Downloader of child porn given life sentence

By Lee Ha-na

For the last three days, America has witnessed a media frenzy surrounding Florida resident Daniel Vilca, 26, being sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole after Collier County police discovered 454 photos and videos of child pornography on his computer.

But why is Vilca facing the same fate as first-degree murderers?

He has no criminal record and has the public questioning whether such punishment is justified for someone viewing pictures of such acts rather than committing them.

Vilca even rejected a 25-year plea bargain on Oct. 6.

Lee Hollander, Vilca’s lawyer, denounced the sentence since his client had only viewed the photos and never did anything beyond that. Hollander cited the case of Robert Hamberg, a former high school band director who is currently serving a 30-year sentence for having sex with one of his students.

Criminal experts, according to The New York Times, have even said Vilca would have probably received a lighter sentence had he actually molested a child.

Steve Maresca, an assistant state attorney, disagreed. He stated that possession of child pornography is a serious crime and that viewing such images keeps the market alive for children to be sexually abused.

Judge Fred Hardt did not have much choice but to place Vilca behind bars for life. A minimum of 125 years in prison is the minimum amount of time to serve for such a crime, according to state law.

In order to impose a lighter sentence, Hardt reviewed Vilca’s mental health history and constitutionality of the actual punishment. As a result, he did not come up with a legitimate reason to shorten it.

Hollander declared the severity of the sentencing as a violation of the Constitution, citing it as “cruel and unusual punishment.”

This case has triggered growing concern over sentencing standards in American criminal law.