Lucas Man Faces Child Pornography Charges
Robert A. Anderson, 68, of Lucas, Ohio, was charged with producing, receiving, distributing and possessing visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, said Steven M. Dettelbach, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio.
The indictment charges that from on or about January 1, 2003, through on or about April 26, 2011, Anderson did use, persuade, induce, entice and coerce two minors to engage in sexually explicit conduct, for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct, and such visual depiction was produced or transmitted using materials that had been mailed, shipped, and transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer.
Anderson is further charged with knowingly receiving and distributing, by computer, numerous computer files, which contained visual depictions of real minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, possessing a SanDisk 64GB thumb drive and an HP Pavilion desktop computer that contained child pornography on January 21, 2014, and knowingly attempting to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, involving three SanDisk thumb drives, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the government’s lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control during the execution of a federal search warrant.
If convicted, the sentence in this case will be determined by the Court after consideration of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines which depend upon a number of factors unique to each case, including the defendant’s prior criminal record, if any, the defendant’s role in the offense and the unique characteristics of the violation. In all cases the sentence will not exceed the statutory maximum and in most cases it will be less than the maximum.
This case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Carol M. Skutnik. The case was investigated by the Department of Homeland Security Investigations, Cleveland Office.
An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.