SCOTUS denies cert in case on CP victim restitution

The Supreme Court yesterday denied certiorari in Amy, the Victim in the Misty Child Pornography Series v. Monzel, 181 L. Ed. 2d 508 (2011) (an appeal from United States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528 (2011)) which could have resolved a circuit split regarding child pornography victim restitution.

In April, the DC Circuit denied that "Amy", a victim of child pornography that has been spread around the globe, was entitled to no more than nominal damages under Section 2259 and the CVRA.

The issue is whether defendants must pay only nominal damages or full restitution when they did not actually know the victim, but simply possessed images of them (and therefore were not the proximate cause of the victim's damages). The Second, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and DC Circuits have each held that the defendant must be the proximate cause of the damages in order to be forced to pay restitution. The Fifth Circuit, however, has held otherwise.

Though most side with the circuit court plurality, several lower courts have awarded restitution to Amy in amounts up to $3,680,153 (U.S. v. Staples, 2009 WL 2827204 (S.D. Fla. 2009)).

In her impact statement, Amy wrote, "I am being exploited and used every day and every night somewhere in the world by someone. How can I ever get over this when the crime that is happening to me will never end? How can I get over this when the shameful abuse I suffered is out there forever and being enjoyed by sick people?” More than 700 claims of restitution have been filed on Amy's behalf, each seeking more than $3 million.

See other posts about restitution here.