Calling constitutional violations "potentially enormous" and "reckless," two federal judges have dismissed evidence gathered by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation against people charged last year as a result of the massive Internet child pornography sting dubbed Operation Candyman.
Although the rulings directly affect only two cases now before the courts, they are seen as potentially fatal blows for the government's cases against more than 100 U.S. citizens charged thus far.
U.S. District Judge Denny Chin in New York ruled Wednesday that FBI agents "acted with reckless disregard for the truth" when they stated in a search warrant affidavit that anyone who signed up to join the Internet emailing list at the center of the investigation automatically received child pornography from other members of the group, known on Yahoo! eGroups as Candyman. The bureau later backed off the statement, saying people could opt out of the group and most did not automatically receive mailings.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry in St. Louis reached a similar conclusion. In throwing out evidence against a defendant in her jurisdiction, she said "false information was recklessly included in the search warrant application."
The rulings were not completely unexpected. Both judges cited flaws regarding constitutional privacy protections and noted that the FBI and prosecutors have acknowledged mistakes in preparation of the cases.
In his 59-page decision in the case of Bronx resident Harvey Perez, Chin wrote "a finding of probable cause would not be reasonable" based on the information the FBI had in hand at the time it submitted the affidavit. Without the FBI's false allegation in the affidavit, all that could have been taken to a judge was that Perez had subscribed to a Website that trafficked in images of child pornography, not that he had possessed any of the contraband himself.
Chin called the government's intrusion into U.S. citizens' privacy "potentially enormous."
"Thousands of individuals would be subject to search, their homes invaded and their property seized, in one fell swoop, even though their only activity consisted of entering an e-mail address into a Web site from a computer located in the confines of their own homes," he wrote.
Seven hundred copies of a draft version of the affidavit used in the Perez case were sent to FBI offices around the country for use in the Candyman investigation, Chin noted. It is not known how many other cases relied on the same affidavit, but attorneys for the two defendants so far affected are calling this week's court rulings a victory for the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
"It's significant," attorney Daniel Juengel told The Associated Press. "The government can't just come in and search your house based on something you may have inadvertently clicked on in your computer." Juengel represents St. Louis defendant Gregory Strauser, against whom evidence was dismissed.
FBI and Justice Department spokespersons told the media on Thursday that the two judicial decisions are being reviewed.
According to the FBI, to date about 60 convictions have stemmed from the Candyman investigation, many as a result of guilty pleas. About 1,800 people have been investigated.
Operation Candyman began in Houston in May 2000; U.S. Attorney General John announced the first wave of arrests with great fanfare in March 2002. Of the approximately 7,000 email addresses the FBI found linked to the Candyman Internet group, 1,400 were traced to people in the U.S.; another 2,400 were traced to residents of other countries. Among those arrested in the U.S. were Little League coaches, Catholic priests, teacher's aides, guidance counselors, school bus drivers, foster-care parents, and professionals in the medical, educational, military, and law enforcement fields.
The Website is no longer in operation.
