BREAKING: 50 Years For Viewing Disgusting Pictures?? Utterly Insane.
Breaking from the News-Journal: Former Tower Hill headmaster Christopher Wheeler was today sentenced to a 50-year sentence for having and viewing 25 pictures of kiddie porn on his computer. Two years for each picture.
Following the sentencing, the DAG said that Wheeler had been offered a 4-year sentence if he pled guilty, but he chose to go to a trial by judge.
So, let me get this straight…the AG’s office felt that 4 years was an acceptable term, otherwise they wouldn’t have offered it, but he gets 50 years instead. This judge Eric Davis should resign today. There is no ‘punishment fits the crime’ here. And the AG’s office may want to rethink its handling of such cases. Wheeler’s been in jail since 2013. He won’t be around in 2063. All this for viewing dirty pictures. Somewhere, Beau Biden is doubled over with laughter. However, AG Denn, this is on your watch. Do YOU think that justice was served here? More time than practically anyone convicted of murder in this state? For viewing pictures, not committing some heinous act? Really, Matt, do think that justice was served here?
I don’t. In fact, this makes a mockery of the term ‘justice’.
…..and Bodenweiser gets probation……
Things are going great at the AG aren’t they?
Can we throw a banker in jail yet?
…And the DuPont heir, who actually admitted to RAPING a three-year old, or was it a two-year old, or was it both, doesn’t do any bleeping jail time.
My first question is are you a Tower Hill Alumni? You seem to have a great deal of sympathy for Mr. Wheeler. If you followed this more closely you would know that Mr. Wheeler’s actions far exceeded looking at pictures but the decision was made to spare the victims having to testify. Also the State of Pennsylvania was watching the trial to determine whether to try Mr. Wheeler for violations (literal) which occurred there. With this sentence there would seem to be no need. Your concern for the victims is touching.
#1: I have no involvement with Tower Hill, nor have I ever. #2: If he committed other offenses, then he should have been tried for those offenses. #3: The crime for which he was charged was for viewing disgusting pictures on his computer. That’s it. 50 years.
If the judge decided that he was going to throw the book at him for offenses for which he was never charged nor convicted, then he is unfit to be a judge.
You’re trying to change the subject here. The issue is whether this was a just sentence. It was not. I’ve never met nor care to meet Mr. Wheeler. This is not about sympathy for the accused, but for the proper application of justice. And 50 years for viewing disgusting pictures is ridiculous. But that’s where Beau Biden (mis)placed his priorities as AG. When he bothered to show up. I’m hoping Denn will restore some sanity to the proceedings.
This sentence is insane as are the laws that allow it. Once again politicians and the courts attack the end users of under age porn, and not the people who produce it. Reminds me of the hated “war on drugs” that has been so effective in jailing hundreds of thousand of Americans and not reducing drug use in any significant way. Might I add Right On ‘Bulo!, and no, we can’t jail bankers until we defeat the politician they own at the polls.
Thanks for saying this publicly. I had been debating whether to post about this earlier but thought it smart to keep my mouth shut. Often those who view images get more time than those who sexually abuse children. It paralells the harsh laws for crack vs the lesser for powdered cocaine.
It’s actually happened here. Recently. That Richards guy who wouldn’t ‘fare well in prison’. Admitted to digitally raping a very young child. Allegedly raped a second child. He’s walking around. He had connections:
http://delawareliberal.net//2014/03/19/did-rapist-skate-due-to-dupont-family-ties-only-to-rape-again/
I have to agree with you, the sentencing seems awful strange. If he is a sex offender then he should be adjudicated as such. however, it’s not against the law to sit in your house and watch pornography. If we could project what someone may do after watching enough porn, that may be another discussion. Howevr, that isn’t the story
I would be the first person to castrate and throw a sex offender in jail until the walls fall down naturally. But in the story the AG’s office didn’t even charge him with a sex abuse crime. None of this makes sense. I can appreciate, as a survivor of sexual abuse myself, what a survivor has to go through when they testify. Why treat Tower Hill survivors differently then less privileged survivors? The state said if they charged him with sex abuse a survivor would have to testify.
This really boils down to another incident like Judge Roth did with the DuPont Family heir.
99 per centers win again.
It is a crime to view child porn in your home. It’s called ‘trafficking in child pornography’ even though ‘trafficking’ might only be some perv watching pics he got for free in the comfort of his home.
We can thank former AG Biden for this, along with lotsa legislators who wanted to show how tough they were on sex offenders in their brochures. It’s how bad laws get passed, usually due to the zeal of some AG. The problem is less in the crime than in the ridiculously long sentences that can ensue.
The sentencing recommendation for first-degree rape is 25 years, isn’t it?
Kurt J, sentencing is not about victims or their rights. If you want to empathize, go right ahead, but stay out of the discussion about punishment if you can’t control your emotions.
Demanding prison time for Robert Richards is off-point and counter-productive. If he got 50 years, that wouldn’t make this right.
This country’s justice system is completely fucked up because this country’s citizens are addicted to self-righteousness.
Wheeler waived the jury trial after he lost his bid to supress the evidence they found. I actually read the decision to deny that motion this morning.
It’s all very odd. I mean this entire thing began when the men he raped 30+ years age as young teens confronted him privately then went to the police after he admitted as much in one of his responses. After some prelimary investigation the cops got a warrant to search based on their investigation of intimidating and/or threatening a witness. Then they found video files….
Once those files were OK’d to be entered into evidence Wheeler waives his right to trial and gets 2 years per count.
I guess there’s no evidence on recent rapes and perhaps the statute of limitation expired on the others? But based on the the actual charges and the evidence this seems way out-of-line.
I see no problem with this. I’m still outraged that the .01% got off scot-free, but this guy is a predator who has been around his potential (and maybe actual) victims for decades.
The law is the law. Statute of limitations et al. A defendant should not be sentenced based on things not on the record. The AG chose to prosecute based on what they could prove, and the Judge sentenced based on what they could not.
The system failed based on public emotion surrounding this case. I want the law followed no matter how unpalatable.
“You seem to have a great deal of sympathy for Mr. Wheeler.”
“This is not about sympathy for the accused, but for the proper application of justice. ”
The proper application of justice ought to be without passion and prejudice. El Som is right, the conviction was for viewing. 50 years for that crime is excessive and unwarranted. Critical thinking is only possible when you are able to disregard your passion and prejudice. El Som did. Kurt J was unable to do so.
Just to be clear. He was offered a plea, and decided to forego. He knew the risks. So now in light of having the losing hand at the end of the game, you practically are asking for a “do-over” because, what he walked away from apparently was the better deal?
The crime may have been for viewing….but please keep in mind….it WAS child porn. And no child can consent to that. So as you sit and discuss the private viewing in your own home of pornography–just remember, some minor age human being was perhaps manipulated, trafficked, drugged, beaten, traded, extorted, and no less than victimized and betrayed by an adult. And that adult had no compunction to earn a buck off a closet pedophile living in an ivory tower with frequent visits to the basement? Sure he “viewed”. But some “rooms with a view”, have a far greater visibility than others. The judge saw that. 50 years? Heh, maybe 30. But you never know, maybe the judge was also giving the guy hope……..hope he’ll even last 50 years when the boys in that frat house here about this.
The huge difference between 4 years and 50 years bothers me. I can only see one reason for it. it certainly puts pressure on any future person dealing with the Delaware Department of Justice, to accept a plea, whether guilty or not…
For if the crimes were so horrendous, why was the plea for only 4 years? That alone is a travesty of justice,and with time served, possibly only 2 more years versus 50 now…
Putting forth this argument this verdict now issues:… “What you did was so horrendous and so horrible we were originally going to give you 4 years but since you decided to take your citizen’s right to a trial and chose not to have it mitigated by a jury, we are now going to throw you in for 50 years….
The only reason I can see for this as said above, is…. to intimidate all further litigants into pleading guilty…. This is an Inquisition Court, on its best days… On its worst, I don’t even know what to call it….
A corrupt court, perhaps?
And who was his counsel? Remind me to never hire them or their firm again…. The entire charade was ineptly handled, For a lesson no how such an event ‘should have been conducted’ I refer you to Joe Hurley.
Well, look at it this way. They offered 4 years. No doubt counsel made client fully aware of potential. Client obviously thought I want NOTHING, and wrongly assumed in a Delaware, “Bradley Branded” sex crimes court setting he was going to walk away? Seriously? Had the goods. Even if it were reduced to 18 months, was that worth going to trial for what you were offered and ended up with? How much under 4 years was he hoping for? A wolf in sheep’s clothing persona added those years. And the judge uncloaked it.
Don’t worry. We have appeals for crimes against children too. Coming soon to a Delaware court near you…….
“In those pictures, kids are being raped and violated and it is captured on film for the rest of their life, the life of the Internet. Their worst moments are on film.”
The kids he was looking could not consent to this. And Wheeler and everyone else procuring these pictures help create the market that makes these pictures profitable to their creators. There’s nothing victimless here or harmless. Nothing. A statutory two years per picture isn’t any more excessive than the exploitation that created those photos.
“A statutory two years per picture isn’t any more excessive than the exploitation that created those photos.”
So excess is OK when it matches excess? I don’t think you mean that.
Kavips is correct: The message is “take the deal.” There’s no other justification for the disparity in the sentence offered and the one handed down. The judge would have had to sign off on the four-year plea deal, so it’s not as if he was unaware of the offer.
It’s hard to comprehend this sentence given the far lesser sentences other people have received for serious crime. But, I strongly agree with Cassandra; this is not a victimless crime. We’ve got to quit minimizing the far reaching effects of child pornography.
Jail time? Understood. Life plus? Nuts. A repudiation of everything learned about crime, penology [and mental illness] over the last 50 years.
Release would involve confinement, meds, supervision. Instead, our children will pay for his room and board for the next 30 years.
Tom Sharp may be gone, but his game of cheap punitive thrills is still popular. Dozens of puny pervs are holed up in the house.
Oh, I’ll be sure to pass on to my children a willingness to pay for that room and board. It’s cheaper than the exponential hazardous fix we’d be billed for in repairing, restoring, medicating, counseling, hospitalizing, detoxing, rehabbing, and then restoring what a child(ren) never should have been denied, in this first world dignity and humanity we profess.
No, it’s not cheap. But the underbelly of society never is. Yet, we’re still responsible. No bother. Glad to cover that in-house.
And thank-you cassandra.
We’ll never get past the raw emotion of the opinions so we’ll never really have a fair conversation about this. I get it and I don’t think Wheeler’s crime was totally “victimless.” However, it’s a little more nuanced than some will admit.
Would those who think 50 years is an appropriate sentence for storing/watching child porn films support terrorist or treason charges for heroin addicts? Most evidence seems to indicate that the opium trade directly funds terror groups in Africa and South Asia. How far do we want the criminal justice system to track back these indirect connections and ask for perpetrator to be punished for what happens two or three or four or more moves removed for the actual acts of the charged crime?
In other situations “liberals” call for more psychiatric treatment for mentally ill criminals, but here some seem to want Wheeler punished not only for the crimes charged and proven (the videos), but for the horror of crimes for which he was not charged and which are several times removed. Seems like a very poor precedent…. Again because people have the best intentions of protecting kids. I totally get it. (In other words, you don’t need to explain that the kids in the videos were raped.)
The real reason he got that sentence wasn’t his crime — it was his decision to take the case to court.
The Constitution guarantees a trial, but in the modern criminal justice system, a trial is a burden. With 97 percent of all cases resolved by plea bargain, the entire system would collapse if even 10 percent of cases went to trial.
If you are OK with him getting 50 years, are you not OK with the offer of just four?
Great point, Gezz. Read a big essay on this over the weekend. Just shows the incredible power of the state to force rights from the people who are suppose to have them. Now you are severely penalised if you choose to exercise your right to trial. That is not good at all.
“opium trade directly funds terror groups in Africa and South Asia”
“perpetrator to be punished for what happens two or three or four or more moves removed for the actual acts”
Valid question. The justice system recognizes accomplices in the commission of a crime, for others less direct, there is obstruction of justice. Heroin addicts indirectly fund terror groups but they are considered more or less victims. Or even victims of crimes where a firearm is involved. Would the firearms manufacturer bear some responsibility. I wonder if there is some general concept regarding the tangled web and culpability regarding crimes?
In this particular case I wonder more about the 4 years than I do about the 50. If the bargain was 25 years would 50 be out of line? More to the point, is 50 the real issue or is it the 4?
I believe the real issue is the disparity.
No raw emotion here. Oh wait, there is. Over his raw arrogance. FOUR YEARS buddy in a substantiated case! By an adult in a position of authority and “pillar” of a child’s community. I would have been fine with 4 years for him. I suppose ivory towers have a dungeon nobody warned him about you’ll claim?
My outrage isn’t over 4 years. Mine is placed at defending the outcome of his own doing, choice, and option in what he obviously deducted…..”not me”. Would you be so vocal, about a toothless, ragged, 62 y.o. living in a Greenwood trailer, wearing a Skynyrd t-shirt, reaking of liquor and chew, having the same 25 pictures?
Yes, I would because we aren’t defending Wheeler. In fact the specific person in the story is irrelevant now.
We are discussing the idea that criminal defendants are punished with excessive sentences for exercising their trial rights. Had the defendant’s appoach to the case been different (plea bargain) while the criminal actions & charges remained the same the penalty would have been over ten times less. This is no good.
We are discussing the idea of punishing a criminal based on the indirect/removed aspects of the crime (how far does responsibility go?) and for actions neither charged nor proven. You’re talking about something else.
Oh, and this impacts poor and minority defendants worst of all. Just like all the other injustices in the criminal “justice” system. It just took a rich white scumbag as an example to make the point… Pretty typical, I’d say.
Same thing about the Atlanta teachers. Judge punished them for not taking pleas.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/04/13/atlanta-teachers-to-be-sentenced-in-test-cheating-case/
And if you connect “ambitious judge” with “black unionized teachers,” you’re not alone.