Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 1 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RICHARD HENDRICKS : : : : : Case No. 11cr112 (EBB)

January 23, 2013

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM OF THE UNITED STATES I. Introduction This is a case about hypocrisy and the exploitation of children. The defendant -- a middle school teacher -- collected child pornography from the Internet, paid for and watched live sex shows involving minors, and secretly photographed his own middle school students in their class room. The hypocrisy between the defendants acts and his duties as a teacher is striking; some the movies that he collected from the Internet are horrific. A sentence at the top of the range suggested by the Sentencing Guidelines is appropriate. On January 19, 2012, the defendant pleaded guilty to receiving child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2252(a)(2). The United States Probation Office calculated the defendant's conduct at a total offense level of 33. Subtracting three levels for acceptance of responsibility, pursuant to Guidelines 3E1.1, results in a total offense level of 30.1 With a Criminal History Category of I, the defendant is exposed to a term of incarceration of 97-121 months, which is the same sentencing range stipulated to by the parties in the plea agreement. The defendant waived his right to appeal a sentence of 121 months or less. Sentencing is scheduled for January 28, 2013.

At sentencing, the Government intends to make an oral motion that the Court award the third point for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. 3E1.1(b) and recommends that the Court grant the additional two point reduction recommended by the Probation Office.

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 2 of 12

For the reasons stated below, the government is seeking a sentence of 121 months, which is at the top of the range specified by the sentencing guidelines. II. Discussion

Summary of the Investigation There are three distinct aspects of this case that the Court should consider under 18 U.S.C. 3553 to determine a fair and proper sentence. First, the case was initiated when the defendant was identified in a national investigation as an individual who paid to see child sex shows originating from the Philippines. Second, federal agents found that the defendant received and saved child pornography images and movies from the Internet in addition to viewing the child sex shows. Third, further examination of the computer owned by the defendant - - who was then employed as a middle school teacher - - revealed that he secretly took photographic and video images of his female middle school students focused on their chest and groin areas. The Defendant Paid to See Live Sex Shows Involving Children From about October, 2009 through April, 2010, the defendant purchased Internet access to live sex shows involving minors that originated in the Philippines. Using a chat program, the defendant indicated that he was looking for a free show or looking for free fun. He would subsequently use his credit card to purchase access to webcam shows involving minors for between $30 and $50. Once a payment was made, the user could view a live webcam show with a chat feature. The child could take commands from the viewers using the chat feature. PSR 6-7. These shows depicted sexual acts involving children. By his own admission, the defendant paid for and viewed live child sexual acts approximately 50 times. Defs Brief at 14.

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 3 of 12

The Defendants Computer Contained Both Images and Videos of Child Pornography Analysis of the defendants computer revealed both pictures and videos of child pornography. PSR 13. Indeed, the defendants computer contained approximately 278 child pornography videos, which equate to a Guidelines equivalent of 20,625 images. As described in the PSR, the images include children engaged in oral and vaginal sex with adults. PSR 13. The defendant started downloading child pornography in 2008. Defs Memo, Appendix C, 80. Videos appear to be the mainstay of the defendants child pornography collection. All of these videos are disturbing; some are horrific. One video depicts an adult female engaging in oral sex and intercourse with a minor male. Another video - - which is over 10 minutes in length - - involves the sexual abuse of a young girl by an adult male. In the video, the victim said I dont want to do no more cuz mommy is going to be here. The male responded that they have plenty of time before mommy gets home. Additionally, the defendant possessed a video of adult male ejaculating into the mouth of a sleeping pre-pubescent girl. PSR 17. It is important to note that none of the children pictured in the hard core child pornography found on the defendants computer were identified as students from the middle school where he taught.2 It is clear that the defendant has an interest in viewing pre-pubescent girls. One movie file was entitled New [redacted childs name] 10YO Showing Off. Agents indicate that YO is an abbreviation for year old and is a common way to describe the age of the child victims in the file, so this title would indicate that the movie involves a 10 year old girl. The movie does, in fact, depict a pre-pubescent girl disrobing at the instruction of an adult male.

