Child Pornography Attorney in Boston

Massachusetts Child Pornography Charges

Massachusetts General Laws chapter 272 contains several statutes addressing visual material involving minors. Section 29C covers the knowing purchase or possession of prohibited material. Section 29B addresses dissemination and possession with intent to disseminate certain visual material involving a child.

The elements prosecutors must prove depend on the charge. Questions may include what the material depicted, whether the accused knew its nature or content, and whether the evidence establishes possession, purchase, dissemination, or intent to disseminate. A file’s presence on a device doesn’t by itself resolve questions about knowledge, access, or control.

When Electronic Evidence Creates Federal Jurisdiction

Federal law separately addresses production, distribution, receipt, transportation, and possession when federal jurisdictional requirements are met. Internet activity, electronic transmission, or interstate conduct can bring federal authorities into an investigation even when the accused is located in Massachusetts.

Potential federal exposure depends on the statute charged, alleged conduct, prior convictions, nature of the material, and other statutory factors. We identify which agencies are involved and whether the case is proceeding in state criminal court, federal criminal court, or through parallel investigations.

Digital Evidence & Constitutional Search Issues

Our investigation may examine metadata, account records, downloads, automated transfers, file locations, cloud storage, messaging platforms, peer-to-peer activity, and who could access a device or account.

Important evidentiary issues may include:

• Search warrants: Whether the warrant was supported by probable cause and investigators remained within its authorized scope.
• Attribution: Whether admissible evidence connects a particular person to a device, account, file, or transfer.
• Knowledge and control: Whether the evidence proves awareness of the material and the ability to control it.
• Forensic interpretation: Whether caching, synchronization, automated activity, or other technical processes affect what the records show.
• Chain of custody: Whether devices and extracted data were documented and handled reliably.

Constitutional search and seizure questions are fact-specific. Don’t delete, alter, move, or try to investigate potentially relevant files yourself. Discuss those files with counsel before taking any action.