Have You Been Charged with Possession of Child Pornography?
Facing a charge of possession of child pornography in Georgia is a deeply serious legal matter with far-reaching consequences. Under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8), possession of child pornography is a felony offense, and a conviction can result in long-term prison sentences, hefty fines, and mandatory sex offender registration.
These penalties reflect the severity of the crime, as child pornography is not only a violation of the law but also a crime against the well-being of minors.
However, like any criminal charge, there are defenses available to individuals accused of possessing child pornography.
As experienced criminal defense attorneys, we can help you navigate these defenses and work toward a more favorable outcome. Below, we’ll explore common and potential legal defenses to a charge of possession of child pornography under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8).
Understanding the Crime of Possession of Child Pornography in Georgia
Before diving into the defenses, it’s important to first understand what the crime entails. O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8) criminalizes the knowing possession of child pornography. A person can be charged if they are found in possession of materials that depict a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.
The statute defines "child pornography" as any visual depiction, including photographs, videos, or digital images, where a minor (under 18) is depicted in a sexually explicit manner. This can include both digital and physical forms of media. Additionally, the law requires the prosecution to prove that the accused knew the nature of the material they were in possession of.
If you are charged under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8), the prosecution must demonstrate that the following elements are present:
- Possession: The defendant had control or access to the illegal materials.
- Knowledge: The defendant knew the materials depicted minors in sexually explicit conduct.
- Sexually explicit material: The materials involved meet the legal definition of child pornography.
Common Defenses to a Charge of Possession of Child Pornography
Now that we understand the nature of the charge, let's explore some common defenses to a charge of possession of child pornography under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8).
1. Lack of Knowledge of the Material’s Content
One of the primary defenses in cases involving possession of child pornography is a lack of knowledge about the content of the material. Under Georgia law, for a person to be convicted of possession of child pornography, the prosecution must prove that the individual knew the nature of the material they were in possession of. This is often referred to as "knowing possession."
If the accused was unaware that the material in their possession depicted sexually explicit content involving minors, they may not meet the legal threshold for a conviction. For instance, if an individual unknowingly downloaded a file that contained child pornography due to a mix-up or virus, they could argue that they did not have the necessary knowledge to commit the offense.
Examples of situations that might support this defense include:
- A defendant who downloaded a file or video under the impression that it was legitimate but later discovered it contained illicit content.
- A person who had access to a shared computer or device and was unaware that someone else downloaded child pornography onto that device.
This defense can be difficult to prove but is essential in cases where there is any question about the defendant’s awareness of the content.
2. Possession Was Unintentional or Involuntary
Another possible defense to the charge of possessing child pornography is that the possession was unintentional or involuntary. For example, the defendant may have accidentally obtained or downloaded the material, or someone else may have planted it on their device without their knowledge.
In some cases, a defense lawyer may argue that the possession of child pornography was the result of a misunderstanding or mistake. For instance, if a person received a file from a friend or acquaintance under false pretenses, and the file contained illicit material, the defendant might argue they had no intent to possess or distribute child pornography.
Additionally, a claim of “involuntary possession” may be applicable if the defendant was coerced or manipulated into obtaining or keeping the material. This defense can often be used when the individual was under duress or faced threats, although it is relatively rare in cases of child pornography.
3. The Defendant Was the Victim of a Hacking or Data Breach
In today’s digital world, it’s not uncommon for personal devices to be hacked, and sensitive files may be planted onto a computer or phone without the owner’s knowledge. A defense strategy that might be used is that the defendant was the victim of a hacking or data breach.
If an individual’s computer, smartphone, or other digital devices were compromised by an outside party, and child pornography was downloaded or stored without their knowledge or consent, the defendant could argue that they were the victim of a cyber-crime. Expert testimony from computer forensics professionals might be necessary to show that files were inserted onto the device without the owner’s knowledge or intention.
While this defense requires technical evidence, it can be effective in cases where the defendant’s device was compromised or infiltrated.
4. Violation of Constitutional Rights (Illegal Search and Seizure)
Another defense available to individuals charged with possession of child pornography is that their constitutional rights were violated during the investigation. Specifically, if law enforcement officers conducted an illegal search or seizure, any evidence obtained as a result of that violation may be inadmissible in court.
Under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, individuals are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. If law enforcement officials did not have a valid warrant or probable cause to search the defendant’s home or digital devices, the defense may argue that the search was unlawful. As a result, any evidence obtained from the unlawful search, including child pornography, would not be admissible in court.
An example of this might be a situation where police searched a person’s home without a warrant or probable cause and found illegal materials. If the search was unconstitutional, the evidence should be excluded from the case, and the charges could be dismissed.
5. Entrapment
Entrapment occurs when law enforcement officers coerce or manipulate an individual into committing a crime they would not have otherwise committed. If a person was entrapped into possessing child pornography by an undercover officer or an informant, this could be a viable defense.
For instance, if law enforcement officers or agents created the opportunity for an individual to download child pornography by posing as someone offering it online, the defense could argue that the defendant would not have committed the crime without the entrapment.
Entrapment is often a difficult defense to prove because it requires showing that the defendant was not predisposed to commit the offense. It’s a defense typically used when there is evidence of manipulation or coercion by law enforcement.
6. The Material Did Not Meet the Legal Definition of Child Pornography
Finally, a defendant can argue that the materials in question do not meet the legal definition of child pornography under Georgia law. The law specifies that child pornography involves materials that depict a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. If the prosecution cannot prove that the material depicts a minor in a sexual act, the defendant may be able to argue that the materials do not meet the legal definition.
For example, some legal arguments might involve:
- The age of the individuals in the images or videos.
- Whether the materials depict explicit sexual conduct.
- Whether the material in question involves realistic or computer-generated images that do not depict actual minors.
In these cases, the defense may argue that the material in question does not constitute child pornography under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8) and should not lead to a conviction.
Consulting a Skilled Criminal Defense Attorney
If you or someone you know has been charged with possession of child pornography under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8), it is critical to seek the counsel of a skilled criminal defense attorney. These charges carry severe consequences, and a conviction can have lifelong effects on your personal and professional life.
A defense attorney can help investigate the circumstances of the case, explore potential defenses, and work to build a strong legal strategy. Depending on the facts, they may be able to challenge the evidence, argue that your rights were violated, or work toward a reduced charge or alternative sentencing options.
Georgia Possession of Child Pornography Lawyer Near Me
Possessing child pornography is a serious crime in Georgia, and being charged under O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100(b)(8) can lead to severe penalties. However, there are numerous legal defenses available to individuals facing such charges.
From challenging the knowledge element to arguing that the material does not meet the legal definition, several strategies can be employed to defend against these charges. With the help of a dedicated criminal defense attorney, individuals can work toward minimizing the impact of such charges and potentially avoid a conviction.
If you’ve been charged with possession of child pornography in Georgia, contact The Sherman Law Group, criminal defense lawyers with experience in handling such cases. We will be able to assess the specifics of your case and guide you through your legal options.