Images

Superior Court of Thomas County in Thomasville, Georgia

This week, our firm obtained a second major victory for a client who was falsely charged with possessing child pornography. After we obtained a dismissal of his charges last year, the City of Thomasville last week agreed to pay our client $500,000 to settle his claims for wrongful prosecution against the City and its police department. Our client was arrested and charged with child porn offenses based on his possession of screenshots from a PornHub video that featured adults, came from a verified account, and had been viewed over 12 million times.

The case began in March 2019, when Flickr, a cloud-based storage service like DropBox, incorrectly flagged images in our client’s cloud storage account as “potential” or “suspected” child pornography. Flickr and other social media and cloud-based storage services sometimes use algorithms that are designed to try to identify sexually explicit pictures of minors. The problem here, of course, is that the pictures were of adults engaged in consensual sex.

As in most of these kinds of cases, Flickr automatically forwarded the tip to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Critically, NCMEC had never seen these images before, let alone identified them as child pornography, so they forwarded the tip to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation for further investigation. The GBI then worked with the Thomasville Police Department since our client lived in Thomasville.

What happened next was an egregious failure by law enforcement in this case. When investigators showed up at our client’s house with a search warrant to seize his computer and cell phone, they interviewed him. During that interview, our client insisted that the images were screenshots from a PornHub video featuring consenting adults, not children.

Unfortunately, the officers were not interested in the truth and had already made up their minds that our client was guilty, so rather than do any further investigation, they ignored our client’s claims and arrested him for child porn possession. If convicted, our client faced decades in prison and life as a registered sex offender.

Our client was an upstanding member of his community, and he lost almost everything overnight. His reputation was destroyed, his family estranged, and he was financially ruined. Fortunately, he hired our law firm, and the District Attorney did the right thing and dismissed the case when we sent them proof through the link to the PornHub video. We also contacted the women from the video, who confirmed they were not minors.

While our client’s criminal case was behind him, and his record was sealed, the damage was done. The newspaper which had run a story about his charges only provided an update in the old article noting that his case had been dismissed—not that there was proof he was actually innocent. Our client could not get his old job back, and the rumors in town continued. 

Still seeking justice, we promptly sent the City of Thomasville a demand letter for damages, explaining how their police department had ruined the life of an innocent man based on their deliberate disregard of the truth and their failure to adequately investigate their case. The City requested mediation, where the parties get together to negotiate a settlement. We presented a detailed case that explained why we felt we would win a jury trial. 

Like the District Attorney, the City of Thomasville did the right thing and was willing to offer our client a significant settlement. Last week, the City committed to paying our client $500,000 to settle his claims against the City and its police department. Just as importantly, the attorney representing the City’s insurer apologized to our client for what he had been through—the first time our client heard an apology for his false arrest and prosecution.

While money alone won’t restore our client’s standing in the community or make up for the pain and suffering he experienced after being falsely accused of such a serious crime, it’s a start. And while our fight to restore our client’s name and reputation continues, the fact that the City agreed to a significant settlement of his claims reflects the fact that he was truly innocent.

If you or a loved one have been falsely charged with a serious crime, please contact our firm. Not every criminal case will lead to a lawsuit, even if the charges are dismissed, but the first and most important thing you need is someone to fight hard to prove your innocence. Our attorneys are ready to fight for you and your family.

Yesterday in Lumpkin County Superior Court, our client heard the two sweetest words an innocent man can hear in a court of law—“Not Guilty.” Our client was falsely accused of child molestation and sexual battery of a child under the age of 16. The trial took almost two weeks and was tried by Tom Church and our experienced paralegal, Emily Brooks, along with co-counsel Bob Rubin.

The trial featured some of the central issues that can come up in child molestation and abuse cases. Though our client was innocent, he faced a substantial risk of being convicted based on allegations made by a four-year-old girl during several interviews by her parents and later in two “forensic interviews.” A forensic interview is a special kind of interview designed to elicit the truth from children that disclose potential abuse. They are designed to account for the fact that children have different ways of processing memories and are highly susceptible to third party influences, especially from parents.

The interviews in this case were deeply flawed and did not account for the child’s “coaching” by her mother, which had heavily influenced the child into making the false allegations. Coaching occurs when a parent or other adult knowingly or unknowingly guides or pressures a child into making false allegations of child abuse. At trial, we were able to pick apart these interviews by cross-examining the interviewer and putting our own expert witnesses on the stand to explain how the mother’s prior questioning of the child had “tainted” the child’s memory. We also showed that the mother’s own suspicion influenced her questioning of the child.

Aside from the child’s statements, many of which were inconsistent, there was absolutely zero evidence corroborating the allegations. In fact, our witnesses explained that the scenario described by the child was impossible. We were able to effectively cross-examine the State’s GBI agent and other witnesses to point out the various inconsistencies and lack of corroborating evidence in their case. We also retained an expert who searched our client’s electronic devices, which did not contain any child pornography or evidence of child molestation, and he explained to the jury that this is uncommon in child molestation cases. Last but not least, we had respected members of the community testify as “character witnesses” who testified to the jury about our client’s good character, honesty, and the fact that he had never acted inappropriately with children.

The trial was an emotional one, especially since our client was a well-known figure in the community and had been close friends with the family of the alleged victim. As in many child abuse cases, the mere fact that he was accused led many to assume he was guilty. The State’s burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant’s presumption of innocence don’t always apply in these kinds of cases, no matter what the jury is instructed by the judge. 

Yesterday, however, our client was able to walk out of the courthouse the same way he came in, as an innocent man surrounded by his loving family. Today, he can begin the process of rebuilding his life and clearing his name.

If you or a loved one is facing a child molestation or abuse investigation or charges, contact our firm. Our experienced team is ready to help you fight for justice.

Last summer, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a significant ruling in Ruan v. United States that clarified what the Government must prove to convict a doctor accused of running a “pill mill,” which refers to a practice of doctors prescribing opioids and other controlled substances to people who don’t need them, such as drug users or drug dealers.

For decades, the Government had been able to charge doctors as drug dealers based on allegations that the doctor’s prescribing practices were not for a “legitimate medical purpose” or were “outside the usual course of professional medical practice.” In effect, this allowed some doctors to be charged based on negligence.

That changed last summer, when a majority of the Supreme Court held that, when charging a doctor with distributing or prescribing controlled substances unlawfully, the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant subjectively knew or intended to prescribe controlled substances without a legitimate medical purpose or outside the usual course of ordinary professional medical practice. This is often called the “Good Faith” defense, and it means that the trial judge must instruct the jury that they can only convict the defendant if they find he essentially intended to act like a drug dealer.

This is an important ruling because the standard for convicting doctors of unlawful prescribing practices was so low that innocent doctors were getting charged and convicted. In fact, our firm has represented some of those doctors. The Supreme Court’s decision in Ruan specifically noted that the purpose of criminal laws is not to punish negligence, only intentional wrongdoing.

That said, the Government can still prove that a defendant-doctor acted intentionally and unlawfully through circumstantial evidence—for example, there will likely be sufficient evidence to convict a doctor who only takes cash, doesn’t do any physical exams, doesn’t screen patients, and who prescribes an unusually high number of controlled substances, especially if those drugs are opioids.

In sum, doctors facing allegations of operating a “pill mill” can now be judged on their intentions, not some rigid standard that treats good faith mistakes as serious crimes. In that vein, a doctor’s practice of performing adequate physical exams and screening patients for potential abuse is powerful evidence that the doctor was trying their best, even if they were prescribing an inappropriate number of medications.

Similarly, doctors who have already been convicted of unlawfully prescribing controlled substances may have a basis for vacating their convictions. That’s especially true if the doctor requested, but did not receive, a “good faith” instruction to the jury by the trial court. In many cases, the defendant may be able to show that there was enough evidence of “good faith” prescribing practices that the Government’s evidence was insufficient to prove guilt.

Our firm has a lot of experience handling “pill mill” charges and representing doctors who are falsely accused of acting as drug dealers.

If you or a loved one is facing “pill mill” charges, contact our firm. Our experienced trial lawyers are ready to fight for you and your family.