Grant Smith, 47, of Utah is the subject of a rare case of child pornography involving witnesses. Usually child porn cases arise from searches of personal or work computers. Smith, however, allegedly decided to review his cache of child porn on a flight from Utah to Boston. Another passenger in First Class reported him to flight attendants who called in the police. [Update: Smith is a professor at the University of Utah and has pleaded not guilty].
Professor Smith is described on the Utah website as an engineering professor specializing in soft condensed matter and ionic liquids. He holds the following degrees: Ph.D. University of Utah – Materials Science and Engineering (1990); M.E. University of Utah – Mechanical Engineering (1989); B.S. University of Utah – Chemical & Fuels Engineering (1985).
The Massachusetts State Police say that they found child pornography on the laptop after taking Smith into custody.
This may be a case where multiple states have jurisdiction as Smith allegedly reviewed porn while flying from and over a variety of states. Massachusetts has a clear claim since, if true, he brought the child porn into the state. Technically, a domestic air flight is in national air space — with a claim for federal jurisdiction as opposed to state jurisdiction. However, Utah and Massachusetts also have grounds for jurisdiction.
Often international flights raise these types of thorny issues. The general matter was addressed in 1963 at Tokyo of the Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft. THe Tokyo Convention obligated the signatories to extend their criminal law and jurisdiction to aircraft of their registry when they are outside national territory. A U.S. plane carries U.S. law, for example. However, the country of arrival often prosecutes offenders in international cases.
In Mr. Smith’s case, jurisdiction is hardly he greatest problem. Having a witness who testifies that he or she watched you watching child porn is a deadly element to any trial.
Source: Washington Post
Otteray Scribe – I was interested in the idea that military aircraft may be subject to US law, and the related idea that military bases may be also.
they found 66 images on his computer. Guess hes being framed right? pfft..
I am in the lynch the bastard camp….why wait for a trial…put it out of others misery before they too become infected….
Smith is denying the charges:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=142850810
I agree with Mespo here. This guy needs to to see a shrink, while he is in jail.
Smith is a professor of materials science and engineering. No bogus claim of research into the ease of viewing this pornography seems plausible to me. While I generally detest prosecution of crimes where the victim is not directly affected by the acts or omissions of the perpetrator, I am more than willing to make an exception here.
Child pornography is a horror and needs prosecution. To me, I also see the various toddler and teen beauty pageants as yet another example of child abuse and child porn, yet there is no public uproar. Why is this so?
Martin, passengers on a military aircraft on official business would be subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Getting caught with child porn on a military aircraft would land one in the brig in a hurry. I am less confident of that outcome should the offender be a VIP.
As for the passenger in question, Grant Smith, a plea is probably going to be in his best interest. He really does not want to put this case in front of a jury.
“A U.S. plane carries U.S. law,”
Does this apply to military aitcraft as well?
How interesting to see he was reported to the police immediately, compared to a famous coach being seen molesting a child in the shower without repercussion.