Shocking news about UtterAccess owner

[Isaac]

Fun facts about bacon!

People who eat bacon have lower chance of marrying a 9 year old!

And if you do marry a 9 year old, plan on frying your own - she ain't allowed near the stove !

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Reading throug Jack Leach's indictment, it is federal rather than state, so that means or implies evidence of interstate transmission of such materials. What happened to the site is pretty simple. The law in question appears to support the idea that you forfeit the illicit material and any equipment used to make or disseminate said materials. There goes the server and any storage devices he owned.

 

[BlueSpruce]

Reading throug Jack Leach's indictment, it is federal rather than state, so that means or implies evidence of interstate transmission of such materials. What happened to the site is pretty simple. The law in question appears to support the idea that you forfeit the illicit material and any equipment used to make or disseminate said materials. There goes the server and any storage devices he owned.

I think UA was hosted on AWS and after the Feds audited the site they had it shutdown. I don't recall seeing any porno content on UA. According to the indictment, Jack was using an alias "jreidmann". A search of that handle shows an instagram account. If someone else stole Jack's identity, used his wifi signal, and hacked his online accounts to perpetrate the crime, they were really good at framing him, but I'm sure the Feds were also physically watching Jack for quite some time to rule out the above.They also found incriminating evidence on several of his devices in his home and office. It will be very interesting to see the outcome of this case. Will Jack cop a plea, or fight the charges? He's being held without bail and they might not offer him a deal. The Jeffrey Epstein and Sean Combs cases have really increased the focus on sex and child porno trafficking.

 

[KitaYama]

No Way!... Show me proof

not 9 years old, but .....still underage

Between 2000 and 2018, nearly 300,000 minors were legally married in the U.S. Some married as young as 10, though cases at that age are uncommon and typically involve exceptional legal or judicial permission

Child Marriage in America: By the Numbers

More than 200,000 children under 18 have been legally married in the U.S. since 2000. This is what we know about them.

www.pbs.org

From wikipedia:

As of July 2025, child marriage is legal in 34 states.[2][3][4][5] 16 states have banned underage marriages, with no exception.

Child marriage in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

‘I was handed to a complete stranger’: the survivors fighting to end child marriage in 37 US states – and the people who want to keep it legal

The country has seen hundreds of thousands of child marriages since 2000. As activists push for new laws, an unlikely cohort stands in their way

www.theguardian.com

However, four states—California, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma—do not specify any minimum age, meaning in theory, younger than 18 (potentially even 10 or 11) could be married with consent or court approval

 

[moke123]

Reading throug Jack Leach's indictment, it is federal rather than state, so that means or implies evidence of interstate transmission of such materials.

I'm more intrigued by the fact that the feds kept it. They usually pass small stuff down to the states. There isn't much on Pacer yet, so not a lot of details.

 

[BlueSpruce]

not 9 years old, but .....still underage

Between 2000 and 2018, nearly 300,000 minors were legally married in the U.S. Some married as young as 10, though cases at that age are uncommon and typically involve exceptional legal or judicial permission

Child Marriage in America: By the Numbers

More than 200,000 children under 18 have been legally married in the U.S. since 2000. This is what we know about them.

www.pbs.org

From wikipedia:

Child marriage in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

‘I was handed to a complete stranger’: the survivors fighting to end child marriage in 37 US states – and the people who want to keep it legal

The country has seen hundreds of thousands of child marriages since 2000. As activists push for new laws, an unlikely cohort stands in their way

www.theguardian.com

However, four states—California, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma—do not specify any minimum age, meaning in theory, younger than 18 (potentially even 10 or 11) could be married with consent or court approval

I've heard of States that drop statuatory raipe charges if the minor legally marries the defendant.

 

[BlueSpruce]

I'm more intrigued by the fact that the feds kept it. They usually pass small stuff down to the states

That's usually the case, but this case is not small. The Jeffrey Epstein and Sean Combs cases have certainly drawn more attention to this type of crime.
We will find out more as time moves on. I wouldn't be surprised if Jack pleads innocent and chooses trial by jury, as he is possibly facing life imprisonment. He's most likely being held in protective custody, under suicide watch. Inmates convicted of these types of charges don't fare well in prison. The implications of Jack being indicted means the content of UA was confiscated by the Feds and anyone associated with him are being investigated to see if they are co_conspirators.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-mdfl/p...tempting-produce-child-sexual-abuse-materials

 

[moke123]

That's usually the case, but this case is not small. The Jeffrey Epstein and Sean Combs cases have certainly drawn more attention to this type of crime.
We will find out more as time moves on. I wouldn't be surprised if Jack pleads innocent and chooses trial by jury, as he is possibly facing life imprisonment. He's most likely being held in protective custody, under suicide watch. Inmates convicted of these types of charges don't fare well in prison. The implications of Jack being indicted means the content of UA was confiscated by the Feds and anyone associated with him are being investigated to see if they are co_conspirators.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-mdfl/p...tempting-produce-child-sexual-abuse-materials

Your preaching to the choir, my friend.
I'm pretty sure I'm the only one on here who has legally seen kiddie porn.

