“They’re going to find child porn”: Longtime Democrat with failed bids for governor warns wife after police search home


PORTLAND, ME – Elliot Cutler ran for governor in Maine twice as an independent. Both times he lost. He used his own wealth to bankroll his campaigns.

Now, he is charged with four counts of possession of sexually explicit material of a child under 12. This is according to Hancock County District Attorney Matthew Foster, as reported by Fox News.

Foster said that the technology devices seized during his arrest are still be reviewed.

“It wouldn’t surprise me if more charges were on the way, he said.”

Additional charges could be levied at the federal level as well since images are often shared across state lines.

Members of the Maine State Police Computer Crimes Unit took Cutler into custody, without incident, at one of his homes in the coastal community of Brooklin.

He was booked in the Hancock County Jail. His bond was set at $50,000. His attorney, Walter McKee, was able to confirm the arrest but would not comment further. Cutler has also not made any public statements.

The attorney, who has been engaged in the political landscape, both in Maine and on the national level, was apprehended after a two-month investigation.

He ran for governor in 2010 and again in 2014, narrowly missing the victory in his first attempt.

He founded a law firm in Washington, DC that focused on environmental law. While in the nation’s capital, Cutler was an aide to Senator Edmund Muskie before becoming Jimmy Carter’s top adviser for environmental and energy policy.

Law enforcement search both of his homes earlier this week, one in Portland and the other in Brooklin.

According to the Bangor Daily News, Cutler confessed, during the warrant-aided search, to being in possession of the explicit material.

“When police arrived at his Brooklin farmhouse overlooking Blue Hill Bay, Cutler immediately responded by saying he wanted a lawyer present. But when police began seizing electronic devices under the warrant, he agreed to give them access to at least one of them.

‘Basically, the conversation was between him and his wife while police were standing right there,’ Foster said. ‘He told her they’re going to find child porn.'”

McKee was not pleased with the arrest coming late Friday, given that the court was closed. He was hoping that Cutler would be able to post bail and be released heading into the weekend.

“I’ve been dealing with the issues created by a completely unnecessary late Friday arrest, after the court has closed, for no good reason,” he said.

At the time of this writing, he had not been released.

The terms of his bond would also require that he not have access to any internet-connected device or sexually explicit material of any kind.

Each of the four pending counts could carry a prison sentence of 5 years if Cutler is found guilty, meaning he could spend the rest of his life in prison.

That is assuming that he doesn’t get a lighter sentence like the ones handed down by Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson. Her easy-going approach to child porn predators has raised the ire of federal lawmakers and concerned Americans alike.


Every parent’s worst nightmare: SCOTUS nominee says some child porn offenders should get lighter sentences, past rulings confirm that

The editorial comments in this article are brought to you by a US veteran and staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.

WASHINGTON, DC – Joe Biden’s nomination for the Supreme Court continued her confirmation hearing by raising some eyebrows. Sadly, a specific topic of conversation didn’t raise enough.

One particular case that Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson presided over was US v. Hawkins. And that case was brought up several times during her latest round of questions.

That 2012 case centered around 18-year-old Wesley Hawkins. He was found to be in possession of multiple images of child pornography.

While federal sentencing guidelines call for a sentence of up to 10 years, the Supreme Court hopeful sentenced him to only three months for the 30+ images and videos found on his computer and phone.

Missouri Senator Josh Hawley alluded to this case being part of a pattern of sentencing child sex offenders to much lower sentences than recommended, as did Texas Senator Ted Cruz.

Even the left-leaning Washington Post spoke up supporting the senator’s argument. They reported that after the end of his prison time, Hawkins went right back to searching for “sexually arousing” photos of minors.

“A person familiar with the Hawkins case read to The Post the probation office request that led to Jackson’s order. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity, because they were not authorized to publicly discuss it.

The probation office petition did not allege that Hawkins committed any new sexual offense or violation of conditions. However, it stated that ‘despite being in treatment for more than five years,’ Hawkins ‘continues to seek out sexually arousing, non-pornographic material and images of males 13 to 16-years-old.'”

In other words, Hawkins may not have been viewing pornographic images, but he was definitely satisfying his carnal cravings by looking at pictures of underage boys.

And what did Brown Jackson say at the time?

“At Hawkins’s November 2013 sentencing she cast the challenge as finding a ‘just sentence’ — ‘One that allows you, Mr. Hawkins, to spend enough time in prison to understand and appreciate the consequences of your actions … but not so long that you will be subjected to harm in prison or introduced to incorrigible influences such that you are lost to society forever.'”

The judge weighed numerous aspects before handing down the sentence. For example, Jackson noted that Hawkins didn’t produce the videos or take the photographs, he merely viewed them.

Speaking to Hawkins, who told detectives he was interested in 11- to 17-year-old boys, she said:

“You were only involved in this for a few months. Other than your engagement with the undercover officer, there isn’t an indication that you were in any online communities to advance your collecting behavior.

Most child pornography offenders are middle-aged adults who are deviants drawn to pictures of vulnerable children … This case is different because the children in the photos and videos you collected were not much younger than you. This seems to be a situation in which you were fascinated by sexual images involving what were essentially your peers.”

Umm…what? Those aren’t peers, judge. They are the most vulnerable members of society. You said so yourself in the same hearing.

Do you recall telling Hawkins that his crime was:

“very serious and, in many ways, heinous crime, one that capitalizes on the victimization of the most vulnerable members of our society … I cannot even express adequately how horrifying it is for me to know that somewhere out there, there are children who are being trapped and molested and raped for the viewing pleasure of people like yourself.”

During another questioning period from South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, the judge double down on not ruining the lives of people who prey on children.


View this post on Instagram


A post shared by Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk1776)

In essence, the judge said that if you are merely dabbling in child predator activity or child porn, you shouldn’t get as harsh a sentence as an individual who is distributing 1,000 images or photos.

But she contradicts herself in the very next sentence.

“On the internet, with one click, you can receive, you can distribute tens of thousands of these. You could be doing this for 15 minutes and all of a sudden, you are looking at 30, 40, 50 years in prison.”

So, if you are only doing for a few minutes, you should get a light sentence, even though, with just a click of a button, you can disseminate 10,000 photos, probably in a matter of a few minutes, thus earning you a longer prison term.

As a parent, I watched this particular part of the hearing mortified. And this came after hearing that she cannot define the word woman and that she doesn’t know if a baby can feel pain at 20 weeks.

She also said that she wasn’t aware that at 20 weeks, fetuses are given anesthesia for life saving procedures.

This is a woman that the President of the United States wants to sit on the highest court in the nation.

As an American, her stances are scary. As a parent, they are horrifying.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

‘Endangers our children’: Senator raises concerns about Biden Supreme Court pick being soft on child sex offenders

WASHINGTON, D.C. – As confirmation hearings are set to begin shortly for Biden Supreme Court pick and radical leftist Ketanji Brown Jackson, one Senator has raised the alarm on Jackson’s apparent history of being soft on child sex and pornography offenders.

In an 18-part Twitter thread, Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) recently introduced multiple concerns regarding Judge Jackson’s attitudes and actions toward child sex offenders and pedophiles.

Hawley began:

“I’ve been researching the record of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, reading her opinions, articles, interviews & speeches. I’ve noticed an alarming pattern when it comes to Judge Jackson’s treatment of sex offenders, especially those preying on children.”

Hawley continued:

“Judge Jackson has a pattern of letting child porn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes, both as a judge and as a policymaker. 

“She’s been advocating for it since law school. 

“This goes beyond ‘soft on crime.’ I’m concerned that this a record that endangers our children.”

Hawley went on to describe a longtime approach from Jackson, dating back to law school, that appeared to exhibit a soft touch with child sex offenders.

He wrote:

“As far back as her time in law school, Judge Jackson has questioned making convicts register as sex offenders – saying it leads to ‘stigmatization and ostracism.’

“She’s suggested public policy is driven by a ‘climate of fear, hatred & revenge’ against sex offenders.”

Hawley also reported that Jackson “questioned sending dangerous sex offenders to civil commitment.”

In addition, Hawley raised concerns that Jackson, as part of the U.S. Sentencing Commission,  called for “drastic change in how the law treats sex offenders by eliminating the existing mandatory minimum sentences for child porn.”

Hawley then referenced some of Jackson’s past words, quoting her as saying:

“So the people who are in this [child pornography] for either the collection, or the people who are loners and find status in their participation in the community, but would be categorized as non sexually motivated, how many are we talking about?”

Regarding these words, Hawley asked:

“What community would that be?  The community of child exploiters?”

Hawley also gleaned from Jackson’s words a question on a “less-serious child pornography offender,” apparently motivated by “technology.”

Jackson reportedly stated:

“And I’m wondering whether you could say that there is a – that there could be a less-serious child pornography offender who is engaging in the type of conduct in the group experience level because their motivation is the challenge, or to use the technology?

“They’re very sophisticated technologically, but they aren’t necessarily that interested in the child pornography piece of it?”

Hawley went on to summarize several cases of Jackson’s in which she appeared to be lenient with child pornographers and child sex offenders.

For instance, he wrote:

“In the case of United States v. Hawkins, the sex offender had multiple images of child porn. He was over 18. 

“The Sentencing Guidelines called for a sentence of up to 10 years. Judge Jackson sentenced the perpetrator to only 3 months in prison.

“Three months.”

Also for example:

“In United States v. Stewart, the criminal possessed thousands of images of child porn and also hoped to travel across state lines to abuse a 9-year-old girl. 

“The Guidelines called for a sentence of 97-121 months. 

“Judge Jackson sentenced the criminal to just 57 months.”

Hawley also wrote:

“In United States v. Chazin, the offender had 48 files of child porn, which he had accessed over a period of years. 

“The Guidelines recommended 78-97 months. 

“Judge Jackson gave him 28.”

Hawley then opined:

“This is a disturbing record for any judge, but especially one nominated to the highest court in the land. 

“Protecting the most vulnerable shouldn’t be up for debate. 

“Sending child predators to jail shouldn’t be controversial.”

Hawley’s concerns over Jackson’s attitudes and actions toward child predators will likely be front and center in his upcoming questioning of Biden’s Supreme Court nominee.



Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Submit a Correction
Related Posts