Outrage: Only 10 Months For Kiddie Porn Producer

Posted on November 25, 2006

Update: The League of Women Voters that he was involved with and may be one reason for such a light sentence is also linked with the ACLU.

This is absolutely outrageous! It shouldn’t take long for O’Reilly to pick up on this news. Unbelievable!!

A Democrat community leader who would “offer a homily during worship services” and facilitated his congregation’s “opening our doors to all people regardless of sexual orientation” has been given a slap on the hand after pleading guilty to extensive child pornography offenses involving children as young as six.

First of all, I don’t care what political party this sicko belongs to. It is only significant in that his political ties may have played a part in how light of a sentence he got. His actions and the lack of justice from the judge involved is what outrages me.

Authorities say Andrew Douglas Reed, 53, who reported for an abbreviated jail term just a few weeks ago, had pleaded guilty to a page-long list of counts of 2nd-degree sexual exploitation of a minor.

Court records in the Asheville, N.C., case said he admitted that he would “record, develop and duplicate material containing a visual representation of a minor engaging in sexual activity.” That activity is defined by state law as including masturbation, intercourse and “touching – in apparent sexual stimulation or sexual abuse – of the genitals, pubic area or buttocks.”

However, instead of the 967 months in jail – nearly 81 years – for which he was liable, Judge Robert Lewis, another Democrat, gave him, in a plea bargain with the office of District Attorney Ron Moore, who was elected as a Democrat, a 10-12 month sentence.

And even that seemed regrettable, according to a number of letters of recommendation offered by other Democrat leaders of the community to the court on his behalf.

The article goes on to list how several political leaders sent in letters praising his community services. I don’t know what the judge was thinking in giving this guy a slap on the wrist for such a horrible crime! It seems that many liberal judges seem to think these perverts can be rehabilitated. I’m not sure if this particular judge buys that philosphy, but I have yet to see any significant evidence that would make me comfortable in putting such a predator back on the streets.

His offenses involved a long list of counts that he used the Internet to collect and share graphic child pornography – mostly involving children as young as six who were filmed “engaged in sex acts with adults or other children,” according to a local news report.

State investigators said Reed used an e-mail account to post 169 images and three movies containing child pornography on file-sharing networks over the last several years.

Ken Bagwell, whose “Heads Up America” radio program has delved into the appropriateness of that sentence, said there’s a difference between taking such material from the Internet “and getting your jollies or whatever these sickos do” and actually producing the material.

“You acquire the kid, you abuse the kid on camera, and get a 10-month sentence?” he asked. “I just cannot believe it.”

As much as the ACLU does in defending child predators that have been released, groups like NAMBLA, and child porn possession; even they make the distinction between possession and production. This is the kind of creep the ACLU wouldn’t even defend, and that is saying a lot. I don’t even know what else to say about this. It just plain makes my blood boil. Justice was definitely trampled on in this case.

Can’t we get some kind of mandatory minimum sentences put in place for those creeps that molest our children? I’d say death be the maximum sentence and life in prison be minimum. Something needs to happen, these injustices are happening entirely too often.

» Filed Under ACLU, Activist Judges, Child Exploitation, Illegal Activities, News

Trackback URL

Comments

2 Responses to “Outrage: Only 10 Months For Kiddie Porn Producer”

kerwin_brown on November 25th, 2006 10:58 pm

Thank you for letting us know about this corruption in the legal system.
Jeff Molby on November 26th, 2006 5:02 pm

What was the evidence against him? This was a plea bargain, so the judge didn’t really have much say in it. The question is: why did the prosecution offer such a generous plea?

My guess is that the prosecution didn’t have a slam-dunk case. They were probably willing to allow the reduced sentence in order to make sure he gets registered as a sex offender.

I’m defending the decision; I don’t have enough info to do that. I’m just saying it might not be a partisan conspiracy.