As discussed below, the defendant secretly recorded images of his students and assembled a collection of up skirt, down blouse, and flesh meshed pictures of his middle school students.
3

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 4 of 12

The defendant, a computer instructor, took a number of steps to avoid law enforcement detection of his online activities. First, he installed a program that allows the user to attempt to mask the his IP address on the Internet. Also, the defendant installed a file shredding program to destroy unwanted files beyond recovery. He also installed a cleaning program that, according to the manufacturer, cleans all areas of your computer including the Temporary Internet files, history, [and] cookies... it also [eliminates] traces of your online activities such as your Internet history. The Supreme Court has consistently recognized that the protection of children is a paramount governmental and societal interest and the permanent record of abuse created by child pornography creates a pervasive harm that revictimizes a child. See New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 757 (1982) ( the prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse of children constitutes a government objective of surpassing importance.). Indeed, well before the widespread circulation and increase of child pornography as a result of the Internet, the Supreme Court recognized: [P]ornography poses an even greater threat to the child victim than does sexual abuse or prostitution. Because the childs actions are reduced to a recording, the pornography may haunt him in future years, long after the original misdeed took place. A child who has posed for a camera must go through life knowing that the recording is circulating within the mass distribution system for child pornography. Additionally, once an image is placed on the Internet, it can never be removed and becomes a permanent record of the abuse inflicted upon that child. Each and every time such an image is viewed, traded, printed, or downloaded, the child in that image is re-victimized. Moreover, the images continue to circulate as the child becomes an adult and hopefully begins a path towards recovery from the crimes inflicted upon them. The physical and psychological harm to children depicted in these images is incalculable, and the continual circulation of images harms children in a manner comparable to the actual production of the images. This harm is compounded and continued when child pornography images are recirculated for the personal viewing pleasure of additional offenders. New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 759-60 & n.10 (1982).
4

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 5 of 12

The Defendant Secretly Took Photographs and Recorded Videos of His Middle School Students While They Were in His Classroom During the course of the offense conduct described in the PSR, the defendant was a middle school computer science teacher in Connecticut. PSR 20. He instructed virtually every student in the middle school. He was also the year book editor and the advisor of a school news program. PSR 20. These roles gave Hendricks access to large number of pictures of middle school students and the ability to use photographic equipment in the school under the guise of being the yearbook advisor. In fact, Hendricks used his position to systematically collect and manipulate images of his middle school students - - without their knowledge - - to feed his sexual attraction to children. The investigation revealed that Hendricks obtained thumb drives from many students, quite possibly under the premise of collecting pictures for the year book. Hendricks would copy photos from the students thumb drives and store them on his computer at home. For example, one directory on his home computer had over 900 picture files of girls in bikinis and bathing suits, some of whom appear to be middle school students from the defendants school. The defendant manipulated some the pictures he obtained in an attempt to highlight and observe either the breasts or the groin areas of the young girls. This technique is called flesh meshing. Investigators found a file on the defendants computer entitled How to Use Flesh-Mesh X-Ray..., which provided a detailed discussion about how to manipulate photographs to allow the user to see through clothing. Several photographs of the defendants clothed middle school students were discovered in which the defendant had applied this technique. For example, agents observed a picture of several female student athletes sitting in a gym. This picture was flesh meshed to give the impression that the
5

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 6 of 12

students were only clothed in bras and were not wearing shirts. PSR 26. In another case, a group shot of an entire middle school girls sports team was flesh meshed by the defendant in order to reveal their private areas.3 The investigation revealed that the defendants interest in child pornography was intertwined with his collection of student images. First, he started viewing child pornography shortly after he began teaching at the middle school. Defs Brief at 14, PSR 65. While he was teaching [h]e also was clearly regularly fantasizing about students at his school. Defs Brief at 15. Second, many of the directories containing the student pictures were co-mingled with the defendants collection of child pornography.4 The file structure the defendant set up on his computer is illuminating. A file labeled Student Poses contained several sub-files including: (1) OMG, (2) DB and Cleave, (3) Student Pics; (4) Memory Cards and (5) Movies. In the OMG folder, which is believed to stand for Oh My God, the defendant created several sub folders labeled with the first names of his students. Some of these folders also contained pornography. One folder was entitled [redacted students first name] & Lookalike. This folder contained non-pornographic images of the named student along with pornographic images obtained from the Internet of an unrelated young girl who resembled the Connecticut student.

