TODD MICHAEL SCRIBER v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, Graeff, March 29, 2018,
Child Sex Abuse – A teacher taking pictures focusing on the buttocks of a fully clothed female student bending over at the waist qualified as sexual exploitation of a minor

Facts:
In October of 2015, Scriber, a Montgomery County high-school science teacher was administering a makeup exam to a female student. While discussing the exam with the student, who was wearing a skirt, Scriber leaned forward, pointed the camera of his phone underneath of her skirt, and pressed the volume button repeatedly in order to take pictures.
The student complained to her parents, at which point CPS and MCPD became involved. After interviewing the student, detectives with MCPD’s sexual assault unit went to speak with Scriber.
When MCPD detectives asked Scriber about the phone, he said that the phone was in his car. When they went out to his car to look at the phone, he said that it was actually back at school. Scriber took the detectives back to his classroom and picked the phone up off of his desk and began looking through it. A detective asked to look at the phone and saw pictures of female students in the classroom, specifically pictures of their “butts” in what appeared to be a classroom setting.
When Scriber noticed what the detective was looking at on his phone, he tried to grab the phone from her.
A search warrant was then obtained for the phone and an investigator with MCPD electronic crimes unit examined the phone.
Located on the phone were “a number of thumbnail images of what appeared to be females in a classroom setting where the focus of the images were the, the buttocks of the young females.”
No photographs were discovered of the incident from the original complainant, however.
Scriber was indicted on four counts of sexual abuse of a minor relating to the incident with the student that sparked the investigation plus three different victims who could be identified based on pictures found on the phone.
The trial judge found that some of the pictures were ambiguous and acquitted Scriber on two of the child abuse counts (the judge found reasonable doubt with regard to a picture of a student standing in front of the classroom with cleavage exposed because “it’s possible that the reason this photo was taken was to memorialize this young lady displaying cleavage. But, it is equally possible, in my view, that this was a depiction of classroom activity. And, again, I’m somewhat in the dark here as to what is permissible and what teachers do nowadays.”).
However, the trial judge found that two of the counts clearly constituted child abuse. One was the incident where he took pictures underneath the student’s skirt. The other involved 30 pictures taken of a female student bending over in class where the pictures were taken of her backside “to the virtual exclusion of every other part of her body.”
Despite the lack of photographs confirming the incident, the judge found that Scriber was guilty of sexual child abuse of the original complainant. The judge explained, “what happened to that photo, I don’t know… The camera may have malfunctioned. The image may have been erased. But, I have no doubt that a photo was taken.”
Scriber was sentenced to 25 years with all but 18 months suspended.
Scriber then appealed, arguing that taking these pictures did not constitute “sexual exploitation of a minor” and that the lack of photographs of the original complainant meant that he could not be convicted based solely on her testimony.

Held: The Court of Special Appeals held that taking inappropriate pictures of students counted as improper use of a child for Scriber’s sexual gratification.

Child Abuse – Three categories of individuals may be liable for child abuse:
– Family Members
– Household Members
– Anyone with permanent or temporary care, custody, or responsibility to supervise a minor

Sexual Child Abuse – Sexual abuse means an act that involves sexual molestation or exploitation of a minor, whether physical injuries are sustained or not

Sexual Child Abuse – An act can qualify as “molestation or exploitation of a minor” even if it would not itself be a crime if committed against an adult

Other examples from the case: The following examples have been found to qualify as sexual exploitation: placing a hidden camera in a minor’s bedroom to watch her dress and undress, having a 12-year-old girl disrobe to take a semi-nude picture, French kissing a minor, encouraging a minor to masturbate and filming it, and even in certain circumstances, the ‘omission or failure to act to prevent molestation or exploitation when it is reasonably possible’ to do so.

Sexual Child Abuse – A suspect doesn’t need to actually touch a child in order to be guilty of sexual child abuse.

Sexual Child Abuse – A child doesn’t need to know that they are being exploited in order for an action (such as secret pictures or video) to count as sexual exploitation

Sexual Child Abuse – All that is required is that someone with responsibility for a minor took advantage of or unjustly or improperly used the child for his or her own sexual benefit

From the Case: While there was no evidence that the teacher “asked, coerced, or induced” his students to “pose for pictures for his own benefit or engaged in any sexually manipulative activity,” that is “not required to sustain a conviction for sexual abuse of a minor.”

From the Case: “Based on the context of the actions, a teacher taking multiple photos of a student during school, and the content of the photos, which depicted primarily the buttocks of a student bending over what appears to be a table, as well as other photos depicting only a “young woman’s legs and buttocks,” a rational trier of fact could conclude that appellant’s actions in taking these photos were for his own benefit and constituted exploitation of a sexual nature.”

Evidence – A defendant can be convicted on the testimony of the victim alone, even if there is no confirming evidence

From the Case: Scriber’s action, in “placing his phone underneath his student’s skirt and taking a picture,” was sufficient to show that he engaged in an act that involved sexual exploitation of a minor at the time he had responsibility for her supervision.