Meyer was driving the silver Ferrari, when he lost control and spun out. Ferretti was driving the red Ferrari and swerved to avoid a collision. He ended up crossing the double yellow lines and ended up in a head-on collision with Stephen Lenge, of Kinnelonwho who was riding a motorcycle. Lenge did not survive the powerful impact.
]]> The Star-Ledger reports that the two Josephs have been charged with death by auto. Both are being held in lieu of $50,000 bail.Death by auto is the general term used to cover vehicular homicide due to recklessness and/or due to intoxication. For these gentlemen, it is likely the former. To prove vehicular homicide by reckless driving, the prosecutor will have to show that the Josephs drove their vehicles in a manner that was indifferent to the known probable harmful results of their driving.
Vehicular homicide due to recklessness is a crime of the second degree in New Jersey. The penalty is between five and ten years of incarceration, plus fines.
From the news stories, it appears that the two Josephs were simply messing around. It is tragic that not only did their alleged street racing cost an innocent third party his life, but it seems like it will ruin the lives of the young men as well.
Related Resources:
Now that reports have spread on the alleged arrangement with the local rabbis to screen molestation accusations, and widespread criticism has emerged on the practice of shielding the names of the accused, it might be time for Hynes, or others, to clean house by filing criminal charges against anyone and everyone involved in shielding the alleged pedophiles.
]]> One possible route to pursue would be criminal obstruction statutes. If the higher-ups wished to go after Charles Hynes, official misconduct is a crime in the great State of New York. The charge requires proof of either an act relating to his office, but constituting an unauthorized exercise of his official functions, or knowingly refraining from performing a duty which is imposed upon him by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of his office.The latter is much more plausible, if more proof can be found regarding the alleged arrangement. This law is essentially a malfeasance statute, and requires allegations Hynes knowingly failed to do his job. Some might argue that this is exactly what is happening with the alleged pedophiles in the Orthodox Jewish community.
However, prosecutors do have wide latitude on deciding what charges to bring, so proving that his actions were an abuse of discretion could be difficult, but not impossible.
Assuming Hynes stays in office, or if his successor wishes to make a good first impression, they could also possibly go after anyone who has engaged in victim any kind of intimidation. Obstructing governmental administration in the second degree seems like a possible charge for those cases.
This law requires obstructing the administration of law by means of intimidation, physical force, or a a few other listed methods. If the tales of widespread victim intimidation amongst the Orthodox community prove to be true, the intimidators could be prosecuted under this statute.
Both offenses are Class A misdemeanors, which carry a penalty of up to one year in jail.
Please come back to this blog for legal updates on the Charles Hynes allegations.
Related Resources:
"Stop and Frisk" is a long-running NYPD tactic in which they stop and pat down "suspicious" people, checking for weapons. However, in order to be constitutional, the stops have to be based on some articulable "reasonable suspicion" that a person has committed a crime or is armed.
]]> The NYCLU study’s numbers are quite interesting. There were 685,724 stops in 2011, with only 1.9 percent resulting in the recovery of a weapon. Blacks and Latinos were more likely to be stopped. However, whites were almost twice as likely to be found carrying a weapon.The study, as summarized by the Gothamist, also highlights another interesting point. In neighborhoods without a majority black or Latino population, young black and Latino men were still stop and frisked at a disproportionate rate compared to white males.
The high failure rate, along with the statistics indicating a predilection towards minorities, calls into question whether the officers are operating on hunch or actual cause. As the Supreme Court stated in Terry v. Ohio,
“[S]imple good faith on the part of the arresting officer is not enough. … If subjective good faith alone were the test, the protections of the Fourth Amendment would evaporate, and the people would be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, only in the discretion of the police.”
The Mayor’s Office responded to the criticism, which has become a cause celebre by potential Mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio, with the following statement, provided courtesy of the Village Voice:
“When Bill de Blasio last served in the City’s Executive branch there were 2,000 murders a year. Today we are on track to have less than 500 - a record new low. Mr. de Blasio may be nostalgic for the days when the ACLU set crime policy in this city, but most New Yorkers don’t want rampant crime to return. The fact is Stop, Question and Frisk keeps guns and other weapons off the streets and saves lives. Make no mistake, we will not continue to be the safest big city in America if Mr. de Blasio has his way.”
