Tuesday, September 30, 2008
O'Malley's porn
Federal prosecutors have released their sentencing memo in the Pat O'Malley case, and it's a blockbuster.
The feds want the judge to send O'Malley to prison for five years. They say the porn on O'Malley's computers included bestiality: images of men and women having sex with "dogs, horses, cats, snakes, a pig, a rooster, a mule, a camel, a cow, and a fish."
The memo confirms what I reported last week in my feature on O'Malley: that child porn was found on computer discs O'Malley's ex-wife turned over to the FBI.
Apparently, prosecutors charged O'Malley with obscenity, not child porn, so that their case wouldn't be tangled up in O'Malley's messy divorce. The child porn came to the feds through O'Malley's ex-wife, her lawyer, and a private investigator, the memo confirms. But some of the adult obscenity came from a computer seized directly from his home, and federal policy is to charge a defendant with "the most readily provable offense," the memo said.
Still, the prosecutors write, "The forensic examinations seemed to authenticate the evidence of child pornography." The memo describes the porn with alarm. "The depravity and deviance of the material sought by the Defendant, especially with the focus of so many stories on sex between children and adults, children and relatives, and children and animals; all while Defendant was the custodial parent of similarly aged children, significantly enhances the seriousness of Defendant's conduct and mandates a five-term of imprisonment," the prosecutors argue.
The memo also cites O'Malley's disorderly conduct conviction for a 2003 fight in Chagrin Falls, and "numerous confrontations with the police" in the last five years "documenting further aggressive behavior." (Many of these incidents are described in my story.) "The sentence must protect the public from further crimes of the defendant," the prosecutors argue. "An arrest, conviction, and fine were inadequate to deter Defendant in the past."
We've posted the prosecutor's memo online (click here), but be forewarned that parts of it describe the sexually explicit material in some detail.
Also, we've posted the sentencing memo from O'Malley's lawyer, Ian Friedman (click here). It argues that O'Malley should receive probation and that imprisoning him would harm his children (ages 5 and 7). It cites several letters of support, some from former employees of his, describing his acts of charity. It argues that damage to a public official's reputation can be punishment enough, instead of imprisonment -- and cites President Bush's commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence as an example.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Can someone explain to me why people are still defending this man and refusing to believe there was child porn?/
How do men like this keep getting away with it? He actually got his law license back? How is that even possible?
Post a Comment