East Tennessee Man Pleads Guilty to Distributing Child Pornography

Forty-three year old Steven Blaine Church of Greeneville pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court Thursday to distributing child pornography. He reportedly faces up to twenty years in prison, heavy fines, and a possible lifetime of supervised release. Church’s distribution of the illegal material was discovered by the FBI’s Innocent Images Project which is an initiative that the FBI started in 1995 to combat the proliferation of child pornography. That initiative has expanded recently to include undercover operations where FBI agents assume fictitious screen names and ages in order to lure sex predators and child pornography distributors into online relationships and gather evidence against them. Such undercover operations are becoming an increasingly prevalent source of sex offense charges nationwide.

Tennesseans who find themselves charged with the distribution of child pornography have several options available for their defense. Successful pursuit of these options requires knowledge of the law and the legal system, and the ability to present persuasive legal arguments to the court. Therefore, it is highly recommended that defendants consult an experienced criminal defense attorney for help with such cases. One such option would, of course, consist of trying to prove that the defendant did not actually possess child pornography. This could be accomplished by proving that the material belonged to someone else or that the material does not actually depict child pornography at is defined by Tennessee or Federal law. If such material does depict child pornography, the defendant may still be able to prove that he was not aware of that and thus did not knowingly possess the images.

In rare situations, the defendant may be able to have the evidence suppressed due to an illegally conducted search, usually based on an invalid search warrant or invalid consent. If the defendant is able to get the evidence suppressed, he or she stands a good chance of acquittal or an extremely favorable plea bargain since there may be very little evidence entered against him or her at trial. Finally, the defendant can also accept a plea bargain as Mr. Church did here when the circumstances dictate that pleading guilty is appropriate. Plea bargains generally result in at least some lenience being shown to the defendant by the sentencing court due to the fact that avoiding trial preserves judicial resources and the defendant has accepted responsibility for his actions.

Source: http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=12938170