ArsTechnica
Peter Bright Got 144 Months Now Appeal
Denied Like His Not A Pedophile Memo
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Exclusive, Patreon
BBC
- Decrypt
- LightRead - Honduras
-
Source
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
March 17 – Former ArsTechnica
writer Peter Bright's re-trial
for attempted enticement to
sex of a minor resulted late
March 16 in a guilty verdict
from the jury. Photo here.
The
verdict came as other trials
in the SDNY courthouse had
been stayed,
and another criminal trial
with one juror deliberating remotely
from his apartment, in
Coronavirus COVID-19
self-quarantine.
Bright's conviction was upheld
by Judge Castel on September
16, 2020. Before sentencing,
Federal Defenders submitted a
memo - but the exhibit
consisting of the argument
that Bright is NOT a pedophile
is withheld in full. Photo here.
Inner City Press on November 2
filed an application to
unseal, photo here,
which Judge Castel on November
4 directed the parties to
respond to be November 6 at
noon.
On November 4,
2020 Judge Castel sentenced
Bright to 144 months. Inner
City Press live tweeted it, here
and below.
On March 17, 2022
into the docket, notice of
denial of Bright's appeal:
"MANDATE of USCA (Certified
Copy) as to Peter Bright re:
[102] Notice of Appeal. USCA
Case Number 20-3792. UPON DUE
CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED
that the district court's
judgment is AFFIRMED..
Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
USCA for the Second Circuit.
Issued As Mandate:
03/17/2022."
From November 4,
2020: Peter Bright is
speaking: "I did not identify
myself as a pedophile because
I am not one. I did not lie to
my therapist." [But Doctor
Kaplan's report is withheld in
full, at least for now, as are
Bright's lawyer's arguments
based on it.]
Bright's lawyer: My client
cannot pay the required fine.
You'd have to make a finding
of indigency. Sure he has two
pensions in the UK, and a
401(k) with Conde Nast
Bright's lawyer:
But he can't access those
funds until he is 55. So he is
indigent.
AUSA: I have
confidence Bright's doctors
evaluated him in good faith.
But the jury found that the
defendant was not truthful
when he said he did not intend
to have sex with the children
in this case. His testimony
was inconsistent with the
finding of the jury.
Judge Castel: As
to Mr. Bright, I decline to
impose the obstruction of
justice enhancement. But the
trial testimony of Mr. Bright
was utterly inconsistent with
the finding of the jury. He
thought she was a real person
with real children being
offered up for sex
Judge Castel: Or
really, the jury found that he
wanted to take it as far as he
could, to engage in sex with
these two young children. This
is of the utmost seriousness.
Mr. Bright, it is the judgment
of the court that you are to
be imprisoned for 144 months.
Judge Castel: Mr.
Bright, after the 144 months,
you are to be under supervised
release for seven years. You
must cooperate in the
collection of DNA and register
as a sex offender. Your
computer can be searched
anytime there is reasonable
suspicion...
Judge
Castel: Mr. Bright, you must
allow installation of software
and applications on your
devises to monitor you. To
ensure compliance, there will
be unannounced examinations.
Judge
Castel: Mr. Bright, you must
not loiter in school yards or
messaging boards or platforms
that allow for real time
interaction with other
uses.
Judge Castel: You
will inform Probation before
accessing any websites dealing
with, among others, teens and
kids, xxx, gambling, hacking,
etc. AUSA: We are not
seeking monetary forfeiture,
just the two phones.
Judge Castel: You
will soon find in the ECF
Docket a request of November 2
by Inner City Press, Mr. Lee,
asking for unsealing. You are
to address it [cites decision
by Judge Koeltl - we'll have
more on this.]
On June
15, with still no trial
resumed, the US Attorney's
Office filed its opposition to
Bright's Rule 29 motion for
acquittal. Full filing on
Patreon here;
it says among other things
that "Bright called Dr. James
Cantor, a clinical
psychologist, and also
testified in his own defense.
Dr. Cantor testified that “age
play” is a type of sexual kink
in which “participants are
pretending that they’re a
different age than what they
are.” (Tr. 310). Building on
Dr. Cantor’s testimony, Bright
testified that when he first
met the mother on KinkD, he
believed she was an “age
player” and that her children
were “littles,” i.e., adults
pretending to be children."
We'll have more on this.
Three days
after the verdict with Inner
City Press which alone covered
the trials being asked many
questions, including about the
ArsTechnica editor who
testified, we offered this:
Conde Nast
/ ArsTechnica official Ken
Fisher (formally, Kenneth
Robert Fisher III) said that
Bright never proposed to write
any article about child sex
exploitation, on ArsTechnica's
Slack or otherwise.
In fact,
Fisher said, to the degree
ArsTechnica cover the
intersection of sex crimes and
the Internet, they had a
deputy editor who wrote their
stories.
On cross
examination by Bright's
Federal Defender, Fisher was
asked, "You are familiar with
his online persona, right?"
Fisher replied yes. Photo of
transcript here. We'll have
more on this.
Back
on February 19 in Bright's
first trial a mistrial was
declared, the day after the
jury sent out a note that it
could not reach consensus. The
judge pushed for a fast second
trial, which has now begun on
March 10. The US Attorney's
Office has sent Michael D.
Maimin to second-chair.
On March 12 with Bright again
on the witness stand, bragging
how he makes "littles order
off the kids' menu," Inner
City Press live tweeted, here:
Bright: I live in
Bushwick... With anal, you
have to know what you're
doing. Real people are not
porn stars.
He says "girl" in
the Bronx was 30, Alicia.
Bright: I'm
pretty sure vibrators are not
used in classrooms. But we
were fantasizing. ... It's
called after-care in the kink
world.
