Posted on 09/22/2011 7:34:55 AM PDT by IbJensen
The face of kiddie porn
SUTHERLIN, Ore. -- Sutherlin police have arrested an Oakland man on child porn charges, after they say he left the electronic device at the Shell station in Sutherlin.
Officers arrested Jason Daniel Goodman, 33, after what they say was a six month investigation.
An employee of the Shell station found the device back around October of last year. They kept the item at the station waiting for someone to claim it.
In February of this year, the employee asked if he could take the iPod home since nobody claimed it. Police say he went home and charged it up, and that's when he found the porn.
He immediately turned it in to police. Sutherlin police turned it into the Oregon State Police Crime Lab. Officers say the lab was able to pinpoint who had the device when it was dropped.
According to police, over 1,400 pornographic images included some with children as young as 6-years-old.
Officers obtained a search warrant for Goodman's home, where they seized a laptop, flash drives and modems, which are being sent to the crime lab for analysis.
Goodman was arrested immediately following an interview on Tuesday at the Sutherlin Police Department. He was charged with ecouraging child sex abuse and possession of child porn.
Goodman is being held in the Douglas County Jail on $200,000 bail.
“Officers say the lab was able to pinpoint who had the device when it was dropped. “ eh?
Seriously sophisticated considering how much time went by.
seriously
That is one scary looking mofo...
It will likely have an account name registered with Apple which might be linked to a credit card. Also email addresses and other account names will be stored on it. You might not be able to tell who had it when dropped, but you can at least tell who the last registered owner was who will have to work hard to explain how all that porn got on the iPod. It would be more than enough for the police to get a warrant to see if the porn on the iPod was synced to his computer.
He looks like Michael Moore.
By allowing the store employee to take the device home, the police broke the chain of custody. Regardless the facts, a lawyer will drive a truck through that mistake.
The police didn't let him do that, the store owner/manager did. The police only got involved after the employee reported the foul images to them. The device itself is likely tainted as evidence (unless they can scientifically prove the dates on file transfers, which should possible based on iOS' sync rules), but it was sufficient for probable cause on the search warrant, where the real evidence lies.
The police did not “allow” the employee to take the device home. The management allowed the employee to take the device home. Of course, you are correct that a sharp lawyer will hammer on that point but if there is a connection to the defendant’s laptop, i.e. syncing, then that argument will likely fail while appeals will ensue.
Rope is cheaper and both reusable and recyclable.
I believe it was the gas station that held the iPod waiting for the owner to return. When no one claimed it, the employee asked to take it home. Then he turned it over to the police.
In other words, the police were at the end of the chain of custody. They could not have “broken” it. They never had possession until the end.
Now will the fact that the iPod was out of this perp’s possession factor into the case? Perhaps. My guess is that his computers at home are loaded with the stuff so it will make no difference in this case.
chain of custody broken, material surpressed. period. to much case law supporting this.
GAAAAH!
You are right.
Routine. "Good job, Abbs".
I pretty sure this is Peter Griffin.
I pretty sure this is Peter Griffin.
I pretty sure this is Peter Griffin.
Triple post is NOT my fault. I swear I only double-posted!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.