit much.  i'd say 5 years.   the sick fucks who you see on dateline on those predators shows get less then 5 years i bet, and they were going to have sex with young kids.

the penalties for all these types of crimes should be big, but you shouldn't get more years for looking then you would touching, just doesn't make sense.

[freedom78]

That's excessive...especially considering that this is the MINIMUM sentence of ten years/photo.

It is sick, though the guy probably needs some mental help, rather than 200 years in prison. 

[Neemo]

200 years or 30 whats the diff...hes already 52

[Izzy]

I feel very uneasy with someone going to jail for looking at something....

Sentencing must reflect the crime and benefit society - how does sending him to jail help society? Wouldnt a fine and community service do more? He wasnt attacking children in the street....

Prison should be for people posing a genuine danger to the public - filling jails with fraudsters and perverts is just a waste of money

[Neemo]

i dunno was he distributing the porn too? childporn is the lowest....that people would exploit kids like that...its sad

and to get his hands on the stuff someone has to attack the kids in the street to create it


i agree 200 years is a bit much but damn being a parent its a scary idea that some kids suffer this kind of thing

[freedom78]

200 years or 30 whats the diff...hes already 52

Fair enough, though I'd rather see people with pedophilic urges in mental insitutions.  Prison isn't curing pedophilia as a mental condition or a compulsion.  Putting him in prison does little to prevent other children from being abused.  They should use these guys to get to the psychological/biological roots of these urges. 

Rehabilitation is like an investment, in that the short term payoffs may be little (i.e. we may not know enough to currently rehabilitate pedophiles), but the long term payoffs may be enormous (i.e. fewer children getting molested/raped/exploited).  Putting him in jail for 200 years satisfies our immediate punishment urge at the expense of learning what causes such behavior and, thus, being able to treat it.   

[mrlee]

why dont they do this type of stuff in england. This countrys getting shitter everyday with scum...oh wait, they dont have the room i forgot. 

[SLCPUNK]

I'd prefer a 200 yr sentence be given to those who create those films.

[freedom78]

I'd prefer a 200 yr sentence be given to those who create those films.

I agree with you, there.  The worst criminal is rarely the junkie, but the dealer.  My God, there are countries where the child-sex industry thrives, and local law enforcement can do little to truly combat it.  Of course I don't want someone to be looking at kiddie porn, but it pales in comparison to the worst offenders in the larger child exploitation "industry."