NORFOLK
A convicted sex offender was sentenced to 15 years in federal prison after he admitted downloading child pornography.
Timothy David Webb, 32, of Woodbridge, was arrested in May after he debarked Royal Caribbean's Grandeur of the Seas at the Norfolk cruise ship terminal. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents pulled him from the line and searched his laptop, which contained 69 child pornography videos.
U.S. District Judge Robert G. Doumar on Monday sentenced Webb to the mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years imprisonment. The judge also ordered Webb to undergo sex offender and substance abuse treatment and placed him on lifetime probation.
The case drew complaints from civil libertarians because federal agents searched Webb's laptop without a warrant, under a new policy that allows agents to search any electronic device carried by international travelers.
Webb did not challenge the search. Instead, he waived his right to be heard by a grand jury and pleaded guilty to one count of receiving child pornography. He admitted in court that he downloaded the images.
The American Civil Liberties Union, however, is challenging the Department of Homeland Security policy on a national level. A bill before Congress that would require Customs agents to have "reasonable suspicion" before searching electronic devices of U.S. citizens returning from abroad appears to have stalled in committee.
As a convicted sex offender, Webb faced a mandatory minimum prison term of 15 years. Without the conviction, the mandatory minimum is five years. Webb has a 2000 conviction in Northern Virginia for sodomy.
Tim McGlone, (757) 446-2343, tim.mcglone@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
"As a convicted sex
"As a convicted sex offender"
That is more than justification to search the mans equipment. I also agree with fighting for the constitution...but there was a reasonable search on this man due to his conviction.
Think about it. Why would ANYONE take a laptop on a cruise where there is no internet service. Going to another country, even on a cruise, many pedeophiles are now taking these trips because it is easier to have access to foreign children.
READ about the "special" trips that some travel agents provide for these sick individuals. So this man definitely should be locked up and yes , I think the ACLU should back away from this one...it is a no win situation for all...if the ACLU wins, then how does that reflect on the law for all sex offenders have to register?? No, I believe this was a good call on the law and a bad one on the ACLU.
Actually ...
... Internet service is available on most cruise ships. I had friends who took a round-the-world cruise last year, were gone 4 months, and I got a couple of e-mails a week from them, even while out in the open ocean. Photos, brief movie clips, the whole 9 yards.
I would be the last person on earth to stick up for a pedophile. But I'd be first in line to defend *anyone's* constitutional rights. Ya convict the guy according to the law, and you sentence him according to the law, and you bury him in a federal dungeon for 20-plus years according to the law.
But I do not like the idea that the federal government claims the right to search my laptop, my iPod and my Kindle just because I've been outside the country. Uh-uh. Not on my watch.
Respectfully, etc. ...
Just a thought---- Hey ACLU
If we can convince the Government to give this crud the needle---will you drop the lawsuit? Seems fair to me and look at the financial savings involved here.
A Great Choice.....
A very nice choice by the A.C.L.U. for their poster boy!!! Let's pick a pedophile and CONVICTED molester!!!! Yeah boy...that's certainly the smart thing to do!!!!!
I would appreciate
I would appreciate PilotOnline updates on the reference bill and the position of law makers on such bill. I want to be informed when I vote.
Anyone who participates in the degradation of children or any human being deserves the fullest punishment the law allows. Laws should be changed to be more strict, not less. Anyone who proposes to defend or protect any persons ability or opportunity to participate in such acts needs to be identified publicly.
When I reported I saw child porn videos on a laptop, a high ranking official at a local Army post informed me I 'needed to understand that many people here do not consider possession to be a crime', as though local opinions supersede Federal laws. My personal experience has been that local officials are more interested in protecting those who practice this perversion and sickness than the victims of such crimes.
my guess
Dear libertarians:
Are you sure you want a convicted sex offender to be your poster child for your crusade? This case does not garner much sympathy, which is what your cause needs. Just some food for thought.
Down with government and all that,
mahbucket
"libertarians"?
While I'm certainly not sympathetic to most of what I've come to know of the ACLU (they seem more about defending degenerates & anyone with an anti-American bent) from what I know of Libertarians (and I'm no expert there either but trying to learn more) there seems far more commonality between the ACLU & fringe Left Democrats than Libertarians.
Libertarians on these posts: looks like someone's thrown down the gauntlet. Defend yourselves.
Actually ...
... the ACLU defends anybody whose right are being trampled on. They defended Rush Limbaugh (you could look it up) when the authorities were trying to seize his medical records during his drug investigtion.
They defended Sen. Larry Craig after his arrest for soliciting in a Minneapolis men's room. They're defending a guy in New Orleans who had his gun confiscated even tho he had a carry permit. They've defended KKK members who were denied parade permits. They don't much care about which end of the "fringe" someone is clinging to ... they care about constitutional rights. Sometimes we might not like whom they defend, but for one, I'm d*mned glad they're out there.
I applaud your willingness to learn, dennis, which is not widely shared on this board. Good on ya. Knee-jerk beliefs by our colleagues on the right only make the thinking conservatives look foolish.
one exception
To bad they weren't representing the interests of the REAL victim in this case.