There is a federal parole system. Parole and supervised release are one and the same.

I wish we could see what the documents say. So many people are quick to judge. It very well could be a case (where someone else mentioned) that he had some pics of young topless girls on a nude beach in Europe. We don't know the story.

So so sad to hear this about Bill.

***Just a side note, please chip in any lawyers...

If it was a case of pics being on someone's computer of underage girls, how can you tell they're underage? What's the process? If they look older but are actually 17, how do the law enforcers find out who these girls are and their actual age?

Quote
If it was a case of pics being on someone's computer of underage girls, how can you tell they're underage? What's the process? If they look older but are actually 17, how do the law enforcers find out who these girls are and their actual age?

I'm not sure what the specific process is but I imagine they wouldn't charge, try, and convict him without some way of presenting evidence that the porn is underage at trial. If Bill pled as a result of a bargain for reduced sentence then he had to have made the calculation that he wouldn't win a trial. If all they had was the hunch and the girl was really 20 I'd be pushing my lawyer to find the girl and confirm her age asap.

Also, to hoya:

I think there's a difference in withholding judgment when someone has been arrested and is awaiting trial than there is after he's been convicted. The fact that for all intents and purposes the legal proceedings are over (unless Bill plans on challenging his conviction) makes it a different story for me. Of course, TomMarino's forthcoming post might indicate that Bill was railroaded into a sham conviction or something, and at that point I'll evaluate accordingly.

And also, apart from Bill's specific case, the rhetoric being used to justify the circumstances that that child pornography might be an okay thing for a man in his 40's to possess is more than a little disconcerting.

Looking forward to TomMarino's post. I hope it's a fair and objective account of the facts and not (as was the case in a similar post with Mo) a pity post asking everyone in the swing community to keep him in our thoughts and bragging that he's teaching the Shim Sham to his cell buddies (yes, Mo's representative on JJ said that).

Repeatedly stating how much of a friend, how important he was, how much he cared for the dance and the such is disgusting. You are minimizing a massively disgusting thing and creating empathy and sympathy for someone who has been tried and convicted of having and looking at little children in sexual acts (lets also not forget admitted), all in the hopes to tell people he was an important dancer.

Want to come to the defense of a sexual offender? 1st read the court documents, then lets hear it. Otherwise you are painting yourselves in THE WORST LIGHT.

It's just dancing people, i've been doing it for nearly 15 years......he's saved none of your lives,he cured nothing,he didn't solve poverty, he just taught movement to music, get over it.

Wow, just, wow.

Bill was a friend to many of us. Demonizing Bill just makes you look bad my friend. "little children in sexual acts" How do you know this is what they found?

Tom, thank you for your post, and I look forward to reading it.

"Just because he was this person that had some positive impact on your life also does not mean it is alright to come up with some excuse, or try to down play the nature of his crime . I think what each of us to whom Bill made an impact on need to struggle with is how are you going to view him now and can you keep a person you once respected who has done something that you find appalling in an accurate perspective after this?" -Well said!

I don't think anyone has a right to pass judgment without the facts being known. The deeper this thread gets the worse it will look for Bill until the facts are revealed. Maybe the thread should stay but maybe it needs to be locked until the facts are known. I for one admire Bill as an instructor. What happens in his personal life is something he will have to live with.

No, they're not. Parole is early release from an indeterminate sentence. The federal sentencing system doesn't provide for early release and has abolished parole and indeterminate sentences of a particular range in favor of specified sentences.

http://www.justice.gov/uspc/history.htm

Supervised release contains conditions upon the conduct of a criminal after service of the imposed sentence, violation of which constitutes a separate offense.

I'm not asking you to withhold judgment; I'm saying that you, WeOwnYou, Wexie, and everyone else commenting here has no right to tell anyone else (including Bill's friends) how to judge him. They might be able to forgive him for this felony conviction, and may choose to continue associating with him. That's their choice, and I have a hard time saying such a choice is categorically wrong (again, given the nature of the offense).

I haven't said - and won't say - that his offense was somehow justifiable. I have said - and would like someone to dispute - that his offense is not as bad as actual, in-person abuse of a child, and people choosing to treat Bill differently as a result of that difference in severity are making a choice I can't really say is wrong.

Ignoring those things about Bill is just as dishonest as ignoring what he's been convicted of doing.

Telling people how they should feel - or that what they feel is disgusting - is impossibly and unjustifiably arrogant. You don't know all the facts. You don't know how people choose to value certain things. You don't have the authority to tell people that the value they place on certain things is wrong. You get to say that you think what he did was disgusting. Telling the rest of us how to feel? We're adults. We can make our own decisions. We don't need your help. In fact, I'm not sure anyone asked for it.

Want to attack a sexual offender? Then first learn everything about that person's life, otherwise you're painting yourself in the worst light.

And please don't presume to claim that teaching dance is somehow useless or beneath notice. It's not. If it were, we wouldn't have any feelings at all for anyone who helped bring Lindy Hop to those of us who dance now. Good, bad or indifferent, Bill is part of that history. So are plenty of people who aren't saints. No one's asking anyone to ignore what Bill's done. All I've heard here is that we aren't in any way required to dwell only on that.

Thank you Marcelo , once again you eloquently sum it up. I was indeed NOT defending him but rather discussing what we are all discussing ,that when you find out some one you know, and or cared about did something horrible it brings up a lot of complicated and sometimes conflicted feelings.

I always respected Bill as a teacher but never considered him a personal friend, but I know many many people in this community that were friends with him. It seems like several people posting are not wanting to believe someone they respected could do something quite horrible, and several people want to just ignore that a person who committed a horrible crime also was capable of giving a lot positive things to our community, again that is NOT excusing him.

