The US Supreme Court has just issued a rather odd ruling. A young woman called “Amy” in court papers was filmed being raped by her uncle at ages 8 and 9. Then the videos went viral on the internet amongst child pornography traffickers. Amy has asked for restitution under a law Congress passed in the 90s. The court agrees she should get it… but rather than collecting it all from the man who made the video, they are splitting the award amongst the known viewers – about 3,200 of them.
What are your thoughts on this? When people win civil cases, it’s up to them to actually recover the money the court said they deserved. Many people never succeed in recovering all they were awarded. At least Amy has already recovered about half what the court has said she’s entitled to. But it may cost her a lot to recover the rest, the way the court has set this up. OTOH, she could also struggle to recover it from Paroline alone, so this is always an issue with civil cases and maybe handling it this way gives her a better chance of recovering more of the award.
I’m all in favor of punishing the viewers as well as distributors and anyone else involved, don’t get me wrong. I’m just not sure this is the most logical approach. I am glad, however, that the court expressed nothing but the view that she did deserve significant restitution and had been through something really horrible. Some of our conservative justices never fail to amaze me with how ignorant they are about topics like this.