Current Conditions
28°F - SNOW
Child porn case sent to court
Intelligencer Journal
Lancaster New Era
Aug 14, 2009 08:13 EST
Intercourse
By JANET KELLEY, Staff Writer

A young Christiana man will stand trial on charges that he had dozens of images of child pornography on his home computer.

James Walter Crellin, 22, of East Slocum Avenue, was ordered to trial on one count of disseminating child pornography after a preliminary hearing Thursday.

Prior to the hearing before District Judge Isaac Stoltzfus, Crellin waived his right to a hearing on 54 counts of sexual abuse of children, specifically possessing child pornography, and one count of possessing drug paraphernalia. Those charges will go to county court as well.

Cpl. James Strosser, a member of the state police computer crimes unit, said another member of his division found the pornography, and he traced it to a computer at Crellin's Christiana home.

Shortly before 8 a.m. on April 29, Strosser said he arrived at Crellin's home, informing him about the child pornography.

"He said he was responsible and did it using the computer in his bedroom," Strosser said.

Under questioning from defense attorney Daniel Kaye, Strosser said Crellin was using a type of program that disseminates information — legitimate or not.

Trooper Philip Strosser, who filed the charges, testified that the pornography was found on two computers in the home Crellin shares with his grandparents.

Kaye, in arguing that the dissemination charge should be dismissed, said there was no evidence Crellin intended to share the pornography.

Assistant District Attorney Joseph P. McMahon argued that Crellin had the pornography, had it on his computer and had it "available to share."

Stoltzfus agreed there was enough evidence to send the case to county court but allowed Crellin to remain free on bail.

E-mail: jkelley@lnpnews.com


Recent Posts
Showing 5 most recent comments out of 50 total TalkBack comments about this article
View full comments | Comment on this article
QUOTE
I'd like to know which marketing genius conceived of the ad that asked a little girl to get naked to make a point.


I wondered the same thing.
Dawl
QUOTE (SMM @ Aug 29 2009, 09:02 AM)
I'd like to know which marketing genius conceived of the ad that asked a little girl to get naked to make a point.


Are you perhaps seeing something that isn't there? I see a child's bare shoulders, nothing below that. Sometimes people see what they want to see.
A1
QUOTE (A1 @ Aug 29 2009, 09:20 AM)
Are you perhaps seeing something that isn't there? I see a child's bare shoulders, nothing below that. Sometimes people see what they want to see.


I think what he probably meant, or at least what I "saw" when I looked at photo was a PSA for child porn, a small girl, bare shouldered and posed with arms crossed. It certainly implies nakedness if nothing else.

I get the point they're trying to make with the ad, but I do think that it could have been done in a better way.
Dawl
QUOTE (Dawl @ Aug 29 2009, 10:07 AM)
I think what he probably meant, or at least what I "saw" when I looked at photo was a PSA for child porn, a small girl, bare shouldered and posed with arms crossed. It certainly implies nakedness if nothing else.

I get the point they're trying to make with the ad, but I do think that it could have been done in a better way.


Regardless of one's personal bias against the ad, it's widely used. I first saw it when it accompanied information about a PA Superior Court case regarding internet child porn. How sad that it offends the sensibilities by putting a face to the real victims - the children who are raped and abused so that the pervs can get their jollies.
A1
QUOTE (A1 @ Aug 29 2009, 12:01 PM)
Regardless of one's personal bias against the ad, it's widely used. I first saw it when it accompanied information about a PA Superior Court case regarding internet child porn. How sad that it offends the sensibilities by putting a face to the real victims - the children who are raped and abused so that the pervs can get their jollies.


Why couldn't the marketing department have "put a face to the victims" by creating an advertisement showing a little girl's face?

I'm glad if it is a successful ad campaign. The use of a child in a photo suggesting nudity just seems thoughtless to me.
SMM
Top Ads