Chuck, we obviously need to talk about this so I think locking this thread now would not be a positive thing.

Miss behave, my comment was not directed at you specifically, rather,everyone and you included. I just happen to have posted right after you did. It seems to be a ringing theme with many people that he was a great dancer and dance instructor as we should 1st remember that before we judge him.

And sorry, but dance is beneath the matter at hand. We're talking about innocent children. It's just a dance, all of it, i've known many more dancers and old timers than you've done triple steps. Measuring a man's moral character 1st by the amount of dancing is none sense.

I really dislike how speculative this thread has been and want to inject some truth and facts as rumors do this situation no good. I have read the court documents thoroughly and they are all available online for a small fee.

The fact is that Bill was charged on a federal level with 1 count of transporation of child pornography and 1 count of possession of child pornography. He plead guilty and was sentenced to 50 months in federal prision with the possibility of a 15% reduction in sentencing for "good behavior."

He was stopped at the US/Canadian border and was subject to a random search where they discovered 10,000 in cash from teaching dance workshops and further investigated the vehicle - eventually seizing his electronic equipment. They found over 300 images of illict images of children's genitals and children performing oral sex on an adult male. He states he was aware of the images being on his laptop. His excuse was that he downloads mass porn and these images are mixed in. He was aware of their existence, he did not delete this images and did not report the website. He subsequently plead guilty to the charges.

He took a polygraph as part of the investigation and it was deemed truthful that he did not have sexual contact with a minor (with the exception of 1981 molestation charge of a 16 year old tennis student of his - this case was dismissed. According to court documents, he did not deny the incident, but states he did not force her). It was also determined that he did not have intent to distribute the materials found on his electronic devices.

According to court documents, after he was released on bond there was computer monitoring software placed on his computer and it flagged for more illict images. He was subsequently banned from computer and internet use. He also continued to travel and teach while out on bond waiting for sentencing.

I can say, after a few personal experiences with him when I was a 15 year old minor in the scene that I am not suprised in the least by this charge. I also can say that I do not believe his excuses or attempts to explain why he would have his images. I am sure he is feeling quite humilated by this and it would be a natural thing to attempt to save face as much as possible.

I do not think this is something that needs to be kept quiet, swept under the rug or should be ignored and I am outraged by the majority of people's public response to this. This is child pornography, there is no excuse - none. It is created because people like look at it and IMO, the person who looks at it is just as guilty as the person who created it for that person to look at.

I understand that he is a friend to many people and I am sure the emotions that they are feeling are intense, BUT - it does not excuse this and it is extremely important that this does not get dimissed or diminished in any capacity.

If it was my 13 year old daughter, would I feel less threatened if her dance instructor was 'only' guilty of child porn charges as long as it was not direct child rape? Nope. Would I want to be informed of this? - Absolutely. Within such a close knit scene where trust is paramount and someone pops up who is a threat (no matter how passively you believe this be), people have the right to know about it and all of these records are public if they desire to continue to work with him after he is released or he continues to be involved in the scene where we have people of all ages.

I understand that he is a friend to many people and I am sure the emotions that they are feeling are intense, BUT - it does not excuse this and it is extremely important that this does not get dimissed or diminished in any capacity.

It is part of the public record that a number of well known individuals in the scene provided him with character references in his defense, mentioning that this is something that he was doing 'behind closed doors' and praising his work within the scene, stating he does not make typical 'locker room' comments. However, when you are involved in a cycle of absolutely reprehensible child abuse, it does not matter how well you could teach a swing out, how likeable people thought you were, or how well you kept your perversion under wraps. People need to bring this into better perspective.

I am personally appauled at the general attitude of the scene and applaud people who have been willing to stand up and realize that this not a situation where you try to find loop holes for his behavior. The images were there. He plead guilty and will be serving a lengthy federal prison sentence. The issue now is how people will cope with this, any personal experiences people may have had that they need to deal with, how to react to future problems of this sort within the community and how to react when he is released. Hopefully, this will also pique awareness of other inappropriate behavior within the dance scene that desperately needs to be better controlled.

There is no need for rumors or speculation. The case is all available and is of public record. I recommend people who have questions read through it.

For those who are going on-line to read the court document, the plea agreement contains the agreed upon facts and most damning information. You do have to register with Pacer however the the significant documents are available through the RECAP plug-in for free.

This is a very sad and unfortunate blow to the swing dance community. The outrage expressed is, in my opinion, quite justified given the agreed facts of the case. The disappointment and disbelief expressed is also understandable given Mr. Borgida's visibility, trust and respect in our community.

I agree with WeOwnYou, dancing is beneath this matter. I think it's good to be vocal that our community is safe and as a community we will not tolerate the abuse of the implicit trust we have.

A court conviction is a matter of public record and thus a public affair. It is not private and shouldn't be kept private out of some abstract respect for the convicted man's privacy. It's not just morbid curiosity, I think we have a right to know when one of our own has been convicted of a major federal offense like this. It doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Those facts SandyEggo posted are insanely damning. Wow.

Oddly enough, even deleting child pornography from your computer counts as possession. The theory is that the act of destroying something is proof that you had it.

There is a widely accepted scale for estimating the age of pubescent children, but I can't think of the name right now, and google failed me.

The fact is, they generally don't bother to prosecute close cases. It's too hard and costly to fight the grayish areas when there are plenty of obvious offenders - by most estimates the number of offenders is shockingly huge. The close cases are generally theoretical exercises for lawyers.

Advice to someone engaging in "mass downloads" - if you see anything questionable, delete it immediately, and don't search for questionable material. The crime is three or more images of children under 18, so it could be easy to commit by accident. Not knowing the person was under 18 is not a defense.