Burglars Find Child Porn, Owner Arrested, Burglars Not

[Kanastrous]

(CNN) -- A central California man has been arrested for possession of child pornography, thanks to a tip from burglars who robbed the man's property, authorities said.

Last month, a juvenile and a 19-year-old illegally accessed the property of Kraig Stockard, 54, of Delhi, California, according to a statement from Deputy Tom MacKenzie of the Merced County Sheriff's Department. They broke into Stockard's barn and stole approximately 50 CDs they believed were blank.

Stockard filed a police report on the incident on September 12, according to MacKenzie.

But the young people who stole the CDs were in for a surprise. When they began putting the discs into their computer, they discovered that some of them contained pornographic images of children, the statement said.

Despite having obtained the CDs under decidedly shady circumstances, the pair decided to report Stockard to the police.

A search warrant was served and three more computers and three laptops were taken from Stockard's home, along with several external hard drives. Police said there were thousands of pictures and movies on the CDs -- more than 30 of the 50 discs had child pornography on them.

Investigators said Stockard has been downloading indecent images of children since 2004. He has admitted possessing the pornography on the CDs but has refused to say whether there is pornography on the computers, they said. Stockard was booked for possession of child pornography and posted $25,000 bail.

The two burglar suspects who reported Stockard have not been arrested.

Their case has been sent to the Merced County District Attorney's Office for review. When reached for comment, a press officer told CNN the office could not comment on the case because one of the informants in question is a juvenile.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/06/us/califo ... index.html

That's...morally ambiguous. Well and good that they reported what they had found, but letting them walk because the crime to which they admitted uncovered someone else's offense?

[tim31]

They haven't been let walk just yet, it's under review. Stealing a spindle of writable CDs is kind of petty theft, so they'll probably get a good behaviour bond or such.

[Flagg]

They haven't been let walk just yet, it's under review. Stealing a spindle of writable CDs is kind of petty theft, so they'll probably get a good behaviour bond or such.

Still burglary, which is a crime in itself that tends to carry a pretty hefty penalty.

[Civil War Man]

Stuff like that's happened before. Hell, almost down to the exact details. I'm not surprised that the burglars are getting off easy (if they get punished at all, it will probably be a light sentence like the story I linked). If the burglars were arrested and given the usual harsh treatment, it may discourage other criminals from coming forward when they see a worse crime in progress.

[Mr Bean]

This is what our good friend the suspended sentence is useful for. The DA should sit these boys down and give them this deal.

1. Confess to your crime and plead guilty to some lesser charge (for example misdemeanor version of breaking and entering to avoid a felony charge)

2. You will be given a suspended sentence, IE don't break the law anytime in the next five years and you will avoid fourteen months in jail and that's the end of it.

Or fight us and we will try it as a felony and because of your previous statements we will get a conviction. If they keep up criminal activities then the suspended sentence hits them and if you want throw on some community service or counseling hours as well.

[Stofsk]

They haven't been let walk just yet, it's under review. Stealing a spindle of writable CDs is kind of petty theft, so they'll probably get a good behaviour bond or such.

Still burglary, which is a crime in itself that tends to carry a pretty hefty penalty.

I seriously doubt they would get any kind of hefty penalty, especially since what they did was petty in itself and helped uncover a greater crime. It wouldn't be worth the time and money prosecuting the case, and you can always use the carrot/stick approach with the kids to get them to testify at trial for the guy rather than being strict with them for violating the guy's property.

[Flagg]

They haven't been let walk just yet, it's under review. Stealing a spindle of writable CDs is kind of petty theft, so they'll probably get a good behaviour bond or such.

Still burglary, which is a crime in itself that tends to carry a pretty hefty penalty.

I seriously doubt they would get any kind of hefty penalty, especially since what they did was petty in itself and helped uncover a greater crime. It wouldn't be worth the time and money prosecuting the case, and you can always use the carrot/stick approach with the kids to get them to testify at trial for the guy rather than being strict with them for violating the guy's property.

Yeah, I'm not advocating one way or the other, just stating the fact that burglary in itself is a hefty crime, whether you steal a stereo or a matchbook.

[Questor]

Right, but I'm guessing that these two (or their lawyer) were smart enough to say "immunity". The 5th amendment bein relevant in any testimony they could give.

[ChaserGrey]

Y'know, when I first read this, my initial reaction was, "What the hell? Just because these two guys uncovered a bigger wrong doesn't make their wrong right!" Call it my inner moral imperative, a lingering side effect of reading too much Kant one semester...

But then I thought: what if it had been something even worse? What if the guy's barn had been full of trafficked sex slaves, or dead bodies? Do I really want to set up a situation where there might be an incentive not to report things like that?

