Sex dating in thomson illinois
Being the naïve and impressionable teenager that she was, she got into his truck and agreed to ride away with him.Unbeknownst to her, however, Thompson had different plans.
He and his wife then stole a camper, and the three embarked on a six-week odyssey of sexual exploitation in which he sold the girl's sexual services to at least fifteen men across three states.Thompson used fear to ensure the girl's complicity in his depraved enterprise. He pled guilty to these crimes without a plea deal.For example, he threatened the girl after she refused to have anal sex with a customer. When Thompson was done with the girl, he sold her to a truck driver for 00. Thompson then gave the girl to a different truck driver who drove her back to Illinois. On October 12, 2016, the district court held a sentencing hearing.49 at 1.) Thompson then picked up his wife, and the two agreed to prostitute the girl. They also show that Thompson used the promise of modeling work “to cause [a] person to engage in a commercial sex act.” 18 U. The final issue is whether the court imposed a reasonable sentence. Specifically, he claims that the court erred by (1) refusing to consider a two-page summary of case law providing information about sentences imposed on similarly situated defendants; (2) concluding that Thompson's cognitive difficulties and childhood adversity were not mitigating; (3) finding that Thompson threatened the victim with force; (4) calling Thompson a “pedophile” and a “sexual predator”; and (5) considering information outside the record. First, there was no error in refusing to consider Thompson's two-page summary of case law addressing the § 3553 sentencing-disparity factor.
We review claims of procedural error in sentencing de novo, and we review challenges to a sentence's overall substantive reasonableness for abuse of discretion. Thompson gave that summary to the court halfway through his sentencing hearing.
Thompson himself had sex with the girl at least five times, knowing full well that she was a minor.