Technical Soddi Defenses: The Trojan Horse Defense Revisited

In 2004, the Trojan horse defense was at a crossroads, having been successfully employed in two child pornography cases in the United Kingdom, resulting in acquittals. Despite the early successes, the Trojan horse defense has failed to become a regularly employed strategy. The original Trojan horse defense has now become part of the more general technical SODDI (Some Other Dude Did It) defense, which includes the possibility of unknown actors using unsecured Wi-Fi connections or having physical access to a computer to perform criminal acts. In the past ten years, it has not been effective in the United States for criminal cases, with no published acquittals in cases where it was the primary defense. Where the technical SODDI defense has been successfully used as leverage in plea negotiations, there has been either poor forensics performed by the prosecution or political pressure to resolve a matter. On the civil side, however, the defense has been wildly successful, effectively shutting down large John Doe copyright infringement litigation against non-commercial violators

Dishonest Ethical Advocacy?: False Defenses in Criminal Court

This Note examines this dilemma and recent judicial approaches to it. Judges disagree about how guilty criminal defendants should be permitted to mount defenses at trial. Some have forbidden defense counsel from knowingly advancing any false exculpatory proposition. Others have permitted guilty defense attorneys to present sincere or truthful testimony in order to bolster a falsehood. And still others have signaled more general comfort with the idea that an attorney aggressively can pursue an acquittal on behalf of a guilty client. This Note seeks to resolve this issue by parsing the range of false defense tactics available to attorneys and evaluating the propriety of each under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. This Note reads the Model Rules in the context of the adversary system’s twin aims to seek truth and safeguard individual rights; it defines and categorizes specific false defense tactics; and it offers practical, context-specific recommendations to courts and attorneys evaluating knowingly false defenses as they occur in the real world

Protecting The Children: Challenges That Result In, And Consequences Resulting From, Inconsistent Prosecution Of Child Pornography Cases In A Technical World

Of all the sinister things that Internet viruses do, this might be the worst: They can make you an unsuspecting collector of child pornography. Heinous pictures and videos can be deposited on computers by viruses—the malicious programs better known for swiping your credit card numbers. In this twist, it’s your reputation that’s stolen. Pedophiles can exploit virus-infected PCs to remotely store and view their stash without fear they’ll get caught. Pranksters or someone trying to frame you can tap viruses to make it appear that you surf illegal Web sites. Whatever the motivation, you get child porn on your computer—and might not realize it until police knock at your door

Avoiding Wrongful Convictions: Re-examining the Wrong-Person Defense

This Article reviews the history of the right to present a defense and closely examines the United States Supreme Court\u27s modern analysis of that right. Part III analyzes the emergence of the right to present a defense that a third party committed the crime and concludes with a discussion of the Supreme Court\u27s recent decision in South Carolina v. Holmes. Part IV then describes the current restrictive implementation of the wrong-person defense by the lower courts. Part V argues that the constitutional right to present a wrong-person defense is being insufficiently protected under current, arbitrary standards, and prescribes a constitutional analysis of the defense that is consistent with the Supreme Court\u27s jurisprudence, more reflective of what the lower courts actually are doing, and that is likely to produce more reliable results

Johnson v. State Appellant\u27s Reply Brief Dckt. 42857

https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/idaho_supreme_court_record_briefs/7224/thumbnail.jp

Johnson v. State Appellant\u27s Brief Dckt. 38769

https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/idaho_supreme_court_record_briefs/4993/thumbnail.jp