Sentenced to Over 2300 Years in Prison for Child Pornography

rockin'robin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
24,433
Reaction score
544
Patricia Ayers is facing 1,590 years in prison and her husband, Matthew Ayers, is facing 750 years in prison. The couple was convicted of over 100 counts of producing child pornography.

"I have been on the bench since 1998, and this is the worst case I have personally dealt with, including murders,” U.S. District Judge L. Scott Coogler told the defendants. "You robbed this child of her childhood and her soul, and a maximum sentence is the only sentence appropriate."

The couple, who lived in Florence, Alabama, pleaded guilty in June to charges related to producing pornographic images of a child in their custody. The pornography was produced and distributed between the summer of 2010 and January 2013.

Patricia pleaded guilty to 53 counts of producing child pornography and Matthew pleaded guilty to 25 counts.



Both Ayers acknowledged in their plea agreements that they they photographed the child engaged in lewd and lascivious poses, and that they both engaged in sexual acts with the child that the other person photographed.

Patricia also admitted that she sent the child pornography to a man in Texas and made arrangements for him to have sex with the child.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the amount of child exploitation has been dramatically increasing since the 1990’s. Since its launch in 1998, CyberTipline has received more than 2.5 million reports of sexually exploited children. Child pornography is a massive industry that largely exists online, bringing in $3 billion annually. Though the victim’s age is unknown, 83% of child pornography cases, the child was between the ages of 6 and 12.

The couple will likely be given even more jail time at their next trial on December 8. They face state charges which include producing child pornography, rape and sexual abuse.


http://www.opposingviews.com/i/soci...nced-over-2300-years-prison-child-pornography
 
Hmm... considering stand on death penalty for this couple.... alas not an option though...
 
is it really necessary to sentence somebody beyond their natural life limit? Why are they were far willing to waste time, money, and making attorney happy, and seek more sentencing for these scumbag? Isn't it cheaper to make it simple as life sentence with absolutely zero chance of parole as guarantee that one won't ever set their foot in freedom ever again then close case right there EVEN though theres more pending charges, and immediately send to prison and never come out ever again... save taxpayers money on silly time wasting court expenses, and make use of these times for other crimes that needs to be address... We got lengthy waiting line for trial.

Also, cut down excessive handing down sentence by using absolute maximum sentence and free up money for cash strapped education programs. In other word, if absolute maximum sentence with no possible parole is being used to cancel all of future trials and additional sentence which would serve no purpose but filling up trash can with cash and throw away.
 
I'm glad that they got a life sentence but sentencing to someone to jail in those amount of years, is just stupid, absurd and beyond me.

No one can live that long, let alone, the average life expectancy of every human based on age statistics, is around 90 years old anyway! (Give or take a decade or so but you know!)

Pfft. The law is just sooo stupid sometimes.

And they going back for another appearance? Ah! Just more money of ours to spend.

Why can't they sentence people and be over with it? Such a waste of time to prolong what already is going to be a long sentence. They take months or years.

Eh,. I can't be bothered..
 
Stupid question: If guy can live 2,300 years. Any chance, he will be free? :lol:
 
Stupid question: If guy can live 2,300 years. Any chance, he will be free? :lol:

He will, eventually, if he lives enough lives to total 2,300 years before he reaches moksha or liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth.

Otherwise, Western civilization must have had this sentencing limit in order to account for the possibility of people being able to live many times the normal life span sometime in the future.
 
Individual charges require individual convictions and individual sentences. They can't be lumped together. The defendant might not be found guilty of all them so that's why it's done that way.
 
They will never get out... whether it's 200, 300, 1000 years. It's same as life sentence for those convicts they will never set foot free ever again. When a defendant has multiple counts, it carries a sentence on each count i.e: 25 years each count... so 5 counts means 125 years.
 
Individual charges require individual convictions and individual sentences. They can't be lumped together. The defendant might not be found guilty of all them so that's why it's done that way.

understood, point is what benefit it has to offer? Once one gets sentence thats beyond their natural limitation, how would additional conviction or not found guilty going to help? Damage is done, so I really don't see the benefit of wasting more money, those could have better used in education where they would focus on youth development to become successful adult citizens.
 
understood, point is what benefit it has to offer? Once one gets sentence thats beyond their natural limitation, how would additional conviction or not found guilty going to help? Damage is done, so I really don't see the benefit of wasting more money, those could have better used in education where they would focus on youth development to become successful adult citizens.
And if that single conviction gets overturned, the prisoner gets set free. That's a problem.
 
They will never get out... whether it's 200, 300, 1000 years. It's same as life sentence for those convicts they will never set foot free ever again. When a defendant has multiple counts, it carries a sentence on each count i.e: 25 years each count... so 5 counts means 125 years.

Simple, they could say "life sentence". :hmm: Isn't that hard?
 
No, but it's the legal system, if a defendant has committed numerous crimes, they make every crime count and carries sentence each.

Simple, they could say "life sentence". :hmm: Isn't that hard?
 
And if that single conviction gets overturned, the prisoner gets set free. That's a problem.

You got valid point, however I was speaking for extreme sentencing where there should be cut off point to where one could end up suffered wrongful charge and could have made up for the potential other crime that he/she would have guilty of These procedure would take not just by years BUT decades of appeals with very small possiblity of being overturned.

Like if one was sentenced at least 5 life sentences would be eligible for absolute maximum which would immediately take away the freedom of being outside of prison (court dates), You know, those with extreme sentence due to extreme violent crimes holds extremely small chance of being overturned.

I see absolute maximum provision reserved for violent and gravely serious crimes against multiple victims. I also see this as equilavent to execution but without death involved.
 
Back
Top