Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-mj-OOO62—lV| PT Document 12 Filed O4/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
ta AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Edward Roe . Case __
Defendant M T M
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3 l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that the following facts require the
detention of the defendant pending trial in this case.
Part I—Findings of Fact
Q (1) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3 l42(f)(l) and has been convicted ofa Q federal offense Q state
or local offense that would have been a federal offense ifa circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3 1 56(a)(4).
Q an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death.
Q an offense for which a maximum temi ofimprisonment often years or more is prescribed in
*
Q Eelony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U.S.C._ .
§ 3142(f)(1)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (1) was committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense.
Q (3) A period of not more than five years has elapsed since the Q date of conviction Q release ofthe defendant from imprisonment
for the offense described in finding (1).
Q (4) Findings Nos. (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the
safety of (an) other person(s) and the community. 1 further find that the defendant has not rebutted this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A)
(1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
for which a maximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in .
· Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). ·
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination ofconditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community.
Alt t' Fl d' B """"""*""‘ " "'“"‘*""'*"""*""-···|
Q ~ I V l erna ive in ings( ) pt E 3 ; E D {
(1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. , ; , L_ L_ E
(2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community. T" TFT" I
i S ag J 4 ani; i 1
- 4 I 1 ¤
4 i __ _ _ _ _ I
l 11.* t`!$`i`?iiZ`i fifllllii
‘ E |_1."·-Zi->1`.!,=' YET 'l·I”'_*·'i·'r`»°if{i; I 1
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
I find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant is charged with knowingly receinving, distributing and possession child pomography under 18 USC§ 2252
which is a rebuttable presumption matter. The court finds that there are no conditions or release of combination thereofthat will reasonably
assure defendant’s appearance as required and the safety ofthe community becuase:
1. During the prelimiary hearing in this matter the court found that there was substantial evidence to support the charge against defendant. In
addition to live testimony, the criminal complaint was very detail regarding defendant`s involvement in the offense. At the time of defendant’s arrest,
no family member was aware of defendant’s conduct since he used a room in the house where he lived with his minor son and wife. Defendant
used the intemet under the email address and name "painter bill S7" to obtain and distribute the child pornography.
2. The pcitures clearly displayed children most under the age of 10 involved in sexual acts with adult, some indicating that the children were in pain
while undergoing such activity. In addition there were videos as well.
3, The evidence shows that despite defendant’s alleged lack of interest in children that age (his preference is for girls 14 years and a bit older),
defendant has been trading in child pom for 8-10 years and has certain individuals on his "buddies" list.
4. Defendant faces a minimum of5 years in jail, with mostly in the 19-24 years range in like ofthe quantity of criminal history points he will
amass if convicted. Further he saves his prepubescent images in a "young" file.
5. According to the evidence, his wife was surprised and shocked regarding defendant’s behavoir.
6. Defendant provided no indication that he felt that he had a problem.
7. No third party custodian would be effective since his wife clearly was unaware. Defendant is employed as a housepainter, which although his
employer does primarily commercial properties, defendant could be not allowed employment near or around schools, playgrounds, day care
centers or other places where children frequent
8. Defendant’s past criminal history shows primarily alcohol related offenses.

Case 1:07-mj-OOO62—lV|PT Document 12 Filed O4/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
Part III—Directi0ns Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attomey General or his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate,
to the extent practicable, from personsnawaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a
reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On order ofa court of the United States or on request of an attomey for the
Government, the person in charge ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendant • e United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. _ "
AEN 23, 2007 k JA-ui.-., 4;; 1
Date Y" ignrzture of./udic
Mary Pat Thynge, Ma isrrate Judge
Name and Title of./udicial Oficer
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 ez seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 et
seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).