Long story short, utilitarian ethics triumph again. I like the idea of probation or a suspended sentence as a way of driving home that society is Not Amused by their conduct and that they won't be so lucky the next time. (At least I hope not, cos otherwise I gotta wonder what kind of place they're from...) But I think people are right when they say the two burglars should get a pass this specific time to make sure greater crimes are reported and punished.

(Although now that I think about it, even a strict moral imperative type would probably have to admit that coming forward with this voluntarily, knowing it might lead to bad consequences for them, was a virtuous act that should count as mitigation. As far as we know, they didn't have an immunity deal when they more or less walked into a police station and said, "So, we stole this stuff from some guy's barn...")

[Themightytom]

I think I might actually be relieved if our criminal justice moved to triage mode instead of it's current first come first served method. Sure burglary is a crime, but they took CDs for crying out loud and given the circumstances it's a much better use of a system with limited resources to go after the higher priority threat to society.

That being said, I'm not sure a pervert with a collection IS a bigger threat, compared to two criminals who are not pre contemplative, but hey, from a rehabilitation perspective, at least the two burglars haven't entirely abandoned their values.

[Eframepilot]

Yeah, the burglars deserve leniency since they did the right thing and came forward despite exposing their own crime. It's not like this will encourage other burglars. The problem would be if law enforcement themselves did the burglary; that would transform us into a police state.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I think I might actually be relieved if our criminal justice moved to triage mode instead of it's current first come first served method. Sure burglary is a crime, but they took CDs for crying out loud and given the circumstances it's a much better use of a system with limited resources to go after the higher priority threat to society.

That being said, I'm not sure a pervert with a collection IS a bigger threat, compared to two criminals who are not pre contemplative, but hey, from a rehabilitation perspective, at least the two burglars haven't entirely abandoned their values.

A pervert with a collection IS a bigger threat. First, children were harmed in the production of said collection. Second, a pervert almost always either has or will in the future molest children themselves.

[mr friendly guy]

This is what our good friend the suspended sentence is useful for. The DA should sit these boys down and give them this deal.

1. Confess to your crime and plead guilty to some lesser charge (for example misdemeanor version of breaking and entering to avoid a felony charge)

2. You will be given a suspended sentence, IE don't break the law anytime in the next five years and you will avoid fourteen months in jail and that's the end of it.

Or fight us and we will try it as a felony and because of your previous statements we will get a conviction. If they keep up criminal activities then the suspended sentence hits them and if you want throw on some community service or counseling hours as well.

That most probably is the best way. This way justice gets it cake and gets to eat it too.

[The Yosemite Bear]

yes, thats the whole purpose of a flexible justice system, to do the greater good for the community. giving a pair of teens a felony on their record for a minor theft would not encourage other low danger criminals from reporting much more serious crimes that they might witness. Also not reporting a crime you witnessed in the commission of a crime makes you as guilty as the person who committed the actual crime. Could you imagine what a couple of burglers would say if they found a collection in a barn that belonged to a budding Ed Gein copycat?

[Sriad]

A pervert with a collection IS a bigger threat. First, children were harmed in the production of said collection. Second, a pervert almost always either has or will in the future molest children themselves.

I've got nit-pick here; we can't know the behavioral specifics of people who haven't been caught.

On topic though... people who self-incriminate to report much more serious crimes (and regardless of whether the "collector" was destined to sexually abuse children in the future collecting child pornography is a very serious crime because it aggrandizes people who sexually abuse children) should be treated leniently or else people won't self-incriminate to report more serious crimes.

[tim31]

So far this thread has boiled down to DID YOU ORDER THE CODE RED???

[Sephirius]

Surely this cannot be used in court, as it was evidence obtained illegally?

[Alyrium Denryle]

Surely this cannot be used in court, as it was evidence obtained illegally?

Destructionator is correct. Only the government, or someone acting a priori in the capacity of an agent of that government or who could reasonably be considered to be acting thus would, by discovering this evidence, invalidate its discovery. There is a laundry list of case law supporting this.

[The Yosemite Bear]

yes, it's not fruit of a poisonus tree if someone civilian breaks the law to get the evidence. you can tape a conversation or copy someone's sexual emails and turn them over to the police who would need a warrent for the same thing. Also because of the rules around conspiracy if a crook discovers a body or child porn in the commission of a burglery, they have to turn the info over to the police or face charges of conspiracy and responsiblity for the murder or the child exploitation.

[Kanastrous]

Doesn't that vary from state to state? I don't think that all jurisdictions will charge you as an accessory or conspirator if you fail to report information about a crime.