Oh, mayor’s office. Your argument contains just a few flaws. For example, the correlation of a reduced murder rate does not mean causation. Just because people are being randomly tickled by officers on the street, doesn’t mean that is the reason, or even a significant part of the reason for the decrease in murders. What about factors like overall age of the population, and the economy?
Also, the main problem with the policy is not necessarily its effectiveness, or lack thereof. The problem is its constitutionality.
“… in justifying the particular intrusion the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant the intrusion.” Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Terry v. Ohio was one of the most important Supreme Court decisions in criminal jurisprudence. It held that the Fourth Amendment is not violated by officers stopping and frisking a suspect on the street if the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person may be armed and dangerous.
The logic behind the decision was that officers shouldn’t have to compromise their own safety for the sake of ensuring constitutional rights. If someone clearly is a threat, or matches the description of someone who has engaged in a violent crime, of course the officer should be able to stop the person and check them for weapons.
For the NYPD, their 1.9% success rate in recovering weapons from those that they stop and frisk could indicate that they lack that reasonable suspicion.Certainly, officer safety and crime prevention are important, but at a certain point, constitutional rights have to come into play.
Related Resources:
But this time, it's criminal.
Anthony and Claire Reyes were the parents arrested for being social hosts, reports the New York Times. The party hosted at least 40 underage private high school students, including the couple's children. The party ended with two teens being taken to the hospital after consuming too much alcohol, and two parents being taken to the police station.
]]> The episode has sparked mixed reactions from the community. Some understand the parents' stance, preferring to keep supervision over their children while they drink instead of having their children do it elsewhere.While the court of public opinion is debating whether the parents' acts were proper, the police have no doubt. They have charged the parents with 43 counts of unlawfully dealing with children and 10 counts each of endangering a child under 17.
Unlawfully dealing with a child in the first degree covers a few different scenarios, including serving alcohol to minors. Exceptions exist for one's own children or for classroom settings. Otherwise, it is a Class A misdemeanor, which carries a penalty of up to one year in jail per charge.
The relevant provision of the other endangerment charge provides that someone is guilty when he or she "knowingly acts in a manner likely to be injurious to the physical, mental or moral welfare of a child less than seventeen years old or directs or authorizes such child to engage in an occupation involving a substantial risk of danger to his life or health."
Throwing a kegger where two kids end up in the hospital is probably what the law means in this case by "acting in a manner injurious to the physical ... welfare of a child." They certainly seem to have authorized the underage drinking party, if the news reports are accurate. The endangerment charges are also class A misdemeanors, carrying up to a year in jail per charge.
If convicted of all of the charges, each parent faces up to fifty-three years in jail. Obviously, the prosecutor isn't going to push for the maximum penalty or the maximum charges. However, the parents are probably facing at least some jail time. Meanwhile, the debate over the morality of throwing these parties will probably shift to the criminal and civil risks to the parents versus the danger of unsupervised underage drinking.
Related Resources:
Catherine Scalia, presumably of no relation to the esteemed Supreme Court justice, has been arrested again for selling sex-acts with her sausages, reports the New York Post. Scalia has apparently been an unlicensed hot dog vendor (and prostitute) for years, as she was arrested for the exact same crime eight years ago.
]]> Her neighbors state that she would sell hot dogs out of her RV, while dressed either in underwear or bikinis. Certain patrons of her culinary delights would emerge from the trailer with a smile on their face. She would also hand out business cards for non-culinary services, reports the Post.This time, after selling a couple of hot dogs and a water (for only $5) to the undercover officers, she offered her “additional services.” According to her business card, she provides one on one strip teases, entertainment for bachelor parties, and topless cleaning services.
According to the report, after striking a deal on the price, the multi-talented woman took the officer back to her place and performed a striptease for $100. She then agreed to ‘manually stimulate’ him for an extra $50.
The penalty for the more serious offense, unlicensed mobile food vending, is $1,000.
As for her other offense, prostitution carries up to three months in prison and a fine of up to $500. The statute defines prostitution as “sexual conduct” for money, which though vague, probably includes manual stimulation, as the court has even held that certain clothed physical contact can qualify.
There is no word yet on the future of her mobile hot dog business, or its loyal customer base. Though her family has yet to spring her from the joint, they might want to consider getting her a Manhattan criminal lawyer before her stock of sausages goes bad.
