IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
July 1, 2010
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
LARRY BECHEL, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
Now before the Court is the Government's June 17, 2010 motion in limine (Doc. 75). Specifically, the Government moves to preclude Bechel from arguing that he lacked knowledge of the victim's minority status as a defense to Count 1of the Superseding Indictment as knowledge of the age of the minor is not an element of the offense nor a defense to the charge.*fn1 Based on the case law, the Court grants the motion.
As to knowledge of the age of a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a), the Seventh Circuit has held:
It is true that the commission of the completed offense under § 2251(a), which can be paraphrased for our purposes as the actual manufacture of child pornography, contains no requirement that the defendant know that the performer is a minor. See United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., 513 U.S. 64, 76 n. 5, 115 S.Ct. 464, 130 L.Ed.2d 372 (1994).
United States v. Johnson, 376 F.3d 689, 693 (7th Cir. 2004).*fn2 Thus, the Court GRANTS the motion in limine. The Court PROHIBITS Bechel from arguing, attempting to argue, or presenting evidence that he was unaware of the victim's minority status in reference to Count 1 of the Superseding Indictment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David R Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court