by sunny » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:30 pm
Just a possible answer for Tricia as to where Nancy's "alleged" child porn tapes might have gone.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.newsmakingnews.com/asimov3,29,01.htm">www.newsmakingnews.com/asimov3,29,01.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>David Asimov, of Living Oak Court, Bennett Ridge, Santa Rosa, the son of the late science fiction writer Isaac Asimov, was sentenced on March 28, 2001 to six months' home detention with electronic monitoring and three years federal probation for possessing child pornography</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>__________<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>The police raided Asimov's four-bedroom home with a search warrant and discovered the largest child porn "processing center" ever discovered in California. <br><br>"There were thousands of disks, thousands of videos," said <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Sonoma County</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Deputy District Attorney Gary Medvigy, who personally referred to Asimov's home as a "processing center" for child pornography. "Anything imaginable regarding sex between human beings and human beings, or human beings and animals, was there. Whatever your imagination can conjure up, he had it. It was like walking into a TV studio" Santa Rosa police seized scores of computer disks and approximately 4,000 videocassettes from Asimov's home, and approximately 1,000 of those videos contained child pornography.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>________________<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>In March 1998, Asimov was arrested in Sonoma County and charged with two counts of felony exploitation of a child and possession of pornography. Asimov faced a maximum state penalty of six years. The identity of the child whom Asimov alleged exploited was never revealed to the public. Parents and associates of the child never came forward. Was there a secret settlement in the style of Michael Jackson? Was any effort at all made to identify the children in the tapes? In Europe, parents who are looking for their missing children or for evidence of child abuse are allowed to view pictures of faces of children depicted in porno tapes which are seized by the police. No one in Sonoma County reported any photo arrays seized from Asimov's home being shown by the police to any parents whose children were exploited or kidnapped.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> </em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>________________<br><br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Medvigy said he had evidence to show Asimov distributed child pornography through the Internet ``on at least a few occasions,'' which would constitute a felony. He said Asimov had 14 video machines arranged for high-speed editing and copying, and possessed cases of blank tapes. <br><br>In addition to the videotapes and computer disks recovered, police reportedly found video cameras, several VCRs, and a costly table-top scanner to create computer images. "He had a whole lot of editing and mass production capabilities," Santa Rosa Police officer Zamudio said. "We were greeted by thousands of tapes, disks, periodicals, and commercial videos with covers showing child pornography. We spent two days collecting, packaging, and transporting all the items." <br><br>The Sonoma County District Attorney J. Michael Mullins covered up the case, let the public believe the feds would prosecute it more thoroughly, and then passed the cover up to U.S. Attorney Mueller</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>_____________<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>U.S. Attorney Mueller delivered a sweet plea bargain to Asimov.<br><br>After having found thousands of images of child pornography in Asimov's "processing center", District Attorney J. Michael Mullins, washed his hands of the matter very carefully. Mullins' office and the Santa Rosa police made public statements that they spent "weeks" analyzing the pornography to determine whether Asimov was involved in production or merely possessed it for personal gratification. "I couldn't tell you if it was for personal use, national use, or international use," Medvigy said. "It's just too early to say."<br><br>Asimov was indicted by a federal grand jury in November 1999 on four counts of possessing images of child pornography. Because the grand jury transcript has not been released to the public, the public cannot determine whether evidence of distribution and sale of pornography was ever presented by the U.S. Attorney. <br>Did the grand jury see all 1000 videotapes of horrendous child pornography found in Asimov's home? If so, why did they only find four instances where pornography was possessed by Asimov? Did the grand jury see any evidence that Asimov transmitted or received the pornography via the internet on his computer, or manufactured it with his cameras, 14 video machines and high tech scanner? Who were the little children depicted on the tapes? Was the grand jury given any explanation by U.S. Attorney Mueller?<br><br>In December 1999, Asimov pled not guilty in federal court, and was released on his own recognizance. Again this type of release put no pressure on Asimov. Asimov enjoyed more balmy days at his Santa Rosa home.<br><br>The two previous charges in Sonoma County, included distribution of child pornography and felony exploitation of a child. The federal indictment did not include these charges, and only included lesser charges that Asimov possessed child pornography by downloading images from the Internet into his computer and onto a floppy disk. The federal charges also included the possession of one videocassette and one foreign magazine with images of children engaged in sex acts. Each of the four federal counts carried a potential sentence of five years in prison. <br><br>In the summer of 1999, U.S. Attorney Mueller engaged in plea deal with Asimov, by dropping two counts. At this point, Asimov and his attorney were close to obtaining a sentence which would not involve state prison or forfeiture of assets.<br><br>Mueller dropped the ball on the Asimov case. Because of the sealed grand jury testimony and sealed evidence, the public will never know the details about the one thousand of images of child pornography Asimov used and created and stored. The public is expected to believe that Asimov never distributed any of this pornography. From whom did he obtain this pornography. No public evidentiary hearings were ever held. Mueller did a good job protecting child pornographers in California.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>_______________<br><br>U.S. Attorney Mueller, District Attorney J. Michael Mullins, the Santa Rosa Police, the FBI and U.S. District Court Judge Maxine Chesney all taught Mr. Asimov his lesson. They also taught a lesson to the children depicted in Asimov's 1000 video tapes, who suffered during the making of these brutal sexual exploitation tapes. These children, unlike Asimov, will not be able to put this matter behind them. Their fate, if they are still alive, makes Asimov's six-month sentence of six months of sitting at his home with an electronic monitoring bracelet on his ankle, look like a day at the beach.<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sunny@rigorousintuition>sunny</A> at: 9/10/06 6:33 pm<br></i>