Aust pedophile seeks shorter US sentence

Yahoo News New Zealand ^ | July 8, 2013 | Peter Mitchell

[informavoracious]

Australian pedophile Peter Truong, who has admitted buying an infant boy with his partner for $US5000 ($NZ6479) and allowing him to be sexually abused by a global child molester network, is hoping a US judge will give him a reduced jail sentence.

Truong, 36, formerly of Cairns, is facing a 40-year sentence while he sits in the La Tuna federal prison on the Texas-New Mexico border. Truong's Australian partner Mark Newton, 42, was jailed last week in an Indianapolis court for 40 years.

A tip off from New Zealand authorities led to the investigation. The horrifying details of how Truong and Newton bought the infant from his mother in Russia, then sexually abused the boy themselves and handed him around to pedophiles in Australia, the US, France and Germany, has been described as "some of the most heinous acts of exploitation" seen by law enforcement officials in Australia and the US.

Truong, who will be sentenced later this year, is claiming to be a child abuse victim. In objecting to a pre-sentence report compiled by a US probation officer, Truong's lawyer Angelyn Gates complains the report fails to detail Truong's history as a victim which "could justify" a shorter sentence.

"Mr Truong himself was the victim of child molestation, indoctrinated into the man-boy love group as a minor teenager, and brain washed to keep quiet and protect other perpetrators," Ms Gates wrote.

Truong, who went by the screen name "Plopper" on pedophile internet sites, also argues the pre-sentence report wrongly portrays him as being a dual Vietnamese-Australian citizen. "Mr Truong considers himself, and believes that he is, only a citizen of Australia," Ms Gates wrote.

Mr Truong also argues he did not pay $US8000 for the boy, as alleged by prosecutors, but $US5000.

[Gay State Conservative]

Not so. In Australia, he’d be facing Life with a substantial non-parole period (most likely less than 40 years, but still significant - 20 years, most likely).

I should have attached some sort of sarcasm tag on my post,sorry.I understand,as do all Freepers,that Oz isn't some Third World country that tolerates such things but,like all advanced,civilized,nations,takes a very dim view of such activities.I guess I was responding to what I saw as a "cheeky" expectation on his part that a US judge might be so easily fooled."Cheeky" or absolutely nauseating.

[naturalman1975]

It’s OK - it’s just that I do think our sentences on some things are too short, and America gets sentencing more correct on serious crimes.

And when it comes to sex crimes involving children, there does seem to be a pattern here in Australia of people avoiding prison in ‘minor’ cases - and I think even a ‘minor’ case is serious with this type of crime.

I do get your intended meaning when I reread, but even the unintended one I read initially has too much truth in it. It’s just nobody would have tried to claim this case (repeated abuse by multiple people aided and abetted by those who should have protected the child) would have been minor.