Opinion ID: 1252224
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Materials Submitted to the Court Prior to Sentencing

Text: Prior to sentencing, Pretrial Services prepared a Presentence Report (PSR), pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(d). That PSR includes the following reference to a letter from Olhovsky discussing his understanding of his own behavior: When I was a teenager, I usually spent a lot of time on my computer, and I got a lot of emails from people on line. I got an email from someone that had a picture of a child in a sexual pose. I was in high school and I was around 15 or 16 years old. At first, I did not really think about it, but I just kept receiving more and more pictures. I got interested in the pictures out of curiosity. I wasn't really thinking about how children were being abused. I was very lonely and did not spend a lot of time with friends. At school, I was pretty much an outcast, with people making fun of me all the time for no reason. I spent all my time at home and on the computer. I just gradually got more and more curious about the pictures. I downloaded some software to make an IRC or internet relay chat that let other people upload and download pictures, too. I wasn't thinking about a child being abused when I was swapping pictures. I guess I wasn't thinking of it as that real. I felt sort of detached from the whole thing. Since I was arrested, I have made a turn around  I totally get it that it was wrong and I am really sorry about what I did. Dr. Silverman has helped me see why it was so wrong and I feel really bad about the little kids in those pictures. I am embarrassed about what I did. Before this whole thing happened, I wasn't very good at putting myself in other people's shoes. But I can understand that what I do effects other people much better now. I am very, very, sorry. (PSR ¶ 22.) Defense counsel also submitted a letter brief in advance of sentencing and attached several supportive letters from family and friends, as well as a copy of Dr. Silverman's letter to Pretrial Services and expert reports from two other mental health professionals. Defense counsel emphasized that psychologists who had seen Olhovsky agreed that he was an immature, adolescent at the time of his offenses. [6] The letter brief also emphasized the progress Olhovsky had made since being in treatment: he had a job, was attending classes at community college, and was spending more time socializing with his peers. The first of the expert reports defense counsel submitted was an eleven-page Forensic Evaluation, authored by Kirk Heilbrun, Ph.D., head of the Department of Psychology at Drexel University. Dr. Heilbrun interviewed Olhovsky at length and administered various tests. Dr. Heilbrun also interviewed Olhovsky's mother, and reviewed the criminal complaint as well as the images seized from Olhovsky's computer. Dr. Heilbrun's conclusions were very similar to those of Dr. Silverman. In his Forensic Report, Dr. Heilbrun stated: It is possible that Mr. Olhovsky's extreme social anxiety put him at risk for obtaining pornography through the internet in several ways. First, given that Mr. Olhovsky feels considerable anxiety during personal interactions with others, he may feel more comfortable with images and relationships that involve some degree of distance and detachment. Second, Mr. Olhovsky's discomfort in social situations may have inclined him to spend more time alone; social isolation may function as a risk factor for him with respect to this kind of pornography. Third, his discomfort with comparably aged peers and own sense of his social inadequacy incline him toward social and sexual interest in younger individuals. (App.151.) Dr. Heilbrun reiterated that Olhovsky presents as a socially anxious and awkward adolescent who appears considerably less mature, socially and sexually, than most individuals his age. (App.155.) The doctor then explained: [h]is social and sexual interest in younger adolescent peers and in prepubescent children can be understood somewhat in this context; rather than viewing these attractions as fixed, they may be considered partly a function of adolescent sexual experimentation, being `drawn' to images of subjects with whom he feels less awkward  both because they are younger, and because they are images on a computer rather than people presenting in person. ( Id. ) Dr. Heilbrun concluded that Olhovsky: 1. did not experience symptoms that clearly and significantly impaired his capacity to absorb information in the usual way or to exercise the power of reason or impaired his knowledge of the wrongfulness of these criminal acts, although his naiveté and social isolation may have limited even his basic awareness of the illegality of these acts, and 2. did experience immaturity, social awkwardness, and depression that decreased his capacity to conform his conduct to requirements of the law. (App. at 155-56.) The defense also submitted a report from Philip H. Witt, Ph.D., who interviewed both Olhovsky and his mother, spoke with Dr. Silverman, and reviewed Dr. Silverman's treatment records, Dr. Heilbrun's evaluation, the