Mankato football coach cleared of child pornography charges

Earlier this fall we covered the story of the Minnesota State Mankato football coach who was charged with child pornography after an information technology employee found videos on his work cellphone. The videos allegedly showed his three children naked and playing and led to very serious criminal charges. Today, a Blue Earth County judge dismissed all charges against him.

As we mentioned earlier, it may not have been the best idea to record family videos on his cellphone, but that does not mean that a lapse of judgment should lead to a criminal conviction. There needs to be an actual violation of the law for someone to be convicted. And, in this case, the judge said that these videos did not violate any child pornography laws.

Previously, the prosecutors had said that the videos clearly were sexually exploitative and that they were a “lewd exhibition of the genitals.” He also claimed that the videos showed one of the children masturbating. After the judge reviewed the videos, however, she said that the videos were merely children being children. If there had been any touching of the genitals, it was coincidental and not sexual.

The coach is very lucky that he had an impartial judge reviewing the videos. Child pornography charges often raise extreme emotions, and it makes it difficult for anyone, jury members and judges alike, to be unbiased. This is why it is extremely important for anyone suspected of sex crimes to work closely with a criminal defense attorney.

Source: Star Tribune, “Judge dismisses child porn charges against Mankato football coach,” Richard Meryhew, Nov. 30, 2012

If you want to read more about how this man was acquitted, please see the source above. If you want to learn more about our work with people who have been accused of child pornography possession, please visit our website.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

How a DWI Affects CDL Holders in Minnesota

Commercial motor vehicle drivers arrested or charged with driving while impaired (DWI) may need to know how a DWI affects CDL holders in Minnesota. You will lose your Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) for at least a year if you are convicted of DWI for the first time, and forever after a second conviction. The consequences go beyond the immediate legal implications of a DWI conviction. A CDL suspension or revocation will lead to job loss, difficulty finding employment, and serious financial challenges.

How a DWI Affects Rideshare Drivers in Minnesota

Knowing how a DWI affects rideshare drivers in Minnesota allows you to take the right steps to protect your license and livelihood. A DWI conviction will lead to suspension or cancellation of your driver’s license. Once you lose your license, you will be ineligible for a work permit required to work for rideshare companies as a driver. You may also face jail time, fines, or ignition interlock device (IID) installation, depending on the seriousness and number of related offenses on your record.

Can Police Search Your Phone Without a Warrant in Minnesota?

People under criminal investigation or whose phones have been seized by law enforcement officers may ask, “Can police search your phone without a warrant in Minnesota?” It’s illegal for police to search your phone without a warrant. However, there are exceptions to the warrant requirement. These exceptions include when you consent to the search, someone’s life is in danger, or there is an immediate risk of evidence destruction.