I doubt the case file will be sealed so I'll eventually be able to see the pleadings.

 

[moke123]

He's most likely being held in protective custody, under suicide watch. Inmates convicted of these types of charges don't fare well in prison.

I doubt he's being held. More likely released with conditions such as no unsupervised contact with kids under 18, No or limited access to computers and internet, etc.

St. Augustine business owner indicted on charges of having child sexual abuse material

Jack Leach, 43, faces up to 20 years in federal prison if convicted.

www.actionnewsjax.com

The criminal complaint includes what prosecutors said are messages from Leach’s phone, talking about children as young as three years old and traveling to the Philippines to abuse children there.

 

[moke123]

WOW!

Just read the 59 page summary of the investigation. Worse than you can ever imagine.

I've had my fair share of kiddie diddlers so not a lot shocks me. But WOW.

 

[Jon]

Now I am curious what was in it. How do I find it?

 

[moke123]

You need an account to access federal records.

I can't post it here but they have the log of a video conferencing app with him talking to the mother in the Philippines.

He makes some damning admissions.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

When I realized that it was a federal indictment, I knew this probably involved a longer investigation pre-arrest, because the feds (correctly) want to catch co-conspirators. Earlier, reading through the articles and comments, it was mentioned that the case stretches back at least 2 years. Now, learning that international interests are involved, this is the kind of case where they don't throw the book at him, they toss the whole law library.

He has to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, and I didn't know him personally, but anyone who knew him through a computer connection would probably not want to step forward right now. He will probably have to put his affairs in order before the trial because this might not involve a death penalty, but if he IS convicted, he might not see the free light of day for a long time.

Moke, you and I don't always see eye-to-eye on some political things, but I trust you to report honestly. Further, I understand that pre-trial, a lot of things are sealed in order to not prejudice the case. If you reacted as strongly as you did to what you saw through your privileged access, I will trust that it is definitely not something that we want to spill into the forum very much. I accept your discretion as being necessary and proper for this kind of case AND to protect the forum. It's why I beat around the bush sometimes when talking about my Navy projects that involved security clearances.

 

[moke123]

Believe it or not there are a lot of laws which protect sex offenders so I know to be careful about disclosure.

Trial looks to be scheduled for November but that always gets continued out.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I know to be careful about disclosure.

I rather expected that. But you are not likely to be directly involved, so you can offer an opinion. If the case is really strong, is the defense likely to ask for a continuance? For this kind of case, what kind of extenuating circumstances would even apply? I have a feeling based on your earlier comments that a couple of YEARS of continuances would probably be ineffective.

 

[moke123]

The litigation is only a few months old. Probably wont reach trial for another year if it gets that far. From just the little info I read there's a good chance he'll look for a deal. These cases can drag out when you have forensic experts to challenge their experts, psych experts for mitigation, etc.

 

[BlueSpruce]

If you [Moke] reacted as strongly as you did to what you saw through your privileged access, I will trust that it is definitely not something that we want to spill into the forum very much.

I agree with Doc and suggest we not publish anything that could alter the outcome of this case. We should lay low and wait until the conclusion of this case.

 

[moke123]

suggest we not publish anything that could alter the outcome of this case.

No one here possesses anything that could affect the outcome, unless you know Jack and have info on his activities. Everything I have is public information. You could visit the courthouse and request the file. I just have the means to access it electronically.

Besides if I posted the chat log you'd probably throw-up.

 

[BlueSpruce]

No one here possesses anything that could affect the outcome, unless you know Jack and have info on his activities. Everything I have is public information. You could visit the courthouse and request the file. I just have the means to access it electronically.

Besides if I posted the chat log you'd probably throw-up.

I have seen several defendants claim they were unable to get a fair trial due to prejudiced publicity.

 

[AccessBlaster]

I have seen several defendants claim they were unable to get a fair trial due to public prejudism caused by publicity.

Yes AWF tip the scales