These images, as well as all of the images obtained from the defendants computers, are available for the Court to review in camera prior to the sentencing hearing. Investigators found that a directory labeled hjjoin contained over 42,000 files, some of which appear to be child pornography. These were co-mingled with non-pornographic picture and movie files of middle school students.
6
4

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 7 of 12

The defendant also took pictures down the shirts of his female students and saved these images. As noted above, one of his sub-folders was labeled DB and Cleave, which likely stands for down blouse and cleavage. These photographs were taken at an angle that exposed the students chest to the viewer. At least two of these photos were labeled as [redacted girls first name]-db.jpg, which was a way of reminding the defendant that the image is a down blouse image of a specific student. It is also apparent that the defendant photographed the groin area of his female middle school students without their knowledge while they were in his classroom. Incredibly, the defendant secretly placed a video camera on a mobile cart in his middle school classroom, located that cart to obtain an unobstructed view up the skirt of the girl as she was sitting at her desk in the defendants classroom, and recorded images of the students groin area. He would then retrieve the camera, transfer the images to his home computer, and attempt to magnify and lighten the images in order to obtain the best view possible of the childs groin. But he did not exclusively use his hidden camera on the mobile cart to obtain these types of images. In a least one example, the defendant openly recorded a female student with what appears to be his cell phone camera as the student was seated at a computer desk in front of him. He then pretended to turn the recording off and dropped his arm so the camera recorded the girls groin area under the table as he continued to talk with her. Several of these movies and manipulated images were found in the OMG folder on his computer in a folder labeled with the first name of the child who was photographed.

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 8 of 12

Such unspeakable conduct by a teacher is almost impossible to fathom. The defendant only stopped because it was too dangerous. PSR 34. Even after the defendant claims he stopped recording his own students, he retained the secretly recorded videos on his home computer, where they were discovered by federal agents in the summer of 2011. Given the facts of this case and the representations made by the defendant in his brief and affidavit about his employment, a representative of the school district that formerly employed the defendant wishes to speak at sentencing. The government believes that the statement by the school representative would be helpful to the Court in considering the defendants history and characteristics to arrive at an appropriate sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). Hearing this statement is plainly within the Courts discretion as [n]o limitation shall be placed on the information concerning the background, character, and conduct of a person convicted of an offense which a court of the United States may receive and consider for the purpose of imposing an appropriate sentence. 18 U.S.C. 3661. The Supreme Court has recently discussed the importance for a district court to receive the fullest information possible about a defendants background, character and conduct for sentencing. Pepper v. U.S., 131 S.Ct. 1229, 1240 (2011). [C]ourts in this country and in England practiced a policy under which a sentencing judge could exercise a wide discretion in the sources and types of evidence used to assist him in determining the kind and extent of punishment to be imposed within limits fixed by law. Williams, 337 U.S. at 246. In particular, courts have emphasized that [h]ighly relevant-if not essential-to [the] selection of an appropriate sentence is the possession of the fullest information possible concerning

