PORTLAND, Maine — A Portland man has been released on personal recognizance bail after appearing last week before a federal judge on child pornography charges.
Jonathan Fenton, 24, was charged with transportation of child pornography and possession of child pornography.
The children depicted in the images may have been as young as 5, according to court documents.
He will not enter pleas to the charges until he has been indicted by a federal grand jury in Portland. Information about when federal grand juries convene is not public, but they usually convene monthly.
Fenton was arrested last Friday. After appearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge John H. Rich III, he was released on conditions that include location monitoring and limits to his access to the Internet and how he can use his cellphone.
He came to the attention of investigators last year when an FBI agent signed on to a file-sharing website using an assumed name, according to court documents. While on the site, the agent received a friend request that was traced to Fenton.
The agent downloaded photographs and videos depicting children from a folder accessed from Fenton’s username, according to court documents.
Local authorities seized his computer in July.
Fenton was arrested after a minor, whose gender is not identified in court documents, told investigators that Fenton recently had sent the minor a photo of Fenton’s private parts.
If convicted, Fenton faces a minimum of five years and up to 20 years in prison on the transportation charge and up to 10 years in prison on the possession charge. In addition to prison time, he could be ordered to pay fines of up to $250,000 on each count.
What? Released on his own recognizance?? And who is keeping children safe while he awaits trial??
who says any children were ever unsafe?
how on god’s green earth did teh minor victim have unsupervised access to the internet in the first place?
It doesn’t state the age of the minor…could have been a teenager (a minor is anyone under the age of 18), who had been taught something about the internet becuase they reported this. And, according to this minor, he was sending sexually explicit photos to this minor, logic tells me that he was trying lure or groom this minor, which means that he was putting this minor in an unsafe situation, and where’s there’s one victim like this, there are usually others.
It is easier to put a minor in front of a computer screen or a video game than actually pay attention to what the minor is doing while using this equipment. I still can’t figure out why 8-10 year olds have I-phones and Facebook pages either.
“Private Parts”? What are we, five??? We couldn’t say “a photo of Fenton’s genitalia?”
Sounded like to me they were quoting the minor. you obviously understood what they were talking about, does it really make a difference?
Only if the BDN gives a darn about the quality of it’s stories.
Oooh! Asked and answered!
Pictures on a computer ,20 years in prison.
Kill someone , in cold blood, far less than that.
Maine Criminal justice system in action.