Related Resources:
A cop briefly attempted pursuit, but either couldn't keep up or just didn't want to endanger others' lives. The former seems far more likely.
]]> The officer then radioed a description of the bike and the plate numbers to other troopers and Thruway workers. The other troopers and workers tracked the bike for over twenty minutes until it stopped for gas.When the officer approached McCarthy at the gas station, he told McCarthy that he had been speeding at up to 170 mph.
His brilliant response: my Suzuki can go 190 mph. The offer was not amused. McCarthy was immediately arrested.
He has been charged with third-degree fleeing police, reckless driving, speeding, and operating out of class, as he did not even have a motorcycle license. He is being held on $20,000 bail at the Albany County Correctional Facility.
Someone is guilty of third-degree fleeing police when, after being directed by an officer to pull over, via siren or lights, they attempt to evade apprehension at speeds exceeding 25 mph over the speed limit or commit reckless driving.
Second-degree fleeing police requires injury to a third party or to an officer, which thankfully did not happen here.
If Nikkolaus McCarthy is convicted of third-degree fleeing police, a Class A misdemeanor, he faces up to a year in jail on that charge alone. He can also probably expect to have any license that he does posses to be revoked or suspended.
Related Resources:
To celebrate the awesomeness of New York's law or lack thereof, and Cinco De Mayo, here is a recipe for Mojitos Diablos. This should provide an unhealthy alternative to those Coronas, Dos Equis, and margaritas. You might also enjoy the song, posted after the break, by B.O.B., about being on a beach down in Mexico.
Just don't enjoy either on your front stoop or beyond.
]]>You are within your legal rights to sing along while reasonably drunk in public.
Thanks to the gloriousness of New York’s law, you can drink in private and then venture into the streets to enjoy the majesty of a beautiful Saturday in the city so nice they named it twice. However, remember to leave those drinks at home, as drinking in public is still illegal, much to the chagrin of many. The penalty is only $25, but that’s still a decent amount of beer money.
Also, while the police are too busy to routinely stop and sniff cups, if you are drunk in public and acting like a fool, you may be approached by a police officer. If he/she can smell the alcohol in your red plastic cup, you’ll probably get a ticket. Remember, drunk in public is okay; drinking in public is not.
Also, though it may be tempting to you personally, don’t do drugs. IAnd if you must, stay out of public. Being under the influence of drugs while in public, to the extent that you are a danger to yourself or others, is punishable by a fine and up to fifteen days in jail. At least in regards to open alcohol container laws, “public” includes your front stoop. It is quite doubtful they’ll be more generous for drugs.
Drink safely, drink carefully, drink responsibly and stay thirsty, my friends.
Related Resources:
Unlawful imprisonment can be charged as either a Class A misdemeanor or a Class E Felony. The difference is whether the restraint “exposed [her] to a risk of serious personal injury.” Arguably, the Sergeant could be charged with the felony here, as he was allegedly choking his wife while he restrained her in the bathroom. Choking, obviously, can lead to serious injury or death. A class E felony can result in a sentence of up to four years.
]]> Assault also comes in shades of grey, but St. Louis would most likely be charged with the least severe charge. Aggravated assault requires the use of a deadly weapon or the intent to cause serious injury, with such an injury actually resulting. His wife was uninjured. Assault in the third degree is a Class A Misdemeanor, which can result in imprisonment of up to one year.Criminal obstruction of breathing (we call that choking back in the Midwest) is applying pressure to the throat or neck or blocking the nose, with the intent to obstruct breathing or circulation. Had any stupor or loss of circulation occurred, it would have qualified as strangulation. Since his wife was uninjured, St. Louis only faces a Class A misdemeanor, which again can result in imprisonment of up to one year.
The bottom line for Sergeant George St. Louis is that if he catches a break on the unlawful imprisonment charge, he will mostly likely be facing three misdemeanor charges with up to a year in jail for each if he is found guilty. If he doesn't, he could face up to a year in jail for two of the charges and up to four years for the third. Whether the district attorney cuts him a break or not will probably depend on the circumstances of the incident, as well as his prior criminal record, if he has one.
His career as a member of law enforcement however, is probably, like his marriage, on the rocks.
Related Resources:
Fortunately for the women, they each got a photo, or in one case, a video, of the offenders. The earliest alleged offender, Kyle Brown, 23, of Brooklyn was charged with public lewdness after he masturbated on the train in the presence of a lady with a cell phone camera, reports the Gothamist.
]]> Brown's exhibitionism was one of two events on April 18th. There was also an unidentified as of yet man who was taking upskirt photos. The photography apparently tired him out, as he is half asleep in the photo provided to the Gothamist. The NYPD have asked for your help in locating and identifying him.The final pervert for the day is this man, who was videotaped masturbating on a train. Warning, the video in the story contains a weirdo self-pleasuring through his clothes on the subway. Thanks to the Gothamist for their extensive coverage of the train's tumescent troubles.
Yes women are fighting back with their smartphones, but the law is also a useful tool. Upskirt photography, or any other similar violations of a woman's privacy, are covered by Stephanie's Law, which makes the crime a Class E Felony. Those convicted face incarceration of up to four years and registered sex offender status.
Public lewdness is defined as showing your private parts or committing a lewd act in public or in a private place, but with the curtains open so others can see you. It is a class B misdemeanor, which is a relative slap on the wrist compared to the upskirt charges, as it only carries a sentence of up to three months.
If you have any information on these two suspects, please notify the NYPD immediately by calling Crime Stoppers, at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477). You can also go online to the Crime Stoppers website at WWW.NYPDCRIMESTOPPERS.COM or text to 274637 (CRIMES) then enter TIP577.
Related Resources:
He was arrested anyway.
Police claim that after the 18-year-old undercover cop was rejected, the cop made a deal with a 51-year-old customer, Stanfiel Collymore, to purchase the alcohol for him. Police say that the deal was done in store, within earshot of Duran.
]]> At the advice of his then-counsel, Duran pled guilty and paid a $120 fine so that he could go home. He was afraid that he would have to go to Rikers Island if he didn't pay right away.Shortly thereafter, Duran had the ultimate "duh" moment, when he realized that there was a surveillance camera in the store, watching every move. A review of the tape shows that he did everything he was supposed to do, including rejecting the underage purchaser, and that he was busy with other customers when the side-deal went down.
Ismael Duran is now attempting to withdraw his guilty plea. Prosecutors are reviewing the tape and considering whether to vacate his plea or not. However, it is not the prosecutor's decision. They can make a recommendation, but it is the judge's choice whether or not to vacate a plea. And they hate vacating pleas.
Vacating, or withdrawing, a guilty plea that has already been finalized is an extremely difficult matter. There are only a few reasons why a judge would actually grant such a motion, including evidence of innocence, fraud or mistake in entering the plea knowingly, or ineffective assistance of counsel.
For fraud or mistake in entering the plea knowingly, there must be some evidence of fraud on the part of the prosecutor or the police officers, or the defendant must have not understood the consequences of the plea. An example is where the judge misreads the sentence in court and the defendant takes the deal.
Ineffective assistance of counsel is usually a dead end. It is very difficult to prove that a lawyer is inept. There are cases where the lawyer was drunk and asleep during trial and the court still didn't find ineffective assistance of counsel.
Finally, actual innocence, which we may have here, is the strongest ground to stand on. For this, you need pretty incontrovertible evidence of innocence. You essentially have to clearly prove that you are innocent, since you have already admitted that you are guilty in court.
For Ismael Duran, the presence of the surveillance camera will probably set him free. For most people who enter a plea of guilty, there is no way whatsoever to withdraw the plea. He is lucky that the camera caught the whole incident on tape, as otherwise, he would have no way to fight the charges.
Related Resources:
The authorities have charged six cab drivers with promoting prostitution and arrested a father-son duo, Vincent George Sr. and Jr., for being the leaders of a sex trafficking ring that brought women into the country, forced them into prostitution, and tattooed them with their pimps' names. The cab drivers transported the prostitutes and negotiated rates with the customers.
]]> Though no RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) charges have yet been pursued, one wonders if that might be a possibility.RICO allows the government to prosecute organized criminal organizations. In order to convict under RICO, the government must prove at least two RICO predicate offenses within a set time period. Some of the offenses that could be used include forging of passports and identification documents, misuse of visas, trafficking in persons, procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully, money laundering, and wire fraud.
