• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« This Week in The National Law Journal | Main | In Commencement Address, Verrilli Offers Lessons Learned »

May 13, 2013



This is an emotional topic with horrible consequences. Aside from the actual topic of restitution, removing the damage by other means may be possible. For instance, the millions of hash sets the fbi has collected could be easily incorporated with anti virus software such as Norton. The real work would be getting anti virus software involved in something so toxic. They already do it for websites, but could include files if they were provided the hash sets that identify the files.


The damage is real, and the concept of restitution (in a criminal law!) is laudable. But, as a tort lawyer, I think the restitution law is unpredictable, unfair and unmanageable.

The 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund example is certainly not helpful. There, only one payor was the source of all the money, the number of applicants for a payout was fixed by a deadline, and then the applicants detailed each element of their losses and suffering at length. Sure, it was emotionally draining to weigh apples and oranges, but at least the total payout and every recipient were known.

The child porn victims are a permanently changing pool of people with evolving injuries, and the number of convicts (and how much they are actually capable of, and liable for, paying) is also a moving target - indeed, unknown at any given time.

I'd say the DoJ and Congress should envision and enact a revised statute that works more like asbestos or Superfund liability, handling an ongoing stream of funds and claims pursuant to a logically consistent scheme. That should satisfy every argument or objection reported in this article.

Anoni Tihnker

This country has spiraled into complete idiocy and continues to be fueled by the DoJ's "ideas". First of all accessing with intent to view and possession are crimes, but I guess this does not apply to the employees at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, FBI, ICE, or ICAC. I find it hilarious that the victim was dragged into the justice system's stupid goose chase. At this point I would assume the victim would rather move on with their lives than continue to be reminded that someone has been arrested for having a image/video of them. If anything the victim should sue the US government for possessing and accessing with intent to view. These child pornography laws do nothing at all. It is not getting rid of the free content that is readily available across various Internet based applications.

Charles E. Higgins Sr.

Childhood sexual abuse harms the victim in a way that leaves damage that effects the person all her life. My ex-wife is a victim and the damage to our marriage was severe. She refused to have sex with me except the Saturday after my birthday for the last 20 years of marriage and even then only every third year. She also constantly accused me of affairs I never had. All this because of childhood trauma.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad