Former Lynchburg resident faces child pornography charges
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
By Chris Dumond
Published: August 12, 2008
A former Lynchburg resident facing federal child pornography charges pleaded not guilty Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Lynchburg.
In an unrelated case, a Rustburg man found with hundreds of child pornography images pleaded guilty to a similar charge and was sentenced to five years.
Matthew Tunnell, 32, the Lynchburg man, was indicted on charges of receiving child pornography and possession or attempted possession of child pornography in February.
Investigators said they identified Tunnell in 2004 after he tried to gain access to a child pornography site associated with a boy named Justin Berry.
At age 13, Berry started producing his own child pornography on a Web cam. When he turned 18, and after an investigative report by The New York Times, Berry turned over information about his operation to federal investigators.Tunnell’s lawyer had earlier asked for a psychological exam. The results reviewed Tuesday found Tunnell was sane during the alleged crimes and that he was competent for trial.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Nancy Healey also noted he is facing charges in Alabama.
Tunnell was indicted there in late March on one charge of child pornography and two charges of possession or attempted possession of child pornography.
In an earlier news conference, former local U.S. Attorney John Brownlee said the two cases could be consolidated here.
Under Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the charges could be heard together in one courthouse only if Tunnell and prosecutors here and in Alabama agree. And then, they could only be heard in one place if the charges were dropped or if he pleaded guilty. The rule says an actual trial would have to be held separately in both states.
Charges of receiving child pornography carry a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison. The possession charges carry a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
Tunnell’s trial date was set for Oct. 9, but Healey and his defense lawyer agreed that date would be rescheduled.
He is being held at the Blue Ridge Regional Jail.
Charles Hollingsworth, 39, of Rustburg pleaded guilty to receiving child pornography immediately after Tunnell’s hearing, although their cases are not related.
Postal Inspector Glenn Aldridge testified that Hollingsworth answered an online ad posted by another inspector advertising incest videos in May 2007.
A month later, Aldridge testified, postal service agents delivered a child porn video to his home. A subsequent search warrant found “several hundred images” of child pornography.
The inspector testified the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children was able to identify several of the children as being from outside Virginia.
Under a plea agreement, Hollingsworth was sentenced to the mandatory minimum five years in prison.
In addition, Judge Norman Moon ordered the man to be on probation for 15 years. During that time, he is not allowed contact with children unless it is approved by his probation officer, he must undergo random searches, he may not live or loiter within 1,000 feet of places where children congregate and can’t possess any kind of sexually explicit materials or patronize adult-oriented businesses such as strip clubs.
Healey told the judge there would also be a question for the probation officer and a sex-offender counselor as to whether Hollingsworth should have contact with his two children after he is released from prison.
Defense attorney Chris Kowalczuk said Hollingsworth took a lie-detector test that showed he never had inappropriate contact with children.
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( Cosmo Wafflefoot ) on August 14, 2008 at 8:39 am
..“aficionados”.. ooh, that was a butte Crisp. Although I would hardly call it that. But, when you post..“I can’t imagine that this man has ever had any desire to see grown women strip.“.. I would tend to agree. That’s why I asked the question. If you don’t think so and I don’t think so, we have two rather differently thinking peoples opinions on the subject that finds Old Judge Moon’s opinion somewhat baffling. I know I do. I think it points out, as a matter of fact, the utter lack of seriousness, or dare I say science, we bring into play as a society in our attempt to eliminate this horrible problem. As our friends the Chinese are fond of saying.. “No understandee…No can fixee.“ Which, of course, has always been my position.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( crispy daisy ) on August 13, 2008 at 6:48 pm
How heart-warming that you thought of me, Cosmo.
I can’t imagine that this man has ever had any desire to see grown women strip. I am not the authority on child pornography aficionados, though, that you are.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Cosmo Wafflefoot ) on August 13, 2008 at 11:42 am
Here it is another week and two more local men are arrested for child pornography. ..“The results reviewed Tuesday found Tunnell was sane during the alleged crimes”.. Kinda makes me wonder just what a guy has to do to be declared NOT sane. Judge Norman Moon ordered, among other things, that Mr. Hollingsworth…“can’t possess any kind of sexually explicit materials or patronize adult-oriented businesses such as strip clubs”. Is there some kind of connection between strip clubs and child pornography that I am not aware of? I bet my old friend (Crispy Daisy) would know.
Report Inappropriate Comment