According to this fine website, a bill is pending that would allow more offenses from the same transaction to be stacked. Included is possession of child pornography.

As you may imagine, the criminal defense is against it.

From the article, "suspects in child pornography cases often possess hundreds of images, each a third-degree felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison, he said. Prosecuting for even a fraction of the images could result in a ridiculous sentence," Hampton said.

My vocabulary is somewhat limited past the four letter words, but I thought ridiculous meant something different. I think the word he is looking for is "appropriate".

Phil Hall

Perhaps Mr. Hampton has exaggerated his claim for effect. The reality is that nothing currently prevents a prosecutor from filing a separate case for each pornographic image of a child and seeking a separate punishment. And, in federal court, every judge may exercise his discretion in imposing consecutive punishments.

Yet, I have not heard of a single example of a prosecutor abusing that procedure. Indeed, given that the defendant has committed separate crimes and should, at least in theory, be punished for each crime, I'm not sure how you even abuse the process.

What happens now, though, is ridiculous. A defendant who has five or six images is treated the same as a defendant who has ten thousand images. This simple, reasonable bill simply makes it more likely that the punishment will fit the crime.

The procedure has already existed in state court since 1997 for intoxication manslaughter and sex offenses involving a child victim. Again, no reports of any problems.

The bill also includes the ability of a defendant to request severance of the crimes into separate trials if joinder would be unfairly prejudicial. What more could a man want?

I encourage you to contact your State Rep. and tell him/her to support the bill. The bill protects children and the victims of drunk drivers.