Islesford man guilty in bathroom camera porn case
9/17/09 | 22 comments

Islesford man guilty in bathroom camera porn case


By Judy Harrison
BDN Staff

BANGOR, Maine — A federal judge has found an Islesford man guilty of producing child pornography by taking pictures of his former girlfriend’s teenage daughter with cameras hidden in bathroom walls.

U.S. District Judge John Woodcock issued the verdict Friday after four days of testimony in the jury-waived trial of Daniel Poulin, 43.

Woodcock found that Poulin used hidden cameras in four different residences and taped hundreds of hours of video. The video was recorded when the victim, who testified against him last week, was between the ages of 15 and 18. At least one of the cameras was placed inside a toilet.

Poulin, who had been out on $10,000 unsecured bail while awaiting trial, was taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals Service shortly after the verdict was announced, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which prosecuted the case.

He will be held without bail at Two Bridges Regional Jail in Wiscasset until he is sentenced.

A sentencing date has not been set.

Poulin faces a minimum of 15 years in prison and a maximum of 30 years. He also could be ordered to pay a fine of up to $250,000.

Poulin was not charged with distributing the images. He admitted that he placed the cameras in the bathroom and made recordings that violated individuals’ privacy. Poulin denied that he produced pornography.

The indictment against him in March 2008 was brought by a federal grand jury because the cameras he used to capture the images between 2001 and 2004 were purchased in Texas and mailed to him in Maine.

None of the images, according to court documents, depicted the girl, who is now an adult, engaged in what most adults would consider sexual conduct. Many of them showed her getting undressed and toweling off after showering.

Poulin’s attorney, David Van Dyke of Lewiston, had argued in his brief, filed before the trial began on Sept. 8, that Poulin was not guilty because it was not his intent to produce pornography.

Van Dyke said Wednesday that he would appeal the verdict to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston.

“This case raises real issues on appeal,” he said Wednesday. “Everyone agrees that this is not a typical child pornography case. This is a voyeur case.”

Van Dyke said the case raises legal questions about what is the production of pornography, whether purchasing the cameras out of state meets the interstate nexus requirement for federal charges, and whether what Poulin filmed is pornography.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Gail Malone declined to comment on the verdict. It is the practice of the prosecutor’s office not to comment on cases until they have been resolved.

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
Print this
Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

Bangordailynews.com is pleased to offer a forum for readers to react to our stories, discuss them and provide additional information. We are reluctant to delete comments, but do reserve that right for those who abuse our forum. For more on using this site, please see our terms of service.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. What does that mean specifically? Here are some guidelines (see more):

Comments
22 comments on this item
On 9/16/09 at 8:38 PM, BeavisJSmithThe3rd wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I am going to puke!That is sickening.............

Report abuse
On 9/16/09 at 8:54 PM, Beelzebubba wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Dear lonely women of Maine: Please, please, please screen your boyfriends carefully before you let them move in with you and your child(ren), especially if you have daughters...

Report abuse
On 9/16/09 at 9:39 PM, JillT1981 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

what SICK S.O.B. Hopefully the port-a-potty guy and this dude won't end up being cellies. God only knows what they would scheme up.

Report abuse
On 9/16/09 at 10:27 PM, Amazed wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Voyeurism is sexual pleasure anyway you want to look at it. It's an ABNORMAL manifestation of sexuality that involves looking, without being seen, in order to obtain sexual pleasure. This girl was underage and this man was getting his sexual pleasure without her knowledge. These damn courts can tie up these cases and we the tax payers are billed for this ridiculous rigamarole. This man is beyond a reasonable doubt, GUILTY... plain and simple!

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 6:21 AM, SoFedUp wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

How about a picture of the slim ball......

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 7:54 AM, MDIGuy wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Don't blame the courts, Amazed. Blame the defense attorneys who use every means at their disposal to extend the appeals process.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 7:56 AM, MDIGuy wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Continuing - and that is, after all, the defense attorney's job. Our system has its flaws, but it's still the best system in the world.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 8:32 AM, dgermond wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

In with the GP and when he is in court, he should be showing up with two black eyes. As he had no after thought for how this would effect that child upon discovery, he shouldn't be given any leniency in judgement. His past should be investigated...doubt he just decided to start doing this four years ago. He must have a storage compartment somewhere that needs to be searched.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 8:38 AM, BOBDUB wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

His lawyer is partially right.... he wasnt intenting to produce porn FOR DISTRiBUTION. He did make them for his own sexual pleasure, which makes them porn. This is a case where the term porn can be used to cover a broad range of sexual situations. Though no sex was taped its a girl undressing and toweling off, I would have to say he has already proven his own guilt.

MDIGuy, I would agree we have the best system in the world. I just wish the people within were better and would just plead guilty when they are saying they did it. Get rid of this I did it but I am not guilty b/s.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 8:51 AM, joyful wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Bobdub, I couldn't agree more! if he is guilty, and he IS guilty, then there is none of this I did it but am not guilty crap! What a complete insult to the victim and also to the taxpayers who pay for these bogus trials for these manipulative, sick sons of bitjez! That poor young girl, what a hideous invasion to have some pervert spy on her in the privacy of her own bathroom. This man has zero value as a human being and should be shot, immediately!

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 8:55 AM, joyful wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

and another thing...how do these defense attorneys live with themselves? They know their client is guilty beyond all doubt and yet they sell themselves out to get these perverts back on the streets! All for the love of money and the children be damned. How would this lawyer feel if it was his daughter? Would he then still agree that EVERYONE deserves a defense attorney?

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 8:55 AM, pcme2000 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I hope that the judge throws the book at this guy. He is very sick for doing something like this.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 9:18 AM, boogyman wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

8:55 AM. Like it or not, It is everyones constitutional right to have a defense attorney.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 10:09 AM, wspahn wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I could mention who else in history believed that defense counsel were a needless clutter upon the justice system, but under the strict rules of the Internet, that would automatically end the discussion.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 10:43 AM, Northwoods_Maine wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

The sick SOB ought to spend a long time in the general population cellblock. They'll teach him a few new perversions! They should also introduce him to his next best buddy - the outhouse pervert. They should get along just swell. Neither should ever 'taste' freedom again.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 12:36 PM, JonAlbrecht wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

The defense attorney is right. This will be overturned on appeal.

Report abuse
On 9/17/09 at 5:34 PM, debutante wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I raised three beautiful daughters on my own and if anyone would have videotaped them as this girl was victimized, I would have gotten a gun and the guy would be missing some body parts!!

Report abuse
On 9/18/09 at 1:14 AM, anniepooh wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

The interstate camera-purchase is a frickin' stretch, though.

Let it go and pursue the real issue.

Typical gov't overreach.

Report abuse
On 9/19/09 at 10:14 AM, mcguire6 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

automatic excution should be the punishment save taxpayers some money

Report abuse
On 9/19/09 at 10:24 AM, jspear wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Let's repeal a law banning loving homosexual couples from marrying, this creep degrades this poor young girl, where is the outrage across this state from the people so afraid that two men or women in love should marry and take down the fiber of our society when this low life creature can marry whom ever he sees fit. Justice Maine, vote no on one.

Report abuse
On 9/19/09 at 11:48 AM, sck1198 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Anniepooh is totally correct on this one!

The degree of punishment this offender receives should be based exclusively on the crime he committed, not in which state the camera was purchased.

Report abuse
On 9/23/09 at 5:44 PM, eagle69 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

this %^@*& should get the chair

Report abuse
You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in.

Powered by: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc.