1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :

vs. : MJ CASE NO. 16-00013-N

:

:

JEREMIAH HUNTER, :

Defendant. 

ORDER

This action is before the Court on the Government’s Motion for 

Detention. (Doc. 8). A detention hearing was held before the undersigned 

Magistrate Judge on March 9, 2016. Present at the hearing were the 

defendant, Jeremiah Hunter, along with his counsel of record Jeff Deen, Esq., 

and Assistant United States Attorney Maria Murphy. Upon careful review of 

the Court file, including the pretrial services report, the affidavit submitted 

in support of the criminal complaint, the evidence presented at the detention 

hearing and the applicable case law, the Court, for the reasons that follow, 

grants the Government’s motion. 

BACKGROUND

Defendant Jeremiah Hunter, age 39, is charged by way of a criminal 

complaint with receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 

2252(a)(2)(A). Specifically, defendant, who is a teacher at Hankins Middle 

School, is charged with receiving nude pictures of underaged males who are 

current students at Hankins Middle School and Theodore High School. On 

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 1 of 8
2

March 8, 2016, based on the affidavit and testimony of FBI Special Agent 

Paul Roche, the undersigned found that the Government established 

probable cause to believe that Defendant engaged in this offense. At the time 

of the probable cause hearing Defendant was under a no bond hold from 

Mobile County District Court. 1 At the conclusion of the probable cause 

hearing counsel for Defendant advised that the state court judge had set bond 

and that a local bonding company had tendered the bond to the court. The 

undersigned then scheduled a detention hearing for March 9, 2016.

ANALYSIS

Pursuant to the Bail Reform Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 3142, a defendant 

may be detained pending trial only after a hearing, held pursuant to 18 

U.S.C. § 3242(f), and upon a finding that “no condition or combination of 

conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required 

and the safety of any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). 

A finding that the defendant is either a flight risk or a danger to the 

community is sufficient to detain the person pending trial. United States v. 

King, 849 F.2d 485, 490 (11th Cir. 1988). In making this determination, the 

Court considers the following § 3142(g) factors: (1) [t]he nature and 

circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense is a 

																																																							 1 On February 18, 2016 Defendant was arrested for Stalking 2nd Degree. He 

was released on bond the same day. On February 26, 2016, Defendant was 

arrested for Tampering with Physical Evidence. Based on the new charge his 

bond was revoked on the stalking charge. The charges arise out of 

defendant’s alleged stalking of an underaged student at Hankins Middle 

School and asking a colleague to remove a backpack from his classroom.

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 2 of 8
3

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; (2) the weight of the evidence 

against the person; (3) the history and characteristics of the person, including 

-- (A) the person’s character, physical and mental condition, family ties, 

employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, 

community ties, past conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse,

criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings; and

(B) whether at the time of the current offense or arrest, the person was on 

probation, on parole, or on other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or 

completion of sentence for an offense under Federal, State, or local law; and

(4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community 

that would be posed by the person’s release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). 

Once probable cause is established that the defendant engaged in a 

felony involving a minor victim, a statutory presumption weighing against 

the defendant’s pretrial release arises. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(2), (f)(1); United 

States v. Hurtado, 779 F.2d 1467, 1479 (11th Cir. 1985). Once invoked, the 

defendant is obliged to produce evidence to rebut that presumption. United 

States v. Niles, 874 F. Supp. 1372, 1374 (N.D. Ga. 1994) (citing United States. 

v. Quartermaine, 913 F.2d 910, 916 (11th Cir. 1990)). If the defendant is 

successful, “the presumption does not disappear, but rather becomes evidence

to be weighed, along with other evidence, as suggesting a risk of flight or risk 

of danger.” Id.

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 3 of 8
4

Risk of Flight

The government argues that the Defendant is a risk of flight on the 

grounds, in sum, that he faces a five year minimum mandatory sentence if 

convicted on this charge. Defendant notes that he is a life long resident of 

Mobile and has been a teacher for over a decade. Mitchell Carter, who 

identified himself as the “best friend” of the Defendant, testified that he has 

known the Defendant for approximately seven years and that in his opinion 

he would not flee the jurisdiction. Michelle Barousse, a colleague of 

defendant’s at Hankins Middle School testified that she has known and 

worked with Defendant for many years and that he has strong ties to the 

community. The undersigned finds that the Defendant has rebutted the 

presumption as to the risk of flight issue. 

Danger 

The government also moves for detention on the grounds that 

defendant presents a danger to the community. Defendant, a teacher in a 

position of trust, is charged with receiving nude photographs of underaged 

male students. In addition to the federal complaint, defendant has pending 

charges out of Mobile County District Court for Stalking Second Degree and 

Tampering with Physical Evidence. These two state court charges also 

appear related to an underaged male student. Aside from these two state 

court charges and the instant offense, defendant has no criminal history. 

