Icky.



That was a few years ago, and he entered a plea, he was not found gulity. Plus it says he wanted to withdraw his plea, so he may have done that and gone to trial. I would be interested to find out how this case turned out in the end.

If he plead guilty as opposed to being _found_ guilty he could not challenge his conviction on 1st Amendment grounds. He entered his plea in 2001 and since then the US Supreme Court has thrown out other laws that criminalize possession of porn that would appear to be children but does not contain any images of real children. I think if he had been found guilty, he could have challenged his conviction and won, since the Supremes believe [at least prior to Roberts/Alito] that for something to be child porn, it has to have images of persons under 18 at the time the images were taken.

But appeals take money, and unfortunately sometimes it costs so much to prove a point defendants take a plea instead.