PSR and other records. Dr. Witt's examination focused on [the] risk [Olhovsky] presents for child molestation. (App.157.) Dr. Witt's report included the following summary of his telephone consultation with Dr. Silverman: ... Dr. Silverman indicated that Mr. Olhovsky has made substantial progress in treatment. It is Dr. Silverman's opinion that Mr. Olhovsky's serious physical problems, including surgeries and hospitalizations, as a child and adolescent have impaired his social development and level of maturity. As a result, Mr. Olhovsky developed social anxiety and isolated himself from others, having been the brunt of teasing and taunting though his adolescence. Dr. Silverman reported that Mr. Olhovsky has done well in psychotherapy. Dr. Silverman believes that Mr. Olhovsky has made significant steps in a positive direction. Mr. Olhovsky now holds a job, and in fact (at Dr. Silverman's insistence) a job in which Mr. Olhovsky interacts considerably with people, as a cashier at Shop Rite. In addition, again with Dr. Silverman's encouragement, Mr. Olhovsky has an age-appropriate girlfriend.... Overall, Dr. Silverman is quite satisfied with Mr. Olhovsky's progress and continues to see him as clinically manageable as an outpatient. (App. 161-62.) While acknowledging that most clinical assessment tools have been designed for actual child molesters rather than passive viewers of pornography, Dr. Witt nevertheless attempted to assess Olhovsky's risk for future sex offenses: To at least obtain an estimate of his current and recent functioning, I am scoring Mr. Olhovsky on the SONAR, which focuses entirely on this area. On the SONAR, Mr. Olhovsky received a score of -1 point, placing him in this instrument's low risk range (three points or less). On the stable dynamic risk factors, he receives no points. He is in a sexually and emotionally intimate romantic relationship [with an 18-year-old]; he does not associate with negative social influences; he does not presently espouse attitudes that support or condone sex offending; during the past six months, both his general and his sexual self-regulation have been good. On the acute dynamic risk factors, he has one point subtracted for no longer accessing or downloading child pornography on the Internet. Overall, a score in this instrument's low risk range is found roughly nine times as frequently among nonrecidivists as among recidivists in the standardization sample upon which this instrument was developed. (App. at 163-64.) Finally, Dr. Witt opined that (1) Olhovsky's offense was not a reflection of a broadly antisocial personality and lifestyle; (2) the weight of the evidence [shows] that at the present time, [Olhovsky] does not have a pedophilic sexual interest pattern; and (3) that Olhovsky, whatever his initial motivations were for viewing such a vast quantity of child pornography (and at the time, those motivations might well have been a sexual interest pattern focused on minors), appears to presently have a sexual interest pattern focused on adults. (App.164-65.) Dr. Witt agreed that social anxiety may have led to Mr. Olhovsky's use of child pornography. (App.165.) Dr. Witt concluded that clinically, taking all factors into account, Mr. Olhovsky presents as within the limits of risk appropriate for outpatient management. ( Id. ) In response, the government submitted a three-page expert report prepared by John S. O'Brien II, M.D., J.D., in which Dr. O'Brien offered his opinion regarding Mr. Olhovsky's diagnosis and potential dangerousness as a sex offender in the future. (App.188.) Dr. O'Brien reviewed a printout regarding the items found on Mr. Olhovsky's computer, including his posting in the internet relay chat room pertaining to child pornography; report of psychological evaluation of Nic[]olau Olhovsky, completed by Philip H. Witt, PhD on January 19, 2007; and report of forensic evaluation of Nic[]olau Olhovsky, completed by Kirk Heilbrun, PhD on January 6, 2006. ( Id. ) However, it appears that Dr. O'Brien never spoke to Olhovsky's treating psychologist, Dr. Silverman, or reviewed his treatment notes, nor did he ever meet or interview Olhovsky or his mother. Dr. O'Brien noted his serious concerns regarding Mr. Olhovsky's prediliction for child pornography and propensity for future involvement in either procuring, distributing, and/or collecting child pornographic materials. ( Id. ) The report concludes: Based upon my review of the records I remain unconvinced that Mr. Olhovsky no longer has a pedophilic sexual excitation pattern, or even a pedophilic sexual excitation preference. It is my opinion that he warrants a more intensive degree of psychosexual disorder evaluation and a longer period of observation as a condition of his sentence in order to more effectively, appropriately, and thoroughly evaluate his potential psychosexual disorder, determine whether his alleged gradual transition in his sexual excitation pattern is more than just a fleeting byproduct of the serious circumstances which currently confront him and the extent to which he does, in fact, pose a future risk to the community as a predatory sexual offender. (App.189-90.)