Defendant reports no substance abuse history. 

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 4 of 8
5

However, the weight of the government’s case is strong. Defendant 

admitted to receiving approximately 10 emails from a young male student 

containing nude photographs of the genitalia of underaged males – all 

students at either Hankins Middle School or Theodore High School. The 

affidavit in support of the complaint identifies pictures of eight different 

children. Emails in Defendant’s accounts contain communications 

purportedly authored by Defendant, including instructions to the child that 

sent the pictures to obtain more photographs of a specific child. In one email 

chat Defendant declines to chat with one student because of a concern that 

the student’s mother reads his emails. During the search of his home 

Defendant gave authorities his password for his personal cell phone and 

laptop computer, which correspond to the birthdate of the student Defendant 

is accused of stalking in the state case. Further, the same child's name was 

found to be Defendant’s password on his work computer at Hankins Middle 

School. 

On cross examination by the Government, Mr. Carter, who works as a 

cosmetologist, testified that he has cut the hair of the alleged stalking victim 

on two occasions. Carter admitted that after defendant’s arrest he learned 

that defendant had called the alleged stalking victim, pretending to be 

Carter, and asking how he liked his haircut. Testimony was also presented 

that approximately one year ago, Defendant purchased a home located 

approximately 7-8 houses away from the alleged stalking victim. Defendant 

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 5 of 8
6

currently resides at the home with his mother, who counsel proffered as a 3rd

party custodian. 

Defendant’s other witness, Mrs. Barousse, conceded on cross 

examination that in 2015 at a teaching conference she became uncomfortable 

when the Defendant told her he had received a text message from a student 

that contained a video of the student masturbating. Barousse stated that she 

left the conversation but failed to report the incident because she “did not 

know who the child was.” Barousse further testified that on February 23, 

2016, defendant was not at school but that he called her and later texted her 

requesting that she retrieve his backpack from his classroom. Barousse 

initially testified that she removed the backpack of her own accord; however, 

upon pressing by AUSA Murphy conceded that Defendant had made the 

request via text message. Upon further questioning by the AUSA, Barousse 

conceded that defendant had called her and then texted her, instructing her 

to secure the backpack. Barousse testified that she complied and ultimately 

turned the backpack over to the vice-principal.

FBI Forensic Examiner Candace Hunter testified that she reviewed 

Defendant’s phone and personal computer. Agent Hunter said that she 

reviewed Defendant’s GOOGLE searches from 2013 to 2014 and discovered

queries relating to “sending anonymous texts”, “sending anonymous 

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 6 of 8
7

pictures”, “young boys” and “twink.”2 Agent Hunter testified that in a chat in 

February 2015, defendant notes that he got a new cell phone because of the 

police investigation. In February 2016 Defendant asks one of the children he 

is texting to delete the conversations so it “does not cause problems”. In 

another chat, purportedly between Defendant and the underaged stalking 

victim, Defendant discusses a sex act with the victim. When the victim tells 

Defendant he likes girls, the Defendant threatens to post online the pictures 

the victim sent him. Agent Hunter further testified that in a December 2015 

conversation Defendant expressed despair and contacted an individual about

purchasing a Glock handgun and ammunition and on February 11, 2016 

Defendant wrote what appeared to be a suicide note questioning how much of 

a prescription drug would be needed to end one’s life.

On cross examination, defense counsel suggested that Defendant had 

deleted the nude photographs from his cell phone and that forensic examiners 

had to retrieve them from “the cloud”. However, Agent Hunter testified that 

none of the items had been deleted and were, in fact, still on the Defendant’s 

devices when they were searched.

Based on the evidence presented at the preliminary hearing and the 

detention hearing the undersigned finds that the Defendant has not rebutted 

the presumption of detention. The undersigned finds that the weight of the

evidence against Defendant is compelling. Defendant has admitted to 

																																																							 2 Agent Hunter stated that the term refers to underage young teen boys 

engaging in sexual acts.

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 7 of 8
8

receiving an email from an underaged student with pictures of the genitalia 

of other underaged students. Defendant’s prior criminal history, which 

consists of a stalking 2nd charge and a tampering with evidence charge 

appear related to a an inappropriate relationship with an underage male 

student. Moreover, Defendant faces a significant period of incarceration if 

convicted of the alleged offense. For the reasons set forth above, the 

undersigned finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that there are no 

conditions or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure the safety 

of the community. Thus, the Government’s Motion to Detain (doc. 8) is 

granted.

Defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his 

designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, 

to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being 

held in custody pending appeal. Defendant shall be afforded a reasonable

opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On Order of a court 

of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, the 

person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the Defendant to the 

United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a 

court proceeding.

DONE this the 10th day of March 2016.

/s/ Katherine P. Nelson

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cr-00054-CG-B Document 14 Filed 03/10/16 Page 8 of 8