The George family was allegedly bringing women into the country and forcing them into prostitution. In order to do so successfully, pretty much every single one of the listed offenses regarding forging identification and immigration documents would have to be violated.
The father and son also owned over ten vehicles and multiple properties. They would have had to be laundering the prostitution money to be able to cleanly purchase all of those things without the IRS investigating.
So far, all that has been reported are the human trafficking charges, which carry one to twenty-five years in prison. It is quite possible, however, that this is simply the beginning. It would not be surprising to see the IRS go after them for tax evasion as well.
Meanwhile, at least one of the cab drivers might want to consider finding a new Manhattan criminal lawyer. His lawyer, Bob Walter, told the New York Daily News that his client was just trying to help people and stated, "What livery car driver doesn't know where you can get a girl?" Seriously? His statement to the press essentially admitted guilt but excused it because everyone does it.
This also is not the end of the police investigation. The District Attorney still plans on going after the demand side of the equation, by arresting the customers of the Vincent George sex trafficking ring that they are able to identify through wire taps and further investigation.
Related Resources:
Do questions like what should I expect, how long will I be there and why are the lawyers asking me all these questions ring a bell with you? If so, read more.
]]> What should I expect?Expect to have some free time. Jury Duty is a cattle call. You are supposed to show up, on time, to the location indicated on your Jury Duty summons. You then have to wait, while they sort through who has shown and who hasn’t. If your summons mentions a Qualification Questionnaire, your questioning will be done in advance, online, and will probably be much more extensive.
The lawyers are on a mission to find potential conflicts and bias. So, while the other ninety-seven people are being grilled, you will listening to every question and answer. Bring a book, (or seven) or some work.
When it comes time for you to answer questions, be sure to be truthful. You are under oath and lying at this point is perjury. You may recall perjury is what Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens have been indicted for. The lawyers are trying to determine whether you can be fair and impartial on their case. So, if you know that you cannot be fair and impartial, whether it’s due to personal bias, a history with one of the parties, or due to a traumatic past, you should speak up.
How long will I be there for?
There really is no way to tell. For your initial service, you will be there for probably one to two days but if on call for a trial, it could be up to five days. If you are selected, you could serve on a jury for any length of time. The vast majority of trials are short, otherwise we’d never convict anyone of a crime. However, there are the occasional multi-week trials, like the O.J. Simpson debacle, that can occupy months.
What if I have a really, really good excuse?
Well, this is going to depend on the excuse, but remember that everyone has an excuse. The court is especially unsympathetic to loss of income excuses, as everyone loses pay by attending. Jurors are compensated only $40 per day, which is about $5 per hour.
For those of you who need a delay, filling out this online form, or calling 800-449-2819 at least one week before your date of service, will allow you to get one automatic postponement. After that, you’ll need to come up with a good excuse or debilitating disease and provide the excuse and documentary proof to the local Commissioner of Jurors. The contact information for the Commissioner can be found by selecting your county from the top left side of the Juror Information page.
Remember, no matter how much you might want to avoid jury duty, it is not worth a perjury charge. Be smart and make excuses wisely. If you really cannot be fair and impartial, say so, but don’t go from being a juror in one case to a defendant in another. Plus, where would the judicial system be without you?
This post is part of FindLaw’s Legal U series. We are working to help you learn what to do in your city to cope with some of the legal problems, questions, or issues that come up in daily life. Please come back to learn more from future posts in this series.
Related Resources:
Stranger danger, faces on milk cartons, and May 25, the National Missing Children's Day all emerged from that tragedy as everyday lexicon. What has not emerged is a resolution the cold case of Etan Patz.
]]> Jose Ramos is by all accounts, a terrible human being. He is currently finishing a long-term prison sentence for molesting young boys. Prior to this, he admitted to molesting others. He dated Etan’s babysitter so that he could have access to her son, whom he also allegedly molested, and access to Etan.Ramos has admitted to abducting Etan that morning and taking him back to his apartment. He claims, however, that after Etan turned him down, he took Etan to the subway to visit relatives in Washington Heights. The Patz family has no relatives in Washington Heights. With no further evidence to go on, the police concentrated on nailing Ramos for anything else, and eventually convicted him of the molestation of a different child. His prison term ends in November of this year.
