From CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/10/19/obscene.journal/index.html Social worker: Written fantasies could lead to action October 19, 2001 Posted: 7:34 PM EDT (2334 GMT) COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- A social worker testified Friday that a man imprisoned for writing fantasies in his journal about torturing and molesting children could act on those thoughts. Robin Aurnou testified for prosecutors who are arguing against allowing Brian Dalton to withdraw his guilty plea so he can fight the constitutionality of Ohio's child p*rnography law. Dalton, 22, pleaded guilty in July to pandering obscenity involving a minor and is serving a 10-year sentence. The case has alarmed experts in First Amendment and obscenity law, who believe Dalton is the first person in the United States successfully prosecuted for child p*rnography writings, rather than images. Aurnou diagnosed Dalton as a pedophile while he attended a treatment program after a 1998 conviction involving pornographic photographs of children. She testified that the private journals could trigger Dalton to act on his fantasies. The increasing frequency and bluntness of the writings make it more likely he could act on them, she added. Franklin County Judge Nodine Miller refused defense requests to strike Aurnou's testimony. Lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union said the testimony had nothing to do with their argument that Dalton's plea and sentence should be thrown out due to his former attorney's ineffectiveness. Assistant prosecutor Scott M. Forehand said the testimony was relevant because it relates to the law's constitutionality. "This witness showed that these materials would be made much more dangerous in his hands, and that would make them (the written words) fall under the law," he said. The judge did not say when she would rule in the case. Dalton, of Columbus, was charged after his mother discovered his journal and gave it to authorities. **** Anyone as surprised as I am that a person can be convicted for what they write? Is there something I'm missing?
It's difficult to feel sympathetic for a sick b*stard like Brian Dalton, but I am curious about the reach of this ruling. outlaw, you'd better stop writing "I could kill 6000 Christians today" in your diary.
More from the Columbus Dispatch. http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/news/news01/oct01/899721.html I'm just still a bit astounded that legislators put into law something that seems (to me) so plainly unconstitutional as this. If the guy hadn't been an idiot about his defense, the law would probably be in the middle of getting axed right now. Judge won't let offender change plea New attorneys for a child pornographer said he received bad advice at his trial Saturday, October 20, 2001 Tim Doulin Dispatch Staff Reporter Brian Dalton knew what the legal issues were at his trial, Judge Nodine Miller said. A judge did not change her mind and again told Brian Dalton he could not take back the guilty plea that landed him in prison for writing a sexual fantasy involving children. Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Nodine Miller yesterday upheld the ruling she made last month. Dalton's legal team from the American Civil Liberties Union had asked Miller to reconsider. They argued that Dalton, 22, had received bad legal advice from his attorney at the time of the July 3 plea. He was sentenced to seven years in prison for pandering obscenity involving a minor. Miller said Dalton was competently represented by his attorney, Isabella Dixon. "The decision not to contest the various constitutional issues were made by Dalton, an adult,'' Miller said. "It was Dalton's decisions that drove his defense.'' Before the trial and at the time of the plea, it was repeatedly represented to the court that Dalton wanted the case to be over, Miller said. "He did not ever want to go to trial,'' Miller said. Attorneys for Dalton said they will now take their case to the Franklin County Court of Appeals. "We believe the judge ruled contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence,'' said Benson A. Wolman, one of Dalton's attorneys. "Obviously, her honor is free to believe the lawyer she appointed was competent.'' Dalton has contended that the 14-page journal in which he writes in the first-person about abusing and torturing children is fictitious and was for his personal use. His attorneys believe he was prosecuted for his thoughts and that Dixon should have raised the issue of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech. Dixon has said that she did. Prosecutors said there was more to the case. "We are not prosecuting him for what he thought or for what he might do,'' Assistant County Prosecutor Angela Canepa said. "We prosecuted him for what he did, which is he created child p*rnography. And in the state of Ohio, that is against the law.'' Prosecutors also questioned whether the journal is fantasy. In the journal, Dalton writes of shooting two drug-addicted parents and taking their children and placing them in a cage at home. When she testified two weeks ago, Dixon said Dalton had mentioned how easy it would be to get a child from an addict parent. Dalton, however, said she misinterpreted what he said. Dalton, who was on probation at the time for a 1999 conviction for possession of child p*rnography pictures, was indicted on two counts of pandering obscenity involving a minor -- one for creating the journal and the other for possessing it. Dixon admitted when she testified at the hearing earlier this month that she believed that one of the counts pertained to a second journal found during the 1999 case in which Dalton described sexually molesting a 10-year-old relative. Dalton's attorneys said that led her to mistakenly advise Dalton on the length of the sentence he faced. Miller said she believes Dixon misspoke while on the stand concerning the second journal "given the negotiations involving this court during the course of this trial.'' Dalton admitted that when he was about 15 years old he touched a 10-year-old female cousin inappropriately while at his parents' home in another county but he was never prosecuted. Assistant County Prosecutor Scott Forehand told Miller that Dalton wants to withdraw his plea because he is upset with the length of the sentence. "He thought he was going to get a lighter sentence with some sort of (sexual abuse) treatment,'' Forehand said. Jonathan T. Tyack, one of Dalton's attorneys, asked Miller to set aside the plea and "let us duke it out.'' "What are they afraid of?'' Tyack said of the prosecution. "Why don't they want to fight it out on the merits? "Give us our do-over, your honor, so we can fight it out on the merits and . . . the merits of the constitutional challenge can be tested.''
Brian Dalton is not a nice guy - but there were some very large liberties taken with the letter of the law to convict him of this. I don't like the way this went down.
Not only has the issue of free speech been brought up, but what strikes me is that this guy did what any shrink would tell him to do: That as a form of therapy to better cope with these thoughts (as sick and disgusting as they are), he should write out these thoughts in an attempt to keep him from acting on them.