Bright: I know
someone who tweets out her
STDs test results every time.
In the polyamorous world we
are responsible
Peter
Bright: One of the joys of
working at home is I can walk
around naked. #Coronavirus
Bright (looking
at jurors, some mouth agape)
"A lot of Americans have never
seen, at least first hand, an
uncircumsized pen*s"
Peter Bright:
When in photos I'm holding two
Starbucks cups, I'm double
fisting, it's a double
entendre
We'll have
more on this.
Inner City Press covered the
opening arguments, here:
AUSA Alexander
Li: Peter Bright tried to have
sex with a 7 and 9 year old.
He was arrested carrying
condoms, on his way to meet
them.
AUSA Li: You may
find the evidence disturbing.
They met on Kink'd, then
WhatsApp. Bright sent a
picture of his [member]. But
he created a cover story, that
he was a journalist for a
technology web site.
AUSA Li: We will
call as a witness the editor
of the technology website. He
will tell you the defendant
never wrote about child
exploitation, and wasn't
authorized to.\
Federal Defender:
Peter Bright likes kinky sex
with consenting adults. He
likes role playing. On Kink'd,
he was a dominant Daddy, an
age player. We have an expert.
FD: Age
play is legal. Princess Mom
set him up. She used the
language of age play, on
Kink'd. She sent him photos of
children. So he went to gather
evidence. He set his phone to
record
FD: The FBI
got it wrong. He told Princess
Mom where he worked. He is not
guilty.
For these
arguments, at which Inner City
Press was the only media,
there were many lawyers from
each side. More on Patreon
here.
Back on February
27, in a proceeding at which
Inner City Press was the only
media present, the only person
in the gallery, a re-trail
date has been selected: March
10. Federal Defenders
confirmed that their expert
will be available, on March
13. Judge Castel said that all
of his previous evidentiary
rulings apply, and that he
will add to the jury charge
language from his response to
previous jury question 4,
about intention. So it's on.
Inner City Press will cover
it, again. Threadette here.
More including why and what at
second trial on Patreon here.
Bright took
the witness stand on February
13 and called himself an "age
player" and a Daddy. He said
he prefers full bodied women
with a lot of body hair - but
denied that he actually likes
children.
Inner City Press,
which first reported Bright's
presentment on the charges on
May 23, here,
started a Twitter thread about
Peter Bright's matter of the
fact statements about himself,
here.
More on Patreon here.
By the end
of February 18, the jury still
had the case. They passed out
a note, "unable to reach a
consensus." Bright's Federal
Defender Amy Gallicchio asked
for a mistrial, but Judge P.
Kevin Castel instead read the
jury to so-called Allen
charge, to see if that could
break the deadlock.
"Legal Definition
of Allen charge : a charge to
a deadlocked jury to make a
further effort to reach a
verdict especially by each
juror considering the others'
opinions with deference —
called also dynamite charge."
Inner City
Press remained in the
courtroom. An hour went by.
Then two. By they, Inner City
Press chatted with that
appeared to be Bright's
parents, with British accents
and on their way to Balthazar.
They asked if this was normal.
Well, none of it was.
Around 6
pm, the jury passed out a
nother note, that they would
come in on February 19 and
continue deliberating. Judge
Castel told the lawyers that
he would have another case at
that time - another one Inner
City Press is covering, as it
happens - but that he would
direct the lawyers in that
civil case to decamp when the
Bright jury has a note, or
verdict.
But when a
note came out, Bright was led
up to the bench and white
noise turned on. It was
impossible for Inner City
Press, in the gallery, to hear
what was said. By 2 o'clock,
it was mistrial and Judge
Castel was frustrated by
defense counsel not committing
to a March 23 trial date. He
said in his day practicing,
judges just declared days. A
letter is due, when the
defense and their expert
witness canNOT do it. Watch
this site.
Earlier on
February 18, the jurors passed
out a note asking questions,
including to see able the
video of Bright's Q&A with
FBI agents. This was played in
the courtroom, in whose
gallery were only Inner City
Press and two older adults.
But the FBI
Q&A concerned girls of 17
years old - who told Bright
she was "turning tricks" and a
14 year old who Bright said
emailed him photos in panties.
Bright was
asked by the FBI, why did you
respond? Bright said it was
flattering to be flirted with.
But he insisted he prefers or
preferred adults *playing*
young teenagers to young
teenagers themselves. He was
also asked by the FBI why he
was telling an interlocutor
about his foreskin, if he did
not intend to show it to the
young children she
described. What will the
jury think? Inner City Press
has asks for notice when a
verdict comes, but continues
to pass by the courtroom again
and again, to check. Watch
this site.
Back on
February 13 Judge P. Kevin
Castel of the U.S. District
Court for the Southern
District of New York let the
jury go to lunch from 12:30 to
1:30 pm, then told the lawyers
to return to discuss the jury
charged at 1:15 pm. Inner City
Press reported, It's coming to
endgame, and it has.
Assistant
US Attorney Alexander Li in
his closing statement
emphasized to the jury the
Peter Bright went to Duane
Park with condoms to meet what
he thought would be children.
Li said Bright is not an
age-playing vigilante trying
to catch the FBI agent but
rather a man attempted to have
sex with children, with a
lesson plan to teach about his
foreskin.
Many
Federal Defenders were in the
gallery for the closing
arguments. Amy Gallicchio had
argued, in writing, that "Mr.
Bright actively engages in
role-playing involving
bondage, discipline, dominance
and submission, sadomasochism,
commonly referred to as BDSM.
He is particularly interested
in ageplay." But what
will the jury think of it?
Watch this site.
Yet more on Patreon here, including on the
case's reference to... Justin
Bieber.
The case is US v.
Bright, 19-cr-521
(Castel).
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|