AP: 3570cb34-eb1e-4446-93a7-ef9ad768ddcd
Judge Ronald E. Culpepper presides during jury selection the voyeurism and child pornography trial of Steve Powell at the Pierce County Superior Court, in Tacoma, Wash., Monday, May 7, 2012. (AP Photo/The Salt Lake Tribune, Rick Egan, Pool)

Judge throws out journal entries in Steven Powell voyeurism case

BY MyNorthwest.com  on May 8, 2012 @ 10:14 am (Updated: 6:33 pm - 5/8/12 )

Related
A judge has thrown out several pieces of key prosecution evidence in the trial of Steven Powell, saying journal entries about his missing daughter-in-law, Susan Cox Powell, would prejudice the jury.

Judge Ronald E. Culpepper ruled Tuesday that the entries, which date back to 2003, do not have a bearing on the ongoing voyeurism case. He said the entries would not be admitted into evidence.

"It certainly shows a guy with some disturbing beliefs about his relationship with his daughter in law," Culpepper said. "But the issues in this case are whether Mr. Powell is guilty of voyeurism involving these two girls who were in the neighborhood. His fantasies about Susan Powell I think don't have much to do with that."

However, Judge Culpepper will allow the jury to hear part of an entry which Powell allegedly wrote in August 2004. It states that Powell enjoys taking video shots of "pretty girls in shorts and skirts, beautiful women of every age." According to the state's trial memorandum, Powell wrote that he took such photos for his sexual gratification.

Powell, 62, has been charged with 14 counts of voyeurism. He also faced one count of possession of depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. However, Judge Culpepper threw the latter charge out Monday, ruling that Powell's alleged crime did not fit state statute for child pornography.

Steven Powell is accused of secretly recording more than 2,000 images of two neighbor girls, who were minors, in their home as they took baths and used the toilet.

"I disagree with him, respectfully, on this whole issue on whether you need something more than a picture of private or intimate parts for child pornography," Seattle Attorney Anne Bremner told 97.3 KIRO FM's Ross and Burbank Show. "I think it was Potter Stewart who said on pornography 'You know it when you see it.' You know it when you see it with these kinds of pictures of the girls."

Bremner said she represents the two neighbor girls, who are now 12 and 14. Their mother is expected to testify at Powell's trial on Wednesday.

Prosecutors argued that Washington lawmakers changed the child porn law in 2010 to make clear that such activity is illegal. The law defines "sexually explicit conduct" as the depiction of a minor's genitalia, breast or buttocks for the purpose of sexual gratification of the viewer, and it specifies that the child does not need to be aware that he or she is participating in the conduct.

"I'm sitting here right now looking at this statute and it basically says that if you take a picture or video a child, of their private parts, that's child porn," Bremner said.

Also on Tuesday, a 14-member jury was selected from a field of 70. Two of the jurors will be alternates. Many were excused during the two day selection process because they believed they could not remain impartial. Several jurors said media coverage of the Powell case had already informed their opinions.

Opening arguments and testimony in the trial are scheduled to begin on Wednesday.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

MyNorthwest.com, Staff report
The team that brings you MyNorthwest.com
Related:
More Local News
Top Stories

  • Soda Pop Stop
    The mayors of Seattle, New York and about a dozen other cities want to ban this

  • 'I Am A God'
    Critics say Kanye West's album will change music forever

  • A Skeptic's Doubts
    An ESPN columnist doubts Russell Wilson will ever be elite
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (9)


  • Add A Comment

  • Informed wrote...
    Question
    May 8, 2012 1:26 pm
    Is the Judge a pedophile also? Powells’ intentions and the law are very clear. Hmmmm
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Realitycheck wrote...
    Informed
    May 8, 2012 6:01 pm
    My thoughts exactly. What person in their right mind would reject first the child pornography charges and now these journals where he calls himself a predator. Only a sick mind that maybe is going (oh, oh I got that at home myself) would not see that.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cash wrote...
    I am not shocked...
    May 8, 2012 4:38 pm
    The courts and judges in this State bend over backwards to hide evidence. How about letting the jury hear the evidence and they can make up their minds instead of you doing it for them... The photos are child porn and it should be decided by the jury not you... All of the entires in his journal where he admits to exactly what he is charged with is also evidence that should be submitted to the jury for a decision; that sir is not yours to make and you know it.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • dori monson fan wrote...
    is it possible to take NON pornographic nude pictures of children
    May 8, 2012 4:51 pm
    with a telephoto lens?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • moyerwilsonfan wrote...
    Jury
    May 8, 2012 4:52 pm
    I am shocked that they could seat a jury in two days. Only "several" (out of 70) jurors felt they couldnt be impartial? Really? I guess there are a lot of people in Pierce county who dont form opinions.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Realitycheck wrote...
    Lets hope they lied
    May 8, 2012 6:03 pm
    And they will nail his sorry a s s
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cash wrote...
    DMF
    May 8, 2012 5:29 pm
    No it is impossible for it "Not" to be child porn. These photos were taken without permission or knowledge of the victim(s) and their parents. Of course it was for Steven's sexual gratification and nothing else. He has admitted he needs photos to get going sexually and it was all left by him in his journals. I can't stand it when defense lawyers and judges go with the evidence is prejudicial... is complete bologna and lets call it what it is, evidence that the defendant does not want used becaue it will clearly convict him... It is called evidence that points towards the crime charged and it clearly should all be reviewed by the jury and decided by them. Tossing the evidence and not allowing the seated jurors is a major error on this judge. Guess what your honor, if he did not want this stuff used against him he should not have keep records of his crimes...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Realitycheck wrote...
    It is amazing
    May 8, 2012 6:07 pm
    How our so called "Justice System" goes out of their way to help crooks, murderers and sexual predators like this guy. Really makes you wonder what kind of immoral people we have in these positions that supposedly seek Justice.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cash wrote...
    Just my opinion
    May 9, 2012 4:57 am
    Which I am quite sure I have to right to express there AJ; no need to call names unless it makes you feel better. I clearly think in these circumstances the photo amount to child porn with the documented evidence. Parents taking bath shots to document the stages of their childs life do not as I believe there is a difference. I personally would never take those kinds of shots regardless because my personal opinion is that is done in poor taste but that is just my personal opinion. I think when you creep around with the kind of equipment he used and the well documneted evidence from his journals and associated photographs/videos it is very clear for what the purposes these were taken for. Come on now AJ I thought we were friends now with different opinions!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }