In the last year the New York Times and other major media covered the legal and philosophical issues arising out of the now adult survivor victim's efforts to seek redress, specifically to obtain "restitution" in criminal prosecution where her images crop up on the computer hard drives of child porn defendants.
Scott's post this morning (his second on this case) deals with some of the aspects of the underlying criminal conduct as it relates to the restitution component; and, especially the difficulty federal courts face in arriving at statutory restitution remedies. Restitution is complicated, enough, now try to figure out how it suffices as a remedy for an adult survivor of child pornography vis-a-vis the present day perpetrator via the mouse click.
Lots to think about, huh?
Posts
