« Congressional aide, or enemy of the state? | Main | Douglas Kmiec: Ambassador »

July 02, 2009

Porn-meister must pay for victim's shrink

Abraham Pearson paid two teenage girls to have sex with him in the basement of his Syracuse-area home. He paid one girl with Marlboro cigarettes, and the other with cash. Then, he distributed the resulting tapes and images.

Pearson's life as he knew it effectively ended with the 2003 arrest. His wife, a physician, divorced him. She got the three kids. Now 52 years old, he's serving out a 15-year sentence in federal prison.

But on Thursday, Pearson won at least a temporary victory in an intriguing fight over restitution. In a decision worth perusing, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals -- no, Judge Sonia Sotomayor was not part of the panel -- directed a trial judge to explain more fully the rationale behind ordering Pearson to pay the two girls $974,902.

The money covers mental health care and other medical assistance. As a consultant noted:

"Each victim 'has a number  of mental health issues that will require treatment and services presently and into the future, some for the rest of her life' as a result of her sexual assault by Pearson."

But the $974,902 ordered by the trial judge was much less than the $2 million that a consultant suggested would be required. In part, the judge determined the teenage girls "had some problems before" that Pearson might be responsible for.

The 2nd Circuit had not previously ruled on whether restitution in criminal cases like this could include coverage of future medical care. On Thursday, for the first, the circuit joined others in ruling that it could, but still sought more explanation. As the appellate panel noted:

"In this case, although the record contains evidence of the victims’ need for long term  counseling and of the cost of that counseling, the district court did not explain how it estimated  the victims’ future expenses."

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c64169e2011570b03fcb970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Porn-meister must pay for victim's shrink:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

scoff

Perhaps it's common knowledge, but I would be curious to hear just a little bit more about the factual basis for these "damages." Was an evidentiary foundation laid during the criminal trial? In post conviction proceedings? Some other time?

The comments to this entry are closed.

ABOUT THIS BLOG

mike

"Suits & Sentences" is a legal affairs blog written by Michael Doyle, a reporter for McClatchy's Washington Bureau. He was a Knight Journalism Fellow at Yale Law School, where he earned a Master of Studies in Law; he also earned a Masters in Government from The Johns Hopkins University with a thesis on the Freedom of Information Act. He teaches journalism as an adjunct instructor at The George Washington University's School of Media and Public Affairs.

Send a suggestion or news tip. Read Mike's stories at news.mcclatchydc.com.

Follow Mike on Twitter: @MichaelDoyle10

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

THIS MONTH

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2 3 4
    5 6 7 8 9 10 11
    12 13 14 15 16 17 18
    19 20 21 22 23 24 25
    26 27 28 29