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 9 of 12

the defendant's life and characteristics. Id. at 247. Permitting sentencing courts to consider the widest possible breadth of information about a defendant ensures that the punishment will suit not merely the offense but the individual defendant. Wasman v. United States, 468 U.S. 559, 564 (1984).); Pepper, 131 S.Ct. at 1241-42. Congress could not have been clearer in directing that [n]o limitation ... be placed on the information concerning the background, character, and conduct of a defendant that a district court may receive and consider for the purpose of imposing an appropriate sentence. 18 U.S.C. 3661. Courts have recognized that the broad language of 3661 does not provide any basis for the courts to invent a blanket prohibition against considering certain types of evidence at sentencing. See e.g. Watts, 519 U.S., at 152, 117 S.Ct. 633. III. A Non-Guidelines Sentence is Not Warranted The defendant argues that a non-Guidelines sentence is warranted under the holding of U.S. v. Dorvee. It is now well settled that the Guidelines are advisory and the court is free to impose whatever sentence it feels satisfies the requirements of 18 U.S.C. 3553. The holding in Dorvee cautions district courts not to apply the guidelines in a manner that sentences first time offenders at or near the statutory maximum. That is not this case. The top of the applicable range in the case is only half of the statutory maximum. Further, as described herein, the case is replete with aggravating factors that warrant a sentence at the top of that range. Further, the defendant asks for a reduced sentence citing, among other things, his professional efforts as a teacher and the fact that he compl[ies] with the laws and mores of society. Defs Brief at 3. He discusses at length his contributions to the middle school,

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 10 of 12

his concern for his former students, and expenditures he made on their behalf. He attempts to portray himself as kind and gentle individual who provided exceptional service to his school and his students. Defs Memo at 5, Defs Aff. at 65-75. Given the facts of this case, none of these arguments have merit. Rather than mitigating his crime, the government believes the fact that the defendant was a teacher who secretly recorded his students is an aggravating factor under 18 U.S.C. 3553. Indeed, it appears that the defendant used his position as a teacher and yearbook advisor to gain closer access to a select group of students. Defs Brief at 10. According to school records, in the three years the defendant organized the school TV news program, 65 girls were selected to participate, while only 12 boys were afforded that opportunity. Even more striking is the composition of the year book staff supervised by the defendant from 2005-2011. In those five years, 108 girls made up the yearbook staff, while only 2 boys participated.5 The defendant would summon female students back into his windowless office, but then claim to forget why he had called them. PSR 23. Many girls indicated that they learned not to go back to his office alone and instead invented their own buddy system where multiple girls would go to the defendants office if one was summoned. PSR 23. The defendant would show female students pictures he had taken of them without their knowledge, a practice the students found to be creepy. PSR 23. The defendant argues that he should receive a reduced sentence in part because he spent a great deal of [his] own money purchasing cameras and equipment for the group

According to school officials, the two boys were both on the yearbook staff in the 20082009 school year. From 2005-2007 and 2009-2011, the staff was entirely composed of middle school girls.
10

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 11 of 12

and even more time perfecting his staffs ability to take great pictures. Defs Brief at p. 10. In light of what the Court now knows the defendant was doing with cameras and pictures in his own classroom, these words are chilling. And they utterly fail to mitigate his culpability in any way. Further, incredibly, in his affidavit to the Court seeking a reduced sentence, the defendant states that he told the students they would always be treated with the respect they deserve as young adults. Defs Aff. at 70. It is plain that the defendant treated his students with anything but respect. The hypocrisy of the defendants statement against the backdrop of his conduct is self-evident. A sentence of 121 months is appropriate. IV. Conclusion The defendant amassed a collection of photographs and videos that document and memorialize the sexual abuse of children. He solicited, paid for, and viewed web casts of children being sexually abused. As a middle school teacher, he secretly photographed his students and manipulated those images for his pleasure. The government believes that a 121 month term of incarceration, which is at the top of the applicable Guideline range, is warranted in this case. Respectfully submitted, DAVID B. FEIN UNITED STATES ATTORNEY /s RAY MILLER ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FEDERAL BAR NO. CT 20451 157 CHURCH STREET, 23RD FLOOR NEW HAVEN, CT 06510 (203) 821-3700
11

Case 3:11-cr-00112-EBB Document 68

Filed 01/23/13 Page 12 of 12

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on January 23, 2013, a copy of the foregoing Memorandum was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by email to all parties by operation of the Courts electronic filing system or by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Courts CM/ECF System. /s Ray Miller Assistant U.S. Attorney

12