Edward Ray Barton Case Overturned On Appeal - Existence of Illegal Files in Cache Only not ‘Possession’ - 4,961 Views, 5 Comments
|
|
Most Recent Searches that Led to This Page: Edward Ray Barton, ray barton, AN OVERTURNED VERDICT ON LONG ISLAND ON A CHILD PORNO CASE, process to appeal a jury verdict child porn cases, need help with overturning a child pornography conviction, Edward Ray Barton wiki, how often have cases been over turned after a conviction, Man enters plea in child porn case limewire, Michael Anderson CT child porn conviction, possesion of child pornography, ray barton and, raybarton, Edward Ray Barton arrested, accidental child pornography convictions, Airmans child porn conviction overturned |
Previous Article « Want a Flash Player for the Sidekick 3?
Read Next Article » “Hackers Can Now Deliver Viruses via Web Ads” Wall Street Journal Headline Exaggerates the Danger
Edward Ray Barton is a very lucky man. You may recall that we reported that Barton was convicted of possession of child pornography after investigators had found child pornography files on his hard drive.
As we reported then, “files from websites you visit can be downloaded and stored on your hard drive without you even realizing it. Often, for example, they often end up in a Temporary Internet Files folder. Now, imagine that you accidentally ended up at a pornography site which caters to people who like younger “models”. And even though you left even more quickly than you got there, those graphics files ended up in your hard drive, in that Temporary Internet Files folder. Now, it may or may not have been by accident, and we may never know, but that is exactly what happened to Edward Ray Barton.”
As a result, Barton was convicted of possession of child pornography, even though the State’s own case was clear that the files had existed only in his temporary files (i.e. his cache).
As a result, Barton was sentenced to twenty years in prison.
This month, however, a Georgia appeals court overturned Barton’s conviction. The bottom line, according to the Court, was that in order to be guilty of “possession” of child pornography, you have to ..you know.. actually know that you have it (and intend to have it).
Said the Court, “There was no way that Barton could have learned of the cache files in the normal course of using his computer. Nor did the state present any circumstantial evidence that would have allowed the jury to infer Barton’s knowledge of these files, i.e. they did not show that Barton was an experienced or sophisticated computer user who would have been aware of this automatic storage process.”
Now, this was a state appeals court, so this decision does not set any binding precedents. However, it will certainly be used to inform other, similar cases.
Was this information helpful? If so, please leave us a review!
Previous Article « Want a Flash Player for the Sidekick 3?
Read Next Article » “Hackers Can Now Deliver Viruses via Web Ads” Wall Street Journal Headline Exaggerates the Danger
Read more:
» Ever Visit a Porn Site? Even Accidentally? Your Hard Drive Could Be Used as Evidence Against You!
» Inadequate Security on Employer-Provided Computer Could Lead to Arrest for Child Porn
» The Grokster Decision Explained: P2P File Sharing is Not Illegal!
» Downloading Porn Is the Same as Making Porn, Says Court
For additional similar stories check out our archives on Internet Law
NOTE: We never, ever, ever will recommend any product or service on this site that we have not regularly used ourselves and do not wholeheartedly believe in. That said, in some cases after being very pleased with a product or service, we may enter into a relationship with the provider of that product or service such that if someone purchases that product or service based on our recommendation, we may get a small payment. Such payments go towards the upkeep of the Internet Patrol.

are there anymore cases like this? my boyfriend is going through the EXACT same thing right now. he is looking at 10 years for “possesion” of child porn. it was an accidental download from lime wire and he deleted it, or so he thought. he thought it was gone.
Comment by brandi — 9/8/2007 @ 8:34 pm
Mr. Barton Is a lier he needs to stay were he is.
Comment by Bama — 10/13/2009 @ 1:51 pm
the s. o. b. needs to rot in jail for what he has done what he really needs the chair
Comment by cornbread — 10/13/2009 @ 3:47 pm
He knew what he was doing who are we kidding? He is just getting off on a technicality.
Comment by Voicefromhispast — 10/14/2009 @ 6:14 pm
<<>>
With all due respect (and the word should be “precedent”), this is inaccurate. This case is binding on the lower courts in the circuit or district in which the case was decided.
Comment by Michael Anderson — 12/21/2009 @ 8:38 am