Etan’s case was eventually shelved. His parents had him legally declared dead in 2001 so that they could file a civil suit against Ramos. The point was symbolic, as Ramos definitely has nothing of value to his name, other than prison pay. They were likely still seeking answers, and hoping that the civil suit’s discovery process would allow them to ask him questions that maybe, just maybe, he would actually answer this time. He did not, and the judge eventually found him at fault for the child’s death because of it, reports The New York Times. Still, no answers and no body were uncovered.
According to NBC New York, the New York Attorney General’s office reopened the case for unknown reasons just a few years ago. However, until a tip came in this week, they hadn’t announced any progress or leads. The tip alerted them to what was claimed to be the location of the body. The location was, at the time, a wood shop in a basement. According to TheTimes, it may have also been a site for sexual rendezvous back in the day. It is only 200 feet from the apartment where the family still lives.
Could it be, after all this time, that Etan’s body was only 200 feet from home?
If there is any forensic evidence recovered, a murder charge could still be brought. The statute of limitations bars most criminal charges in New York from being brought after more than a few years, but the bell (and the statute) never tolls on murder.
His previous convictions and other alleged incidents of molestation would probably not be admissible to prove guilt, as evidence is usually not allowable to show that someone is likely guilty because they did it before. However, a creative prosecutor might be able to get it admitted as evidence of a common plan or scheme to show that he had a pattern of abducting young boys and therefore this abduction is likely to have occurred in the same way.
The police, unable to prove that he killed Etan Patz two decades ago, wanted to keep Jose Ramos behind bars for as long as possible. Perhaps they bought just enough time.
Related Resources:
Phillip L. Byrd, 21, Eric S. Darden, 20, and Raheem D. Simmons, 18, all of Camden, are alleged to have carjacked a couple at the Trump Taj Mahal parking garage. They then forced the victims to drive to Warren Webb Sr. Drive and shot them both. Sunil Rattu, 28, died from his wounds, while his girlfriend, Radha Ghetia, 24, survived.
]]> The victims were found in their vehicle by the Atlantic City police after someone contacted 911.The crime of felony murder, which is one of the laundry list of charges that they are facing, is where someone other than the coconspirators dies during the commission of a felony. The purpose of this law is to allow all of the coconspirators to be charged for the death when only one of them pulls a trigger.
For example, if two people decide to rob a liquor store and one of them decides to shoot the cashier for not including Tropical Fruit Skittles with the bag of money, the second will also be subject to murder charges. Their agreed-upon illegal and dangerous activity is what placed the victims in harm's way and they are all held responsible under the law.
Felony murder is an alternative to murder for charging purposes. A person cannot be convicted of both murder and felony murder for the same death, as they require proof of almost the exact same elements and to do so would be punishing someone twice for the exact same crime.
The Camden Trio are also facing charges for murder, kidnapping, carjacking, armed robbery, aggravated assault, conspiracy, and weapons charges, amongst others.
Related Resources:
Among those arrested were the 50-year-old Director of Public Works for Morristown, Charles E. Jones and an unidentified 17-year-old minor. The full list, along with photos of the suspects, has been released to the press.
]]> Bernard Cahill, 53, allegedly photographed himself sexually assaulting a juvenile. The photos were seized during the arrest. He was charged with manufacturing child pornography and sexual assault, in addition to the possession and distribution charges faced by the others.Another suspect, 23-year-old Cesar Salgado-Maya, was arrested back on March 1 after investigators discovered that he was living in a residence attached to a day care center. Most of the remaining suspects were arrested only recently. Three of them are still on the loose.
The investigation was launched in January, after Attorney General Jeffrey Chisea took office. Cracking down on child pornography was one of the primary goals of his administration.
Federal law prohibits the production, possession, transmission, reception, or distribution of child pornography using any means of interstate commerce, which includes postal mail and of course, the Internet.
These suspects were allegedly using file sharing to transmit files to each other.
The most popular forms of peer-to-peer file sharing, including Bit Torrent, transmit files byte by byte while downloading them. Essentially, the file is broken down into thousands of tiny chunks. While you are downloading some chunks, other chunks are available to be copied to others. That means file-sharing users who are attempting to download the files are quite possibly guilty of distributing them as well.
Sentences for child porn offenses range from five years all the way to a full life sentence.
Related Resources:
